[SCUM Manifesto] S.C.U.M. : Society for Cutting Up Men. Manifesto by Valerie Solanas with a commentary by Paul Krassner

First edition following the unobtainable mimeographed version produced by the author.
Inevitable minor wear along the edges of the covers and spine, restoration to the upper left corner of the front cover, newspaper clipping laid in. Barnes & Noble price sticker affixed to the front cover.
Commentary by Paul Krassner.
 
This incendiary pamphlet, issued by the marginal and modest Olympia Press, newly re-established in New York, was printed in only a small number of copies.
Gender discrimination, hate speech and incitement to genocide, a violent and unrepentant attempted murder of one of the most celebrated artists of the twentieth century, the advocacy of anarchic violence in a grotesque burst of laughter, the elimination or humiliation of half of humankind...
 
In her misandrist pamphlet, Scum Manifesto (« Society for Cutting Up Men »), Valerie Solanas shows no empathy, grants no room for moderation or reconciliation, and makes no exception in her plan to eradicate men save for « the men who methodically work towards their own elimination [...] [such as] the transvestites who, by their splendid example, encourage other men to demasculinize themselves and thus render themselves relatively harmless ». The first manifesto of radical feminism is not addressed solely to women, but also embraces in its struggle the sexual identities cast aside by the phallocratic society Solanas sought to destroy with unprecedented rage for such a cause.
 
« Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and destroy the male sex. »
In 1971, Emmanuèle de Lesseps, taking on a French version, translated this opening as: 
« Vivre dans cette société, c'est au mieux y mourir d'ennui. Rien dans cette société ne concerne les femmes. Alors, à toutes celles qui ont un brin de civisme, le sens des responsabilités et celui de la rigolade, il ne reste qu'à renverser le gouvernement, en finir avec l'argent, instaurer l'automation à tous les niveaux et supprimer le sexe masculin. »
 
At once an insurrectionary political programme, a paranoid delirium and a poetic text, Solanas's manifesto unsettles by refusing to be confined to any single genre—serious, utopian, or satirical. The real question posed by such a work may not be one of morality, but of the author's right to claim excess. Published after her attempted murder of Andy Warhol, Solanas’s manifesto is the literary and literal assertion that men hold no monopoly on violence.
 
Though presented as an urgent cry of anger, SCUM was in fact the product of two years of thought and writing before Solanas, lacking a publisher, mimeographed it herself in 1967 and sold it on the street (1 for women and 2 for men), meeting no success.
 
Seeking recognition, Valerie Solanas moved in New York’s underground scene and became close to the pope of counterculture, Andy Warhol, frequenting the Factory. Unable to have her manifesto published—« the best piece of writing in all of history, which will be surpassed only by my next book »—Solanas turned to her first literary work: Up Your Ass, a play she hoped her mentor would produce. Unfortunately, Warhol rejected the piece and lost the only manuscript. In compensation, he offered her roles in two of his films. Dissatisfied with this minor artistic recognition, on 3 June 1968 she fired three shots at Warhol, gravely wounding the artist and achieving instant notoriety. She made no secret that her murderous act, more than a personal vendetta, was above all a political necessity and an artistic means to secure circulation of her work. Questioned on her motives, she offered this laconic reply to the courts and the press: « Read my manifesto, you’ll know who I am. »
Maurice Girodias, the notorious publisher of Olympia Press, repeatedly condemned, notably for issuing Lolita and Naked Lunch, had already noticed Solanas the previous year. Though he had rejected her manifesto, he offered her a contract for future works. After the attack, he decided finally to publish the feminist pamphlet of this atypical criminal who proclaimed women’s omnipotence and the toxicity of the male sex. In a final provocation, Girodias reproduced on the back cover the front page of the New York Post reporting Warhol’s tragic hospitalisation.
 
Is Solanas’s book the work of a sick woman—abused as a child, prostituted as a student, diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, repeatedly confined in asylums, and who would die in poverty and solitude? Or is such an interpretation itself proof of the refusal to allow a woman the extremes of delirium and anarchist utopia that men have long claimed?
 
In 1968, in the midst of the interminable Vietnam War, violence was no longer the sole prerogative of oppressors, and the rising anger of minorities against endemic discrimination in the United States manifested itself in violent clashes and the rise of radical groups such as the Black Panthers. Yet women remained excluded from these struggles and their rights denied by both sides, as Angela Davis and Ella Baker also denounced.
 
Unlike them, however, Solanas adhered to no emancipatory struggle and rejected every utopia then in vogue, which, in her view, liberated only men, leaving women at best as rewards:
« Le hippie [...] est follement excité à l'idée d'avoir tout un tas de femmes à sa disposition. [...] L'activité la plus importante de la vie communautaire, celle sur laquelle elle se fonde, c'est le baisage à la chaîne. Ce qui allèche le plus le hippie, dans l'idée de vivre en communauté, c'est tout le con qu'il va y trouver. Du con en libre circulation : le bien collectif par excellence ; il suffit de demander ».
 
« Laisser tout tomber et vivre en marge n'est plus la solution. Baiser le système, oui. La plupart des femmes vivent déjà en marge, elles n'ont jamais été intégrées. Vivre en marge, c'est laisser le champ libre à ceux qui restent ; c'est exactement ce que veulent les dirigeants ; c'est faire le jeu de l'ennemi ; c'est renforcer le système au lieu de le saper car il mise sur l'inaction, la passivité, l'apathie et le retrait de la masse des femmes ».
 
A true detonation in activist circles, S.C.U.M. split the emerging feminist movements such as NOW and Women’s Lib and gave birth to radical feminism. Yet Solanas refused all affiliation and even rejected the support of activist lawyer Florynce Kennedy, pleading guilty at her trial even as Warhol refused to press charges against her: « Je ne peux pas porter plainte contre quelqu'un qui agit selon sa nature. C'est dans la nature de Valerie, alors comment pourrais-je lui en vouloir ». (A fascinating testimony to the psychological hold these two opposites exerted on one another).
 
In a fireworks display of obscenity and mocking extremism, Solanas’s work nonetheless dismantles the arguments of progressive intellectuals while exposing the inescapably patriarchal structure of a falsely modern society. « S.C.U.M. stands against the entire system, against the very idea of laws and government. What S.C.U.M. wants is to demolish the system, not to secure certain rights within it. »
 
Fifty years on, Solanas’s manifesto retains its biting acuity, and the delirious energy of her prose cannot justify the progressive erasure of her place in social history—mirrored by her own mother’s destruction of all her manuscripts after her death.
 
Outraged, convinced, or stunned by the cathartic violence of the text, no reader emerges unscathed from the S.C.U.M. experience. This is doubtless due to the literary force of Solanas’s prose—almost Céline-like in its vitriol—but also to the undeniable relevance of her revolt today:
« Celles qui, selon les critères de notre « culture », sont la lie de la terre, les S.C.U.M. ... sont des filles à l'aise, plutôt cérébrales et tout près d'être asexuées. Débarrassées des convenances, de la gentillesse, de la discrétion, de l'opinion publique, de la « morale », du « respect » des trous-du-cul, toujours surchauffées, pétant le feu, sales et abjectes, les S.C.U.M. déferlent... elles ont tout vu - tout le machin, baise et compagnie, suce-bite et suce-con - elles ont été à voile et à vapeur, elles ont fait tous les ports et se sont fait tous les porcs... Il faut avoir pas mal baisé pour devenir anti-baise, et les S.C.U.M. sont passées par tout ça, maintenant elles veulent du nouveau ; elles veulent sortir de la fange, bouger, décoller, sombrer dans les hauteurs. Mais l'heure de S.C.U.M. n'est pas encore arrivée. La société nous confine encore dans ses égouts. Mais si rien ne change et si la Bombe ne tombe pas sur tout ça, notre société crèvera d'elle-même. »