The Two Faces of one Coin

Akshay Joshi

English 1b

Roger Marheine

11/18/2016

The Two Faces of One Coin

The last 150 years or so has brought some of the most terrible death and destruction the world has seen in its entire history. Great human minds have tried to explain and comprehend a time period where humankind has truly been at its lowest. Marat/Sade a play written by Peter Weiss is a perfect example of the great contrasting ideas between the two main characters, Jean Paul Marat and Marquis de Sade. Both characters describe personal and symbolic views of the world which they live. While both Marat and Sade make highly polarizing arguments, Marat’s claims of revolution against authority and ultimate compassion towards other humans makes Marat more correct.

At the heart of the French Revolution were ideas of social equality and justice which the people of France were truly embracing. Marat and Sade are the very center of this debate. At the start of the play Marat describes death’s triumph in which he compares the beheadings of social Aristocrats to the multitudes of commoners that gave their lives in the quest for profits or servitude for the rich. Marat claims these deaths have a meaning and should not be forgotten to history. Meanwhile Sade claims that no matter what, all death is just a simple part of nature. “Death is simply part of the process, Every death even the cruellest death drowns in the total indifference of nature” (Marquis De Sade P.24) Sade claims that no matter how evil or vile the death of a person may be, at the end - death is simply death. Marat would counter that Sade’s viewpoint of death and nature a lack of compassion for fellow humans. It is this act of compassion towards humans that Marat would further his point in claiming that it is up to the people to see the difference between right and wrong and act upon it. “The important thing is is to pull yourself up by your own hair to turn yourself inside out and see the whole world with fresh eyes”. (Jean-Paul Marat P.26) Marat tells us to question authority around us and to see the world from a different perspective, allowing us to feel the pain of fellow humans. Jean Paul Sartre would also side with Marat in his claim that ignorance is not an answer to the atrocities caused by humans but rather each human is responsible for his or her actions.

Marat and Sade both are in agreement that their ideas are on extreme ends. However, Marat speaks towards the advancement and progress of society while Sade claims that nothing of the outside world matters or interests him. “For me the only reality is imagination the world inside myself, the Revolution no longer interests me” (Sade P. 34). Marat would argue that simple ideas are not enough for significant change, because ideas often stall progress: “We’re all so clogged with dead ideas passed from generation to generation that even the best of us don’t know the way out.” Marat claims that people do not give up old ideas that easily and it is these dead ideas that truly stall the progress of humankind. Erich Fromm would also agree with Marat on dead ideas. “The fact is that while we are living technically in the atomic age, majority of men live emotionally still in the stone age” (Erich Fromm) While humankind is technologically advancing, it is emotionally stalling due to dead ideas. Marat’s ideas of revolution go far beyond the social classes of France, but are a very relevant message even today. Sade claims that revolutions are pointless because they always go around in circles without any real results. While Marat doesn't entirely disagree with this notion, he would claim that it is those dead ideas that keep us from developing real progress. “We invented the revolution but we don't’ know how to run it; everyone wants to keep something from the past” (Marat P. 34). Marat once again emphasizes the importance of using true ideals to create change.

Sade shows us time and time again that he lives life for his own pleasures. There are many instances in the play where Sade describes brutal tortures and murders only to find a great joy in them. While these may be literal acts of torture, the symbolism for Sade’s ideas for revert back to basic needs of human pleasures. Sigmund Freud would agree with Sade in claiming that “Men are not gentle creatures who want to be loved; on the contrary, creatures whose instinctual endowments is to be reconed a powerful share of aggressiveness” (Freud). Marat would claim that Sade’s views on selfish pleasures is lacking compassion and intellect, and he would rather see that energy be spent of utilizing ensuring equality and justice for the working class. Sade on the other hand would claim that there is no true change and people do not evolve but rather keep going in circles. “It’s easy to get mass movements going, movements that move in vicious circles” (Sade P41). Marat again would disagree at Sade’s nihilist views claiming that societies have been conditioned by out of date rules and laws in which people are blindly led to serve out of fear and ignorance. “And so they chained down the poor in their ignorance so that they wouldn’t stand up and fight their bosses who ruled in the name of the lie of divine right”