George Bataille: Story Of The Eye

[Sybarite]

Story of the Eye by Georges Bataille, translated by Joachim Neugroschel

George Bataille's Story of the Eye is a short piece from 1928, which details the adventures of the male narrator and his two female accomplices, Simone and Marcelle, from their early sexual explorations to a murderous denouement.

The story employs the fetishisation of certain objects ? eggs and eyes particularly ? as it builds toward its climax.

It concludes with Bataille's own brief explanation of the autobiographical background to some of the subject matter ? memories of a cataract-blinded father struggling to piss, for instance, seem to provide the basis of the obsession in the book with eyes and urination.

It's difficult to imagine anyone finding the book erotic ? in which case, it's concomitantly difficult to label it as pornography, since the primary role of porn is to arouse.

So what does it do? Does it stretch limits? Well yes, although generally it all seems pretty pointless. Only right at the end does Bataille come close to the anger of Sade and finds a point, in a burst of anti-clericism. Otherwise, it manages to be shocking and rather tame all at once.

It's well written in terms of language. The plot, from a perspective of traditional story-telling, is thin, but what Bataille does is to carry a series of ideas and images through the book, in a way that owes much to the Surrealism that he was interested in. Eyes and eggs and sexual organs (the 'eye' at the end of the penis) and piss and liquidity and blood. The sun, for instance, mirrors those, and hangs, at one point, in a sky that is described as being liquid. Thus the main characters in the book are less the triumvirate of sexual explorers and more these objects (the title of the book, does, of course, provide rather a big hint to this ? but we tend to see things in books in a more traditional way).

So in that sense, it has an interest level once you start to see the picture.

The Penguin edition comes with an article about the book by Roland Barthes, which does help understand some of these 'signs'.

What is far more interesting is the accompanying essay (at 30-odd pages, a lengthy one) by Susan Sontag on The Pornographic Imagination.

Sontag does not, herself, particularly like porn. She makes that clear. However, what she's concerned to do is show:

? that porn can be literature/art;

? that it is discounted from such because of attitudes toward sex;

? that such transgressive works can be powerful and dangerous;

? that porn is less harmful to society than a great many other things that we don't generally object to (genocide on TV every night, therefore becoming entertainment, is a specific example);

? that censoring porn is about censoring knowledge. That knowledge ? all knowledge, including sexual knowledge ? is dangerous.

She uses a basic examination of 20th century literature to show the fallacy of such arguments as porn lacking plot, that the use of first-person narrations are 'bad' etc. In other words, she exposes the hypocrisy about porn, by showing that such criticisms set different criteria than are used when assessing any other form of literary endeavour.

Indeed, she goes further in examining sex as an extreme experience, the validity of art recording extreme experiences, and the role of the artist in having those extreme experiences to report back for the rest of the world. Ideas of artists as mad, of genius as bordering on madness, are common. And as Sontag points out, nobody thinks anything less of Van Gogh's work because of his mental state ? he's not banned from 'proper' galleries because he was mad. So the downplaying of, for instance, Sade's work, on the grounds that his madness is seen as directly related to sex, is specious and hypocritical.

And it is born out of a fear of sex ? not least when it is transgressive sex: ie sex that is perceived as outside the norm, and not for purely procreative purposes.

Sontag provides quick and interesting analyses of classic porn texts, from Sade to this Bataille story to The Story of O.

It is a provocative and fascinating piece of work. And does make you look at the Bataille story in a new light.

[Heteronym]

Looks like an interesting book. I know Bataille mostly for his literary criticism, but I might try his fiction now.

[Sybarite]

Looks like an interesting book. I know Bataille mostly for his literary criticism, but I might try his fiction now.

To be honest, I hadn't heard of him until the summer, when this book was in a special selection at my little local bookshop and, since it's a particular interest area, I decided to buy it. He did write non-fiction about sex, and was apparently particularly interested in links between sex and death and violence (and religion).

It's the sort of book that has taken me some time to write about because I had to sit and think about my responses to it. Initially, my response was a sort of 'yuck'. I thought about describing it as 'obscene', but I'm wary of using words like that because they're so loaded with 'moral' certainties. And if Bataille's book is about anything (other than the images), then I think it's partly about challenging such things. So that approach, for me, served to give the experience of reading the book a greater value. It challenged how I look at a number of things, including literature itself.

And as I said, I thought that the Sontag essay was excellent.

[titania7]

Sybarite,
The Bataille book is outside my "comfort zone." But you are a person of bravado! I can see you would probably dare to do just about anything. Such intrepedity. The men must find you intriguing, my dear.

Nice write-up on the Bataille novel. Discreet. I like subtlety (though who would know it from some of my posts?)

The only work by Susan Sontag I've read is the play, Alice in Bed.
Are you familiar with it? I wanted to stage it here in Atlanta, but I couldn't find a director who was interested in it. They (the directors) tend to like to be the ones who pick out the plays.
Not vice versa. Alas.

Anyway, the Sontag piece sounds worth a read.

So, between you and me (and the rest of the list), didn't the Bataille book churn your stomach just a little?

(Cannot resist asking that. I can be daring, too. Check out my all
the controversy I've created on the Cortazar/Hopscotch thread.
The general consesus is that I'm clearly no angel).

~Titania

"When you know your name, you should hang
on to it, for unless it is noted down and
remembered, it will die when you do."
~Toni Morrison

Curious

[Sybarite]

Sybarite,
The Bataille book is outside my "comfort zone." But you are a person of bravado! I can see you would probably dare to do just about anything. Such intrepedity. The men must find you intriguing, my dear...

:D


... Nice write-up on the Bataille novel. Discreet. I like subtlety (though who would know it from some of my posts?)...

Many thanks. I didn't see a need to repeat any of the specific scenes ? but then again, I always try to be fairly careful about giving away too much a book.


... The only work by Susan Sontag I've read is the play, Alice in Bed.
Are you familiar with it? I wanted to stage it here in Atlanta, but I couldn't find a director who was interested in it. They (the directors) tend to like to be the ones who pick out the plays.
Not vice versa. Alas.

I haven't read any Sontag before, although it will almost certainly encourage me to read more.


...Anyway, the Sontag piece sounds worth a read...

I'd heartily recommend it ? not least because I think it's rigorous, and it posits an argument that shows a different feminist approach than the one that is given most coverage on porn. I'm on a bit of a thematic thing at the present, reading Angela Carter's The Sadeian Woman at present, with Gore Vidal's Sexually Speaking ? Collected Sex Writings and Simone de Beauvoir's Must We Burn Sade? waiting in the wings.

If anyone's interested in the subject from a wider perspective, I'd recommend Reay Tannahill's Sex in History ? which is probably due a re-read by me anyway ? Neil Schaeffer's The Marquis de Sade: A Life, Isabel Tang's Pornography: The Secret History of Civilisation and Laurence O'Toole's Pornocopia: Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire.


... So, between you and me (and the rest of the list), didn't the Bataille book churn your stomach just a little?

(Cannot resist asking that. I can be daring, too. Check out my all
the controversy I've created on the Cortazar/Hopscotch thread.
The general consesus is that I'm clearly no angel).

~~purses lips and thinks carefully~~

There was a moment when I thought something along the lines of: 'this is just revolting', but I can't remember exactly where it was in the book. It wasn't the denouement because, as I said, that actually had some sort of point to it. As I said, I think that the value for me was in it forcing me to think about a number of things ? including the whole idea of constructing a piece of literature where the most important elements are a series of objects.

I like your controversy, by the way. And angels are boring. ;)

[titania7]

Sybarite,
It sounds as if you're reading some interesting books. As always :). I would love to get my hands on the De Beauvoir piece, Must We Burn Sade? She's a woman whose intellect I've always admired. Love her fiction, too. Ever read All Men are Mortal?
That is such a fascinating book--deep, but mesmerizing. Just your style, I'd imagine.

Thanks for saying you like my controversy. I've been thinking of exiting the list because I despise an atmosphere of serious contention. Also, I don't like to have to be in a position where I feel like I must defend my views. Once I start feeling that way, I'm outta here. I have vehemently declared my intentions not to defend what I say. Yet, I'm starting to notice that when my opinions are attacked the inevitable happens: I start actively leaping to my own defense. We women can be so double-minded in our ways (can be, not always are. And not ALL women. I clarify this because of Fausto's reactions to my comments regarding men).

Yes, I guess angels can be boring, Sybarite. And I wouldn't make a good angel because I'd never be able to keep track of where I last left my halo ;).

~Titania


"Vitality in a woman is a blind fury of creation. She sacrifices
herself to it."
~George Bernard Shaw

[Sybarite]

Sybarite,
It sounds as if you're reading some interesting books. As always :). I would love to get my hands on the De Beauvoir piece, Must We Burn Sade? She's a woman whose intellect I've always admired. Love her fiction, too. Ever read All Men are Mortal?
That is such a fascinating book--deep, but mesmerizing. Just your style, I'd imagine...

~~LOL~~ I read pretty diversely, but I suppose that, as with anyone, there are certain subjects that I find interesting – and in my case, I quiet openly admit that I find sex fascinating, and that includes reading it about it on a fairly serious level.


... Thanks for saying you like my controversy. I've been thinking of exiting the list because I despise an atmosphere of serious contention. Also, I don't like to have to be in a position where I feel like I must defend my views. Once I start feeling that way, I'm outta here. I have vehemently declared my intentions not to defend what I say. Yet, I'm starting to notice that when my opinions are attacked the inevitable happens: I start actively leaping to my own defense. We women can be so double-minded in our ways (can be, not always are. And not ALL women. I clarify this because of Fausto's reactions to my comments regarding men).

There is a very great deal in what you say there that I completely agree with.


... Yes, I guess angels can be boring, Sybarite. And I wouldn't make a good angel because I'd never be able to keep track of where I last left my halo ;).

~Titania

:)

[titania7]

There is a very great deal in what you say there that I completely agree with.

From the bottom of my heart, thank you for these words.

~Titania

"When I read Shakespeare I am struck with wonder
That such trivial people should muse and thunder
In such lovely language."
~D.H. Lawrence

[miercuri]

Does anyone have any idea if Sontag's essay is available online? You have made me very curious. I loved The Story of the Eye for its powerful imagery, it's probably one of the most uncomfortably perverse books I've ever read. I deem it a mandatory experience for any avid reader, because it simply can't leave one indifferent.

Sybarite, I wonder if you have read Anais Nin's pornographic short fiction? It's definitely not in the vein of Bataille, but rather shallow and repetitive, yet I seem to enjoy it a lot. It captures perfectly the bohemian atmosphere of the melting pot that Montparnasse was in the 30's, without being overpretentious. I recommend either Delta of Venus or Little Birds.

[Sybarite]

Does anyone have any idea if Sontag's essay is available online? You have made me very curious. I loved The Story of the Eye for its powerful imagery, it's probably one of the most uncomfortably perverse books I've ever read. I deem it a mandatory experience for any avid reader, because it simply can't leave one indifferent.

Sybarite, I wonder if you have read Anais Nin's pornographic short fiction? It's definitely not in the vein of Bataille, but rather shallow and repetitive, yet I seem to enjoy it a lot. It captures perfectly the bohemian atmosphere of the melting pot that Montparnasse was in the 30's, without being overpretentious. I recommend either Delta of Venus or Little Birds.

Hi Miercuri,

Thanks for the comments.

I can't see the Sontag essay actually online, unfortunately.

I've haven't read any of Anais Nin's short porn – yet. There's certainly a tiny edition somewhere in the flat and it's on my list as I continue to explore the genre. And thank you for the recommendation.

What I did read as a teenager (in secret – a couple that I babysat for had it, so my parents never knew ;)) was Emmanuelle, (written by another woman, Emmanuelle Arsan) which had an extraordinary impact on me at the time. I got hold of a copy again a few years ago and enjoyed it every bit as much. Whnat is noticeable is that the passages describing various sexual encounters are interspersed with passages of philosophising about sex.

The other thing that, in the wider context is interesting is precisely that this was another female author writing about sex. For years, there was a refusal by many people – not least women – to believe that The Story of O was written by a woman. Even after Nancy Friday (and Kinsey and goodness knows what else), there is a reluctance to see women's sexuality occupy a wide spectrum. You have the extraordinary situation, for instance, where certain types of feminist seek to decry other women for the sexual choices and proclivities; they attempt to actually maintain women within narrow sexual parameters that are little different to those that patriarchal society in the West has done over centuries.

Throw in ideas of woman as mother (this granting women a 'special' moral status) and New Age regurgitation of woman as goddesses, in a really very unsexual way, and you have a continuing denial of the sexual potential of women. In that sense, it's surprising (or perhaps not) to find porn written by women (the majority of the Black Lace titles available in the UK are written by women too – although that's much more 'pulpy', if you will).

It's one of those great ironies of our time that some women are as misogynistic as the men that they rail against. Few things show that up, I think, in the way that sex does. And porn (of any media) generated by women is a fascinating part of what is happening.

I'm now reading Angela Carter's The Sadeian Woman. Very interesting and with (thus far) some very good points indeed. But, like Sontag in The Pornographic Imagination, she raises the idea that sexual relations between men and women in our world have been 'distorted'. The trouble is, that's fine to say that, but you need to show some previous norm that they were 'distorted' from – and I've yet to see one described anywhere. Repeating it does not make it so.

It's a fascinating area. :)

[titania7]

Sybarite,
The denial of women's sexuality has long been a problem. Society oft-times hasn't been able to even accept that women want sex.

For example, my grandmother has repeatedly told me (I guess she thinks this will
turn me off sex, which is odd, considering how concerned she is that I'm going to be an "old maid"--in her mind, if you're over 24 and unmarried, you are on your way to spinsterhood) that sex is something a woman does "for the men." It's apparently not something a woman is supposed to get ANY enjoyment out of. I get so frustrated every time she talks this way. I know she's archiac, but for how many years
did these sentiments exist? And do they still exist to a certain extent, however remote??

I'm not interested in sex to the extent you are. However.....the pyschology of
human behavior very much interests me, and that sometimes can and does
pertain to the sexual arena.

I do wish the Sontag essay were available online. It would definitely be
worth a read. I especially feel this way after hearing your comments about it.

By the way, thank you for answering my question about whether or not
you were somewhat offended by The Story of the Eye so specifically.
I was curious because I suspected that you probably knew many details
about what the book was about prior to reading it. Thus, I wondered
whether or not you were completely prepared for everything. Or whether,
reading in print what you had merely heard about made you sqeamish.
I notice I have an easier time digesting something I'm reading or watching
if I know about it ahead of time. For example, if a rape or murder
is part of the story, it isn't as traumatic an experience to watch
or read about if you know about it ahead of time. Am I making sense? (I hope)

You'll be delighted to know that The Kill finally arrived. When I ordered it
over 3 weeks ago from amazon, they only had one copy. So, I'm guessing that's why it took awhile to arrive. I'm already in the midst of too many books to
start it yet. However....it's high on my list of to-be-read-soon.

Best,
Titania

"Life is a maze in which we take the wrong turning
before we have learnt to walk."
~Cyril Connolly

[Sybarite]

Sybarite,
The denial of women's sexuality has long been a problem. Society oft-times hasn't been able to even accept that women want sex.

For example, my grandmother has repeatedly told me (I guess she thinks this will
turn me off sex, which is odd, considering how concerned she is that I'm going to be an "old maid"--in her mind, if you're over 24 and unmarried, you are on your way to spinsterhood) that sex is something a woman does "for the men." It's apparently not something a woman is supposed to get ANY enjoyment out of. I get so frustrated every time she talks this way. I know she's archiac, but for how many years
did these sentiments exist? And do they still exist to a certain extent, however remote??

That has certainly existed as a cultural attitude. I think that it's perhaps been particularly prevalent in northern Europe and the US. In the UK, for instance, it's caused a huge amount of problems over the years. In the late 19th century, London was the global child prostitution capital. Not because lots of men here fancied children, but because of a conjunction of middle-class hypocrisy over sex (essentially, 'respectable' women only having sex to procreate and otherwise refusing) and syphilis. Men went to prostitutes – but were terrified of disease, so wanted virgins. How did they know they were having sex with a virgin? Well, youth helped. So the prostitutes got youngr and younger and younger. Zola mentioned in his diaries. He was visiting London and was propositioned by a child he took to be as young as six. He was shocked and tried to give the child some money to go away. But apparently she'd been taught not to take money for nothing and became abusive.

A few years ago, a fin de si?cle TV documentary in the UK looked at sex in Britain in the first half of the 20th century. Various ordinary people had agreed to be interviewed. What was shocking – and incredibly sad – was how so many had not known that women could enjoy sex. The female orgasm, the clitoris – these things were unknown. One elderly man, a widower, was bemoaning not having known that he could have actually helped his wife to gain pleasure, instead of seeing it (as his wife apparently did), as an act that was simply about the man having pleasure. I found it shocking and tragic.

In British our culture we've had the idea of the 'English Rose' – the respectable (essentially middle-class) English woman, arguably best personified by Celia Johnson in Brief Encounter (in other words, it was an idea that carried on a long time). Chaste and almost asexual – for me, this is a secular Madonna for a Protestant northern European country; woman on a pedestal, woman as mother, as dutiful wife etc. Fragile and strong in combination.

But we now have it in new ways. I have seen, on a number of occasions in recent years, in high-profile, mainstream media, a certain type of feminist pronouncing on what other women should and should not do in bed. The particularly hate BDSM – and even more when a woman plays submissively with a man (I have actually seen one such woman write that other women should never allow themselves to be anything less than dominant in such a relationship). Quite apart from the spectacular arrogance of assuming that they are qualified to tell people what they should and shouldn't in their own bedrooms, it also seems to suggest that they actually don't understand the most basic aspect of feminism – that of winning and maintaining the right for women make their own choices. It's as though, so much having been won, they now assume that all women should choose (automatically, of course, because like religious fundamentalists, they have no doubts that they and they alone are 'right') to run their lives the way that these women choose. It's a rejection of notions of equality.

More generally, there are still more words in the English language to describe, in a derogatory way, a sexually active woman than to describe such a man.

Indeed, while young male promiscuity is approved of linguistically (or at least expected and tolerated) – 'he's sowing his wild oats' – and older men are referred to by quite remarkably tame words such as 'rou?' or 'cad' or 'bounder' or 'womaniser' or 'Casanova' or 'philanderer', none of these carries remotely near the morally judgmental meaning of something like 'slut' or 'slag' or 'slapper', or even 'wench' or 'scrubber' or 'tart'. That some of those words in particular still have such a derogatory meaning shows that we've not yet reached a level playing field.

Part of what you then see, I think, as a result of that situation, is that we've currently gone the other way. The UK remains repressed in many ways (some of which I've touched on above), but is also absolutely obsessed about sex. We're prurient and prudish in unholy combination. I have several friends from the Continent – and the attitudes could not be more different.

And all that leads to a point where, when discussing porn, it starts to take on a whole new level. I mentioned Sontag seeing porn as knowledge – and I think that this is absolutely true. It's no coincidence that, in the last couple of decades, more and more women are writing porn – not just the obvious stuff, but works like Pat Califia's Macho Sluts, which is lesbian S&M and the excellent collection, Unlimited Desires, which is "an international anthology of bisexual erotica". Both are written well – and both take porn and use it not just to arouse, but to explore 'alternative' sexualities.


... By the way, thank you for answering my question about whether or not
you were somewhat offended by The Story of the Eye so specifically.
I was curious because I suspected that you probably knew many details
about what the book was about prior to reading it. Thus, I wondered
whether or not you were completely prepared for everything. Or whether,
reading in print what you had merely heard about made you sqeamish.
I notice I have an easier time digesting something I'm reading or watching
if I know about it ahead of time. For example, if a rape or murder
is part of the story, it isn't as traumatic an experience to watch
or read about if you know about it ahead of time. Am I making sense? (I hope)...

My pleasure. I discovered a few years ago that repression and silence are linked – and resolved to be as open as possible about things.

I had pretty much no idea what to expect with the Bataille, so I was unprepared on a specific level, although I have read some Sade, so there probably shouldn't be much that can shock me. ;)


... You'll be delighted to know that The Kill finally arrived. When I ordered it
over 3 weeks ago from amazon, they only had one copy. So, I'm guessing that's why it took awhile to arrive. I'm already in the midst of too many books to
start it yet. However....it's high on my list of to-be-read-soon.

I really hope that you enjoy it – and I look forward to reading your comments. :)

[titania7]

Sybarite,
I'm wondering when you are going to put pen to paper and
write a book on sex? You express yourself with such obvious
erudition and have a wealth of knowledge on the subject.

The incident you relate regarding Zola is revealing. Earlier this
week I read an essay on sexuality in Victorian literature which
delved into some of the issues you speak of--men being afraid
of prostitutes because of diseases and so forth. It would
be impossible for me to compete with you on this subject.
So...I won't even try ;).

I will speak briefly about the double standard that exists regarding
sexual behavior in men vs. women. For many years, my father had a mistress while he was married to my mother. However, it was expected that she would tolerate this, particularly since my father was the "bread-winner" in the household. On the flip side of the coin, she was expected to be the ever-faithful wife. I cannot even imagine how she would've been crucified if she had gotten involved in an affair. Women who are adulteresses are usually thought of as whores whereas men are just "getting a little something on the side."

For unmarried women, promiscuity is still looked down upon. You are very right about the slurs "loose" women receive as opposed to the winks, nudges, and slaps on the back men who sleep around get. Also, it's interesting to note that many women are actually
drawn to men who are 'players'; whereas, men generally wouldn't be enchanted by a woman who had lots of lovers (of course, there are exceptions--hence of usage of the word "generally"). We have indeed not reached a level "playing field," as you term it. There is still a bit of the virgin/whore conception existing. For instance, I have known men who think ALL women are whores except for their mothers, whom they put on the pedestal as what I would call "makeshift Madonnas." I oft-times wonder what would happen if they one day discovered that this mother they idolize had
been unfaithful to their father? Would they even be able to accept it?

Oddly, women can be even more judgemental of other women
who sleep around than men can be. Thus....I am not for a minute
blaming men for anything. It's more of a cultural problem than
anything else. Oft-times, it has to do with how one is raised
and the beliefs that have been handed down to one via one's parents, grandparents, et cetera. Just to give one example, ever since I was in my mid-teens, my grandmother has tried to brainwash me into believing that a man won't marry a woman unless she's a virgin. Did her vantage point have an impact on me? You bet. I knew she was wrong but her comments made their way into my subconscious and stuck there.

Feminists haven't any right to tell women what they should or
shouldn't do in bed. Yes, in doing so they are going against
the basic concept of feminism which is the fundamental right
of women to make their own choices. Honestly, I haven't
any desire to tell someone else--man or woman--what
to do in their bedroom. That's their business. And it would
be harder for me to be the dominant partner in a male/female
relationship than for me to be submissive. You must remember--I'm from Atlanta, Georgia, the deep Southern part of the U.S. For a woman to be submissive and docile is expected in these parts of the world. Even in 2008. Amazing, huh? When we
share strong opinions we feel a need, almost immediately afterwards, to apologize, to make amends. If you go over to the Cortazar thread you'll see how I quickly I fell into the mold of a Southern female. To call yourself a "feminist" in my neck of
the woods automatically makes you a figure of controversy.
Not that I care. Not that I go around broadcasting it, either ;).

That's what's so great about this forum. I have complete freedom
in terms of calling myself a feminist. It's so......well, exhilerating.

Well, there is a lot more I could say in response to your post.
But you could undoubtedly say it better than I could, Sybarite.
Thus, I'll leave it at that.

Oh, one more thing! You might find this review by Doris Lessing on Lady Chatterley's Lover quite interesting. D.H. Lawrence, it seemed viewed a woman's clitoris as a weapon, of sorts. In his book, The Rainbow, he even compares the clitoris to "a beak." In both The Rainbow and Women in Love Lawrence portrays women as cruel and vicious, capable of virtually castrating a man. They're painful works to read (for me, at least--but I'm very sensitive), yet they are also incredibly revealing in regard to how Lawrence (one of my favorite writers) felt about women.

Doris Lessing on Lady Chatterley's Lover | Books | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/jul/15/classics.dhlawrence)


Alternatively, you can go to this link and put Doris Lessing in the search engine:

Books news, reviews and author interviews | guardian.co.uk | Books | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/books)


Best,
Titania

"Do not allow to slip away from you freedoms the people
who came before you won with such hard knocks."
~D.H. Lawrence