Deconstructing O,

[Mad Lews]

Right on! That's it. Most of the best stories are about the subs NOT about the masters. Pej

I couldn't agree more. subs are much more interesting than Masters. Then again it could just be that we're more interested in subs. I suppose to get a real perspective you'd have to ask some subs.

I was always found suprising views that saw O as a victim. From the point of storytelling at least, O is the ONLY REAL character in the book - "tragic heroine in a bloody romance" - as some like to put it.. Everthing is happening because of her, not the other way around.
At Roissy she is just 'made' to ah, participate. Then when Rene turns out to be a wimp he is, up pops Sir S.
THEN when he cannot take her further - her comes Anne-Marie et cetera. In a way O is USING them.
Even in Lews Sir Stephen's Confessions O FORCES Sir S to do what she wants. We might not be happy about her choice but it is certainly legitimate one.

(Strange book, isn't it? No matter how much you analyze it - it turn yet another cheek. And I'm not sure we can agree completely - THAT'S why it's so good )

Have fun

Pej

Yup strange...
It has always been my contention that in an exchange of power the giver (the sub.) maintains control over the relationship with the receiver (the Dom.) So it's natural (to me) that O would control the ending of her relationship with Sir Stephen. That is why I tried (with mixed results) to show the story as Sir Stephen's failure, not O's triumph.
Did you even remember writing this Pej?
your registered madman
Mad Lews