I thought Salo` had long since disappeared from the face of the earth, so horrific and unwatchable in places that I was certain there would eventually be no market for it anywhere. How fascinating that it's coming back or has been around this long and hiding just under the surface.

I saw Salo` in the late 70s in Salt Lake City at the grungy and now long gone Blue Mouse theatre. I had just returned from Rome where I happened to be living when Pasolini was killed out in Ostia. His death was big news in Italy, although I barely knew his films at that time and certainly had not seen Salo`. I went to see Salo` out of curiosity for Pier Paolo Pasolini, not knowing what I was getting into.

Still to this day after many thousands of films have come and gone through my consciousness, I can still say without hesitation that Salo` is one of the most horrifying films I've ever seen. Towards the end of the film I had to finally cover my eyes because I just couldn't take it anymore. (Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse, it did.) The ending is haunting, as much for what Pasolini wanted to say with it as the implications of the children dancing together to what I believe is a traditional Fascist song.

I have been told by my Italian friends who are into their movies, that this was Pasolini's indictment of Fascism. What a way to lay it out. Wowsers. Even though we're a culture accustomed to tremendous depravity in horror films, Salo` moves on another level that is almost unfathomable.

I think anybody truly curious about seeing the film would be wise to read up on some of the details so that they don't get themselves into something they don't want lingering in their consciousness for the rest of their lives. I don't necessarily regret seeing the movie but I would love to be able to purge some of those scenes from my memory.

Thanks Joan, you have articulated the situation succinctly and perfectly.

Thank you Ms. Cordell for a beautiful and thoughtfully written article.

In response to jmcdsf's posts:

Marriage is not a religious institution as some would like us to believe. If it were we would be asked to state a belief in some form of diety or to state a religious preference when we apply for a marriage license. We are not asked to provide any information or make any declarations as to our religious or spiritual practices and beliefs in order to qualify for a marriage license. At no point in the process is there any mention of god, religion or spirituality. To wit, an 80 year old atheist man and a 78 year old atheist woman can go down to city hall today and get married to each other, thus making it clear that in the government's eyes marriage is not a religious or god-centric affair. And for that matter, not a procreative affair either.

It isn't a religion or a church that grants the benefits and privileges of marriage. It's the government that grants us all that. A rabbi, representing the Jewish faith, may marry two people and that marriage will be recognized by the government. But it's not the Jewish faith that provides over a thousand fiscal and practical benefits to the couple. It's the government that does that; and it's unconstitutional for the government to discriminate against a designated class of people.

Ultimately the courts will keep overturning these anti-gay propositions (that become laws) in much the same way as they did the Jim Crow laws; the last word will always be found in constitutional justice, not in extremist caterwauling. The pity in all of it will be the money we will waste fighting bigotry when that money could be invested in so many other wonderful and worthwhile endeavors.

Utah's teachers are amongst the lowest paid in the nation. Instead of calling on its members to donate money to bettering an impoverished educational system, Mormon leaders asked their members to donate millions of dollars to getting Prop 8 passed. At last count Mormons had anted up something in the neighborhood of 18 million dollars to support the passage of Prop 8. Can you imagine how many teacher's salaries could have been amended and bettered by that much money? Apparently, at least for Mormons, enforcing religious bigotry is more important than improving the quality of education.