Occasionally during the 1950's and 1960's I and friends interested in literature and the arts would discuss a book, written anonymously in 1954 by a woman author using the name Pauline Reage, and commonly regarded as a very powerful work depicting submission as the route to a woman's fulfillment. This discussion was however largely based on hearsay - the book itself was not readily available in the U.K. where I was then living. We understood that a copy was available in the British Museum reading room for anyone who called themselves a scholar, but it was not regarded as suitable reading matter for ordinary folk, and no British publisher dared to publish it. When I eventually saw it on sale I was sufficiently intrigued to purchase a copy, and I quickly appreciated that the very deadpan and unemotional style of writing gave this work an extraordinary power which made it difficult to forget. Unlike most books, it was very hard to understand the author's motive in writing it, but the scenes of pain and humiliation it featured were so lucid that I assumed it would never be possible for this book to be filmed. I was therefore quite surprised when Just Jaeckin's film was released in France in 1975. Many years passed before this film was cleared by British censors for distribution in the U.K., and by then I was living in North America where I have seen it both in the cinema and on the First Choice television channel. The film features almost everything described in the book with remarkable accuracy, but it is depicted in such an unemotional and almost documentary manner that it is remarkably non-pornographic.
SPOILER AHEAD. Right through history the wish to own and dominate women has been part of the masculine character, and this is brought out clearly in the literature of every age. However literature has not always made it equally clear that there is just as frequent a wish on the part of many women to be totally submissive. Such a woman often believes that however unreasonable the demands made on her by her dominant man, this behaviour will ultimately force him to truly love her. Artistically it is important to note that nothing which happens to 'O' in this film takes place before she is asked for, and has given, her consent. Voluntary, but total and completely passive submission is the theme of the film. There is one scene in the film which I found particularly effective. This is the Commander's ball just before the end which 'O' attends, naked except for a fabulous mask that makes her appear completely anonymous. Sir Stephen gives 'O' the chance to choose the mask she will wear, and she chooses one which is strongly suggestive of a bird of prey. The symbolism of this appears to be that, by their very submissiveness, these women are also preying on their men who become deprived of any opportunity to form any normal relationship with them; and may thereby be psychologically damaged almost as badly as their victims.
Only right at the end of the film does any emotion break through, when Sir Stephen indicates to 'O' that her prolonged submission to pain and humiliation have won his love, and she responds by demonstrating the affection she feels for him for the first time. When this film was first shown in Paris it ran for thirteen years and I found it intriguing to read that more than half of most audiences were women. Clearly, even in these days of active feminism, the concept of attaining true love through a role of total submission has some appeal to a large number of women. This is the reality which has to be borne in mind by the viewer whenever watching this or any similar film.
This is a film which many will watch for its curiosity value, but which will probably only appeals to a very small number. Within its limitations it is extremely well made, and it is certainly not pornographic. Although there is plenty of nudity there are no shots showing either male or female genitals, and no attempt is made to dwell on any of the violence just for titillation. Overall it probably deserves a reasonably high rating, unfortunately I cannot give it this. I am amazed at how accurately the scenes depicted in the film follow the written descriptions in the novel - it is obvious that its makers took a great deal of trouble to ensure this. My basic concern is that this disguises the fact the film completely reverses the message which the original novel appears to have been intended to convey. There were two different endings to the book which are still extant. Both involve Sir Stephen losing all interest in 'O' after he has completed humiliating her in every way he can. In one 'O' begs Sir Stephen to permit her to commit suicide - she would not do it without his explicit permission, but he grants her this. In the other she is returned to the training mansion to help teach her replacement what will be expected. Either of these endings convey the clear message that total submission does not lead to greater love but ultimately to contempt for the oversubmissive individual. Because it reverses this message; the film, however closely it may follow the book in other respects, is totally unacceptable to me.
SPOILER AHEAD. Right through history the wish to own and dominate women has been part of the masculine character, and this is brought out clearly in the literature of every age. However literature has not always made it equally clear that there is just as frequent a wish on the part of many women to be totally submissive. Such a woman often believes that however unreasonable the demands made on her by her dominant man, this behaviour will ultimately force him to truly love her. Artistically it is important to note that nothing which happens to 'O' in this film takes place before she is asked for, and has given, her consent. Voluntary, but total and completely passive submission is the theme of the film. There is one scene in the film which I found particularly effective. This is the Commander's ball just before the end which 'O' attends, naked except for a fabulous mask that makes her appear completely anonymous. Sir Stephen gives 'O' the chance to choose the mask she will wear, and she chooses one which is strongly suggestive of a bird of prey. The symbolism of this appears to be that, by their very submissiveness, these women are also preying on their men who become deprived of any opportunity to form any normal relationship with them; and may thereby be psychologically damaged almost as badly as their victims.
Only right at the end of the film does any emotion break through, when Sir Stephen indicates to 'O' that her prolonged submission to pain and humiliation have won his love, and she responds by demonstrating the affection she feels for him for the first time. When this film was first shown in Paris it ran for thirteen years and I found it intriguing to read that more than half of most audiences were women. Clearly, even in these days of active feminism, the concept of attaining true love through a role of total submission has some appeal to a large number of women. This is the reality which has to be borne in mind by the viewer whenever watching this or any similar film.
This is a film which many will watch for its curiosity value, but which will probably only appeals to a very small number. Within its limitations it is extremely well made, and it is certainly not pornographic. Although there is plenty of nudity there are no shots showing either male or female genitals, and no attempt is made to dwell on any of the violence just for titillation. Overall it probably deserves a reasonably high rating, unfortunately I cannot give it this. I am amazed at how accurately the scenes depicted in the film follow the written descriptions in the novel - it is obvious that its makers took a great deal of trouble to ensure this. My basic concern is that this disguises the fact the film completely reverses the message which the original novel appears to have been intended to convey. There were two different endings to the book which are still extant. Both involve Sir Stephen losing all interest in 'O' after he has completed humiliating her in every way he can. In one 'O' begs Sir Stephen to permit her to commit suicide - she would not do it without his explicit permission, but he grants her this. In the other she is returned to the training mansion to help teach her replacement what will be expected. Either of these endings convey the clear message that total submission does not lead to greater love but ultimately to contempt for the oversubmissive individual. Because it reverses this message; the film, however closely it may follow the book in other respects, is totally unacceptable to me.