Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma

 

同樣只提供各種零星簡單的筆記…

 

 

要簡述Pasolini版本的Salo會有相當的困難度，光是語用對話方面就已經寫了一堆筆記(內容沒辦法在此逐字說明)，本片從某(我的)角度而言，可謂是透過一層層循序進化的言談暴力所呈現的”法西斯思想電路圖”，很”工整”、很精細、切實地呈現，導演真是不要命了。然後十年前十年後的部落格影評還是老樣子，很粗略地形容看完覺得噁心變態之類的~ 這些幸福的傢伙，沒看過小說原著的人沒資格靠腰! 整體畫面與訴求的呈現已經客氣到不行了。

個人覺得，看原著的Salo感覺更殘酷變態(但終究還是本好書吧，都十年前讀的了，還讀英版的真是找死)，因為你看不到畫面，看不到巧克力做成的便便或是長鏡頭的性虐畫面，讀原著時一切都在你眼前(腦海中)血淋淋呈現，外加文體造成的重度暈昡感…老實說這本書我沒看完，友群中好像也沒人整本看完的。不過不論是Sade的版本或是PPP的版本，覺得都是在目睹或目擊人性與歷史的黑暗面，不是在欣賞或被娛樂。

我想…或許忠誠於Sade即是背離Sade吧! PPP的版本注重言談與畫面的層次(好厲害)，在架空的故事中步步打造一個法西斯基本運作機器，並且給觀者所看的視角來說，諷剌、道德批判與省思還是存在的，表達了權力之空洞，權力造成同化，同化造成追求毀滅與死亡的原理。

無論如何，這還是一個很有力的連結/比喻: 法西斯政治的專制，是如何殘暴荒謬地去除”人性”、去除”他者”，就如同Sade的性虐一般，將人的身體物化成為物品¹。不過這樣的”比喻模式”…嗯…相信大家可能多少都讀過羅蘭巴特為此片所撰寫的評論²，這段還蠻值得仔細思考(有稍為畫一下重點):

 

“…However, the letter has a curious, unexpected effect. One could believe that the letter does serve truth, reality. Not at all: the letter distorts the objects of conscience on which we are obliged to take a position. Remaining faithful to the letter of Sadean scenes, Pasolini comes to the point of distorting the object-Sade and the object-fascism: therefore it is with good reason that Sadeans and politicians are indignant and disapprove.

 

The Sadeans (the readers delighted with Sade’s text) will never recognize Sade in Pasolini’s film. The reason for this is general: Sade can in no way be represented. Just as there is no portrait of Sade (except an imaginary one), there is no possible image of Sade’s universe: the latter, because of an imperious decision made by the writer Sade, is entirely given over to the power of ecriture. And if this is so, there exists undoubtedly a privileged agreement betweenecriture and phantasm: both are perforated; the phantasm is not the dream, it does not follow the continuity, whether contorted or not, of a story; andecriture is not painting, it does not follow the plenitude of the object: the phantasm can only be written in script, and not in description. That is why Sade will never be acceptable in the movies, and, from a Sadean point of view (from the point of view of the Sadean text), Pasolini could only commit an error – which he did stubbornly (to follow the letter is to be stubborn)…”

 

“…From a political point of view, Sade too was mistaken. Fascism is too serious and too insidious a danger to be treated by simple analogy, the fascist masters coming “simply” to take the place of the libertines. Fascism is a coercive object: it forces us to think it accurately, analytically, philosophically. All that art can do with it, if it deals with it, is to make fascism believable, to show off (demontrer) how it happens not to show (montrer) what it resembles; in brief, I see no other way to treat it than a la Brecht. Or, better yet: it is a responsibility to present this fascism as a perversion; who will not be relieved to say in front of the libertines of Salo: “I am really not like them, I am not fascist, since I do not like shit…”

 

起初我也看不出此片的analogy有什麼問題(沒辦法layman就是layman)，只是覺得電影的構造太繁瑣，很難懂。但在彙整這些瑣碎的筆記的時候(看完本片之後相隔數日)，開始覺得這個精工電路圖到底能不能持續”通電”，確實是個大問題……

至少這部電影讓我體會到…極權劫持思想~總在意義與表達脫節時開始*³。 而與自由開放之意識(也是需要這種脫節)所不同的是，這種脫節是一個封閉獨斷的運作機制…一個體制、制度，一個系統的內部。第一個老妓女說故事時，這種環環相扣的體制就已經交代好了，天啊這種”敘述型態”還是很忠於Sade的說…

這不知道幾年前的，John Waters在TIFF跟觀眾一起看Salo，訪談蠻真摰也蠻有趣的，說便便嘛都巧克力做的，臨演的孩子們很容易笑場，並且JW不認為Pasolini的死是政治相關，他認為可能只是私人/sex方面的問題，訪談文章連結在此~ www.philmology.com/?p=792

 

至於這部電影的評價的話…我是layman所以不能給專業或可靠的評論，而且老實說，這篇筆記，大概是最近寫得最零散的一篇了! 只能說這是一部”不同”的PPP作品吧，格局與陳述的方向與他以前的作品都很不同，這部也不可能是我最愛的PPP電影。但在腦海中與記憶中，還是會把這部與Sade原著、Benjamin與任何考究法西斯與極權暴政的哲學理論放在一起，比較不傾向把它與其他的義大利電影，其他的禁片，或包括PPP在內的任何電影拿來做比較。

以前朋友看完這部片之後跟我說”不會恐怖!比較像是優雅的SM片的格局而已” 總之沒有劇照截圖與影評說得那麼誇張，然後就相信他們的話看了這部片啦! 想說這個孩子被割舌的鏡頭，一定沒有想像中恐怖啦!

 

 

但當你你已經看到最後，你都已經理解到本片所要表達的意念之後，再看到這些透過望遠鏡所觀望到的受虐場景…老實說這時所體會到的恐怖感，比想像中更令人難耐。

 

 

(完)

---

 

圖片來源: Google搜圖；圖為Criterion版本的DVD封面。

還有: http://www.organicmechanic.org/scratch/Salo.jpg

 

電影資料:

Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma

英: Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom 中: 索多瑪城120天

dir. Pier Paolo Pasolini ；Year: 1975

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073650/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salò,_or_the_120_Days_of_Sodom

http://www.criterion.com/films/532-salo-or-the-120-days-of-sodom

圖書資料:

The 120 Days of Sodom by Marquis de Sade

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_120_Days_of_Sodom

 

註*1:  摘自紀錄片Pasolini prossimo nostro(2006)的對話～

Pasolini: “…but in my film, all this sex takes on a particular meaning: Is a metaphor of what power does to the human body. It is the commodification of the human body, its reduction to one thing, which is typical of power, of any power.”

#同場加映 “Nothing is more anarchic than power. Power does what it wants and what it wants is totally arbitrary or dictated by its economic reasons which escape common logic.”

 

註*2:

“Sade-Pasolini” by Roland Barthes

• originally published in Le Monde, June 16, 1976
  Translated by Verena Conley

From Stanford Italian Review. “Pier Paolo Pasolini: The Poetics of Heresy.” Ed Beverly Allen. II,2. Fall 1982. 100-102

在網路上找到這則全文: http://zizek.livejournal.com/702.html

 

#最新 註*3: 「極權劫持思想~總在意義與表達脫節時開始…」如果讀者對這句話有所興趣，請另洽本誌 1) 高堡奇人專文的兩個段落“III.2：一心一意，遁入死亡空無” & “II.3 #Simulacra Now“ 2) 暴行語法學的 #沙盒區，3) 歡迎光臨陰陽魔界多段分集介紹以及 4) NEW攻殼機動隊S.A.C. #18yrs回顧中關於孤立綜合之“起舞”的敘述。在此你不會找到絕對的答案，但也不會讓你空手而回…