XIX

In the tradition of morbid curiosity, the same impulse that had me read American Psycho or Diary of an Oxygen Thief, I just had to read something so inflammatory. A gay romance set in Auschwitz? With gratuitous torture? A fucking Nazi symbol on the cover? What in the hell, and what even is this? What about this book's existence makes it feel so impossible to discuss but also fascinating to sit with?

Unfortunately, this novel carries the distinction of not only been boring, but also badly show more written. When I first started reading this, I found myself in an interesting dilemma: having to think about the role of outsider art, 21st-century self-published pulp fiction, and transgressive art as a whole.

Schadenfreude is at it's heart a gay romance/erotica novel written in the style of fanfiction attempting to deal with the horrors of the Holocaust as a backdrop. It opens heartily: after the main character is sent to Auschwitz, the rest of the first quarter of the book is dedicated to detailed torture scenes. I almost stopped there--It genuinely read as torture porn, no ifs ands or buts, but I trudged on.

The rest of the novel spirals into a romance, with tedious, unclear prose that leaves you confused, bored, and a little shocked you're still at it. Why was I at it?

Yes, because I was interested in reading this precisely because of how controversial it was. A book so flagrantly attempting to put the middle finger to social norms is intriguing, but American Psycho it is not--A little bit more Diary of an Oxygen Thief, but even that had a line editor. The author simply does not have the chops to make this even remotely worth reading, instead relying on the shock value of the premise to keep it afloat.

I like transgressive art. I like that there are people making art that makes me uncomfortable, and I like seeing for myself if I can learn something new about myself in the process. There is also something undeniably alluring about seeing this crop up in the murky world of self-publishing, a frontier that will never have to cow to a boardroom and thus has an ecosystem akin to the tangiest of junk stores. What will you find? Unfortunately, I found Schadenfreude to just be plain bad, though I guess I'm happy it exists.

I just don't think it's worth your time. show less

I've been looking for this book for a long, long time.

I've never read anything in my life that reaches this level of intensity. I'm blown away by how good it is. This sounds like hyperbole but it's really not. Beautifully written, unstintingly cruel. It's not something I'd describe as porn exactly or necessarily. Yes, it's sexual. The main character is a slave used for sex and other things, and his psyche warps to adapt to his terrible circumstances. It's never comfortable or flippant. It's show more about surviving the unsurvivable, and Stockholm Syndrome. Its emotional veracity won't leave you unaffected.

I've noticed some people leaving reviews of the book despite not having read it. If you haven't read this, you don't know how brutal it is. And if it had been any LESS brutal, it would have done the disservice to the memory of real victims that these commenters assume it does.

I think stories like this have a right to exist and be told. I'm going to treasure this sickening, radioactive, incredible, haunting book. I don't think it's for everyone, and if you have your doubts whether it's for you, skip it. But if you're intrigued, I highly recommend this book. It goes all the way there and you'll never forget it. show less

No, I didn't read it. Yes, I still gave it 1* after reading several of the reviews.

Why?

This is not at all representative of what happened, especially not for what happened to the survivors of concentration camps, or Mengele's experiments. It's the wet dream of someone inordinately fascinated with these atrocities instead.

What revolts me there is not the fact that someone might wank off over Mengele and his victims, there's always that. What revolts me to the point of actual physical nausea show more is that people read and clearly end up thinking--as documented in their reviews--that this is what had happened. No it hadn't and wasn't. Not even close to it. It doesn't even come close to what reverberates down the generations. And I'm not in the slightest sorry to say: doing THAT, creating such misconceptions, that is vile.

Far far better alternative reading material are the poems of [a:Paul Celan|86816|Paul Celan|http://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1288812114p2/86816.jpg] or any of the authentic survivor accounts, [b:I Was A Doctor In Auschwitz|777047|I Was A Doctor In Auschwitz|Gisella Perl|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1260671666s/777047.jpg|763080] is a good start. show less

This book might need to be read more than once to catch the nuances.

The author, 19 wrote a story that is like those ambiguous pictures that ask the viewer “Is this a young woman with a rose on her neck or is it an old crone with a shawl?” Either answer is right, and more often than not the view can easily see both images, but in the end, one might stand out more than the other. You initially see one thing, but with a bit of a paradigm shift, the other image stands out in stark relief, show more and the viewer goes back and forth. There is no answer, there is only what the viewer sees and choses.

I can spend hours and pages breaking down this story into various scholarly essays that would garner me an A in Psychology, History, or English Lit (although I graduated a few years ago). But that is not a review, it’s is a book report and case analysis.

So as a review I will say that yes, you should read this book. Keep in mind it does take place in Nazi Germany, in Auschwitz to be precise. There are detailed and graphic depictions of what went on in those Doctor’s laboratories. The Mengele twin testing, the hypothermia tests, and other historically known and accurately portrayed incidences that went on. There is little to no interactions with the general populations. Also, the story itself may cause distress if the reader finds themselves a bit too “understanding” to situations. It is a prime case of situational ethics.

I won’t say much else because the story needs to be read without any preconceived notions. If you go in with someone else’s ideas and takeaways it might prevent your own discoveries and conclusions. It takes a while before the abuse and torture morph into something else, even when the abuse and torture continue.

The book is continually pushing the line in trying to say, is this still a romance? Is this still love? Or are you, the reader, becoming like Erich and grasping for anything else besides the obvious because to believe that it isn’t love means that his own feelings are wrong and misplaced, that he truly has no hope and nothing to look forward to.

Remember, Erich is set up in the first chapters to have the psyche and sexual leanings that will put him in the perfect position to take the abuse and rise to the challenges in the book, while endearing him to Kaltherzig in a way that no other previous “boy” had.

Had Erich never met Kaltherzig, never been arrested and sent to the camps, where would his life be? I am curious to know what other reviewers feel about this story. Do they find love, or is it the results of abuse/objectification/experimentation/paternalism/deprivation/behavior modification?

If anyone draws the parallels to current BDSM Master/slave roles, keep in mind, Master/slave roles that are healthy have both people being equals in two different roles. Both have a mind to say. The Master holds the reins, but the slave allows them to be held and can walk away at any time. show less