Philosophical_novel on George's Blog

Nausea

Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:32:18 -0500

Summary

Antoine Roquentin, an isolated aspiring biographer, inhabits Bouville (mud town) like a ghost. “Nausea” by Sartre is not so much a story as it is an attempt to let the reader have an experience. Roquentin’s alienation provides the space to observe, producing the typical results of social critique. Yet, he goes beyond this to grapple with the existence of things in general.

Thoughts

This book will have a very hit-or-miss reception among readers. It can be easily dismissed as another case of a melancholic Frenchman who needs to spend more time in the sun. When I picture Antoine, he is quite pale, so those readers would probably be correct. However, for my friends who don’t know when to stop asking questions, this book will give you a few more.

Demons

Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:31:12 -0500

We were silent again for a minute. “Cher,” he concluded at last, getting up quickly, “do you know this is bound to end in something?” “Of course,” said I. “Vous ne comprenez pas. Passons. But … usually in our world things come to nothing, but this will end in something; it’s bound to, it’s bound to!”

Summary

Dostoyevsky chose as the epigraph to this story the passage of Luke where Jesus sends the demons into the swine, and they subsequently throw themselves off a cliff. A curious passage, and one that will come up over and over in this book. I won’t bother to write a plot summary because spoilers, and also like all of Dostoyevsky’s books, the plot is the tortilla of the burrito. It serves mainly to deliver the contents of the book. The contents are the conversations. The characters are unforgettable, you have a fifty-year-old child, who was influential once, but is of no practical use and literally runs away from home. You have Stavrogin, a man who can’t bring himself to believe in anything, but apparently can’t stop influencing people with the force of his ideas. You have the power-hungry revolutionary sociopath Pyotr Stepanovich who is always willing to break a few eggs to make an omelet. Last but not least, one of the most compelling characters Kirillov, the atheists par excellence, consumed by an idea, courageous, selfless, and ultimately doomed. In short, this work is a literary masterpiece that managed to divine the future of Russia with astonishing clarity.

The Stranger

Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:32:22 -0500

This was a short story about a man who seemed to float through life mostly detached. You could almost say a stoic not by philosophy but by personality. Most things that attach people to this life didn’t seem to be there for him. A French man living in colonialized Algiers. Meursault is like Dostoevsky’s Idiot. He tells the truth, but instead of having a good heart, Meursault’s heart seems indifferent. Written by Albert Camus while Hitler occupied France, this book places the character in the most extreme of human situations. Meursault and the reader are forced to realize they are condemned to death and to try to find a way to enjoy the time they have in the face of absurdity and meaninglessness. I liked this book because just when you think you have a handle on it you remember a new detail that makes you look at it from a different angle. It is similar to no country for old men in that sense and in the fact that the ending leaves it up to the reader to write the conclusion. This book was not written from a place of answers, the character is just as clueless as the reader. That is valuable and leaves it open to many interpretations. Camus had this one sentence summary:

Siddartha

Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:32:02 -0500

Finished this, this weekend. Still processing it. I think the moral of the story is you can’t teach wisdom, the only way to learn that is through personal experience. Especially being aware enough to know when you are fighting a useless battle trying to “teach” someone wisdom when they aren’t ready. While this is somewhat of a common idea, being able to graciously accept that is not common at all. I’ve often found it frustrating trying to impart my “wisdom” on people who clearly just aren’t ready. Why can’t they see I’m always right?

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:31:23 -0500

My first foray into Nietzche I did not find this book to be super enjoyable. It is about Zarathustra who is a spokesman for Nietzche’s new vision. He declares that God is dead and presents the idea of the over-man (or superman) as what should replace him. This super man should be a warrior and have a personal sense of pride and above all should not be driven by pity. For as one of the most interesting quotes of the book says, “Thus spoke the devil to me, once on a time: “Even God has his hell: it is his love for man”. And lately did I hear him say these words: “God is dead: of his pity for man has God died”. So, Zarathustra comes down from a mountain and teaches some disciples about his ideas but then they try to couple his idea with some ideas of Christianity. This will not do because this is the thing that led to the death of God in the first place. So, after teaching these disciples Zarathustra starts to become overwhelmed with pity for man as well. So, he retreats back to his mountain and reconnects with nature to “find himself”. He thus returns to his enlightened state of supreme joy and happiness. After some time, some “higher men” of various types come to visit him. He thinks that they may be a sort of mantle carrier for him after he passes. But long story short, although better than most they are no superman. The story ends with him deciding to come down from the mountain again in an attempt to find some men that would live up to his standards. As far as writing goes it was pretty well written (obvious) I feel like as with most poetic type of literature it was hard to follow from time to time due to the over-floweryness of the language. Overall, I did not really like the tone very much because the “enlightened” character seemed to mirror Nietzsche’s own character too closely. It seemed a little like a long high five to himself for being so awesome and better than everyone else.