Product Description
A collection of letters written by Jean-Paul Sartre to Simone de Beauvoir offers a candid, provocative study of Sartre's literary, philosophical, and political evolution and of the social and cultural institutions of prewar Europe. ... Read more

Product Description

Product Description
June 1940 was the summer of defeat for the French soldiers, deserted by their officers, utterly demoralized, awaiting the Armistice. Day by day, hour by hour, "Iron in the Soul" unfolds what men thought and felt and did as France fell. Men who shrugged, men who ran, men who fought and tragic men like Mathieu, who had dedicated his life to finding personal freedom, now overwhelmed by remorse and bitterness, who must learn to kill. "Iron in the Soul", the third volume of Sartre's "Roads to Freedom Trilogy", is a harrowing depiction of war and what it means to lose. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Rethinking Assumptions in the Wake of Defeat
Sartre sets Part One of the excellent IRON IN THE SOUL in June 1940. In Part One, the Nazis have routed the French army and only random teams of fatalistic French soldiers still resist the invaders. Meanwhile, Sartre sets Part Two in a POW camp, where 20,000 French soldiers await their fate. Many of these have desperate hopes that the Nazis, once hostilities end, will treat them benignly.

In Part One, Sartre examines the Defeat of France from two perspectives. First, he shows the reactions of characters he has developed earlier in this ROADS TO FREEDOM trilogy. These include Gomez, a veteran of the Spanish civil war who resents France's failure to join the war against Fascism in Spain; Mathieu, a professor and non-combatant in the French Army whose commitment to personal freedom has become irrelevant in the war; Daniel, a self-loathing and predatory gay man who finds in defeated France a convenient target for his rage; Boris, the boyish kept lover of an older woman who finds a mission in warfare; and Jacques and Odette, a loveless older couple that rationalize Jacques's cowardice as they flee Paris.

Meanwhile, the second narrative-line in Part One follows a troop of non-combatant French soldiers who have been abandoned by their officers and are awaiting capture by the Nazis. Here, these leaderless men oscillate from drunken despair to baseless hope. In conversation, many declare that the Nazis, for their own benefit, will furlough all captured soldiers and send them home within a month. In following these soldiers, Sartre shows there are no good options, although personal fulfillment may come to soldiers who, despite pointless futility, do their duty.

Part Two of IRON IN THE SOUL examines attitudes in the defeated French army. In this case, Sartre principally follows two characters in a large POW camp. These are Brunet, a communist organizer; and Schneider, a sophisticated thinker who has great empathy with defeated French soldiers. Here, Sartre shows how Brunet keeps his dignity and grows as a person as other POWs, starved for information, develop childish and unrealistic expectations of their enemies. And, he uses the humane Schneider to define "iron in the soul". As he and Brunet discuss a POW with PTSD, he says: "He's trying to build up some kind of defense-mechanism, to think out the whole situation in which he finds himself; to get it straight from the beginning. But with what? He no longer has the necessary tools. Even his power to think straight is down and out. He's suffering from the iron that has entered into his soul..." This, certainly, is a problem--the need to rethink assumptions--that many French people faced during and immediately after World War II.

Similar to AGE OF REASON and THE REPRIEVE, the other books in this ROADS TO FREEDOM trilogy, Sartre's writing is absolutely first-rate and not to be missed. Still, his great writing may reach its highpoint as German tanks enter Paris and the character Daniel, crazy and enraged, watches alone from the streets. Here, his thoughts include:

"Paris was not, strictly speaking, empty. It was peopled by little broken scraps of time that sprang here and there to life, to be almost immediately absorbed again into this radiance of eternity."

"Everywhere, as far as the eye could reach, was silence and emptiness, an abyss stretching horizontally away from him... The streets led nowhere. Without human life, they all looked alike."

"...today the Reign of Evil begins."

A great book and highly recommended.

Sartre the Novelist

June 1940 and France is defeated. Mathieu is amongst soldiers in a small village awaiting the conquerors. Daniel roams an occupied Paris whilst others we know flee.Brunet is captured and tries to seize the opportunity to radicalize the men towards communism. Meanwhile Gomez is in New York, with both his homelands over run by the fascists. Amongst the populacethere is a fatalism that accepts and wants to accomodate the Germans.
Sartre captures the dissaray of defeat;the vacuum it creates in a society trying to reform itself around a new reality. Life must go on.
This is far removed from the Hollywood portrayals, this is so real and how it was.
Sartres dispair of the supine acceptance of defeat is evident, as is the feeling of a people unable unwilling or to fatiqued to see whats staring them in the face;the reality of totalitarian nazi rule.
'Iron in the Soul', the third in 'Roads to Freedom' is written in the more conventional 'novel' form (as opposed to the brilliant stream of consciousness of 'The Reprieve') and its power comes accross as events are detailed as so everyday;events and historical characters are all discussed or mentioned like one might discuss something in todays paper. It brings a searing reality to things.
'The Roads to Freedom' trilogy is superb;the slow drift into war and defeat. The blurb says that this was an abandoned project, that Sartre planed to write more. I dont know weather that would have been a good thing or not;the work is great as it stands.
Sartre the writer, the provoker of profound thought knows few equals. As the political ideologist he was flawed, the mistake being that all ideologies end up in paradox, achieving completely the opposite that they intended. Its a wonder Sartre fell for this trap.Perhaps he should have listened to Musil: ' Ideology is fine as long as no one takes it seriously'But forget the enigma of his ploitical leanings, there is so much to be had from his writings. ... Read more

Product Description
The internationally acclaimed biography of Sartre in celebration of the 100th anniversary of his birth.

The first volume in the Lives of the Left series, Annie Cohen-Solal's Sartre is a remarkable achievement. "A sensation" upon its initial publication in France, as the New York Times reported, Sartre was subsequently translated into sixteen languages and went on to become an international bestseller, appealing to the broadest audience. First published in the United States in 1987, it is the definitive biography of a man and an age, an intimate portrait of a complex life.A major accomplishment of this biography is that it places Sartre in the context of history while at the same time reassessing the full import of his literary and political accomplishments. Discovering untold aspects of Sartre's private and political life, Cohen-Solal weaves together all the elements of an exceptional career. From the fascinating description of his hitherto-unknown father to the painful last moments of Sartre's own declining years, this is biography on the grandest scale, fully deserving of the praise it has received. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

An excellent introduction to the work of Sartre
This may be a 'crib' but it is possible to learn a great deal from it. It is not only about the two plays, but also contains a short biography of Sartre, and summaries and analyses of his major works, the novel "Nausea" and his major philosophical work"Being and Nothingness".It also contains a summary of the essay on 'Existensialism' one of his most influential works.
It does not however as it was published in 1983 contain the latest revelations about Sartre's life and work. At the time it was written my sense is Sartre's reputation was more unimpeached than it is today. This guide stresses how much of a 'humanist' Sartre was , and how he always focused on the human situation, and how deeply his writing is involved in the social problems of mankind.
But Sartre's gung- ho Communist Anarchism is seen by many today as less than commendable. And his personal life shown to be far more contemptible and exploitative than was previously thought.
In any case this work which rightly see Sartre more as writer than philosopher provides an excellent introduction to his overall accomplishment.

An incredible piece
Sartre's "No Exit" not only provides a version of Hell that is the complete polar opposite of Dante's vision but he succeeds in making it seem scarier...and funnier.The fact that these three strangers startattacking each other like small children causes the reader (and viewer ifwatching a produced version) to secretly chuckle.One always wondersthough as to whether they would fall into the same trap that these three dowere they in the same predicament. ... Read more

Product Description
A criticism of modern psychology in general and Freud's determinism in particular. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Speculative? System-building?Abstract? Gut-wrenching!
This work consists of 2 excerpts from Satre's "Being and Nothingness". What's new is a 17 page introduction by Rollo May. Although May admires Sartre, he does present key differences he has with Sartre, so this intro has some teeth in it. Even as excerpts, there's about 200 pages of meaty exposition that saves you lugging around "Being And Nothingness" if this subset is yourfocus.

Sartre builds up a big, abstract, speculative system, apparently as a framework for his belief in human freedom, choice, and responsibility. What does this construction accomplish that simple assertions wouldn't of our freedom, our not being determined, our defining ourself via our yet-to-be-accomplished projects, our responsibility rooted in our unavoidable need to make choices? Perhaps both emphasis (you'll be less likely to forget you are free), elaboration (you'll learn more what being free as well as trying not to be implies), and examples (you'll learn more of the ways in which people try to avoid the weight of their freedom).

Even if the experts tell you they have you all figured out, you'll have decide whether to buy that or not. Even if you want to be all figured out and delivered from uncertainty, they (and you) may be wrong. If Sartre only argued for our individual freedoms, he wouldn't be so important. It is in his exploration of the ways in which we cringe from our freedom, of our "bad faith", that he connects and makes what seems a speculative, abstract system instead a powerful emotional truth.

Excellent Book
I read this book in one sitting and found it to be very informative. In outlining the basis for an existentialist psychoanalysis, Sartre gives interesting and riveting existential perspectives on the human situation. I would recommend anyone with an interest in philosophy, psychology, and thehuman situation in general to give this book a try. ... Read more

Product Description
This volume presents an English translation of a lecture Sartre delivered at the Club Maintenant, along with several pages of dialogue between Sartre and the auditors and critics of the lecture. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

We are what we choose to make ourselves
For Sartre Man is thrown into the world without having being asked whether he wants to be here or not. This means in Sartre's terms that Man is born without an Essence, a fundamental nature. That Nature is shaped instead by decisions, by conscious choice, by our freedom.
But human beings, contrary to Sartre are born into family, communal , national , religious traditions. They are born into worlds in which there are values. They do not begin their journeys in life as blank slates.
This means that the ' freedom' which Sartre tends to make his absolute (i.e. while denying that we have a nature he makes Freedom our nature) is qualified and limited for all of us in many different ways even before we begin to make conscious choices.
Nonetheless the pessimistic doctrines of Marxism and certain forms of Christianity which tend in the direction of a total determination of our collective nature , are rightly criticized and qualified by Sartre.
Sartre's celebration of the possibilities of human self- creation and transformation of reality certainly provide a special kind of hope, and youthful sense of our own humanity.
"We are the makers of what we are, of what we are, and what we are not"
I would see parallels here between Sartre's existensialim and James-Dewey American pragmatism.
Nonetheless I would want to argue that in negating the importance of our connection with Transcendence i.e. with God, Sartre woefully, and unnecessarily limits human freedom.
For for many human beings the greatest free act of their life is their choice to devote their lives to making closer connection with God.

Some Thoughts on Morality
Last night I read Jean-Paul Sartre's short manuscript Existentialism and Humanism, in which he set out to defend the existentialist philosophy against criticisms that had been made against it, particularly by Marxists, and particularly for its being (perceived as) overly subjective (amongst other things). I think there is a lot that Sartre says that is just right. Such as, every action is a moral action, including the action of doing nothing. And most importantly, Sartre makes the connection between freedom and morality. This is something that Musil is really sharp on, as well (particularly with the Moosbrugger case in The Man Without Qualities) -- in order for any action to be perfectly moral, it must be perfectly freely chosen; and to the extent that various extra-agent factors impinge on the action, the action is subsequently less moral.This is built into our very idea of what it is to be moral: an action you initiate is something you are morally accountable for; an action that happens from outside of you is something you are not morally accountable for. Now, if as (arguably) the Marxists say, the individual is inextricably determined by the social, there can be no morality, since everything is determined from without. Seen from this perspective, it is clear why many of the existentialists were Christians: Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, and Jaspers, for example. However if we are to take the atheistic line (which I believe with Sartre to be the most consistent with the existentialist principles) we say that even God couldn't help us act morally. Sartre illustrates the point with an example (which is appropriate, of course, since existentialism is a form of moral particularism, in that it says we need to act in each new case on the basis of information we have at hand, and no rules can guide us rigidly from case to case). A young man approached him (Sartre) and said that he had a choice to stay at home and care for his sick mother, or to leave and fight in the war. Caring for his mother had concrete calculable benefits over the short term; fighting in the war has abstract, generalised benefits that may, moreover, have been thwarted (he may have been stuck in a camp or pushing paper at a desk, or whatnot). Sartre says, what can guide the man here? No moral rule can determine what his course of action should be; the decision is the man's freely to make; and this free action is what confers the status of a moral decision on it. And so Sartre simply said to the man, do what you feel is right (or something similar). I think Sartre is absolutely correct to say that existentialism is not mired in subjectivity, or in despair. It is not mired in subjectivity, because your morality is something that is exhibited by your actions (we might even say there is no such thing as a moral thought, only a moral action: something that fits well with liberal political principles [as an aside, one of the interlocuters at the end of the manuscript accuses Sartre's moral system of being simply a variant of 18th Century liberal philosophy, a point which has, I think, some merit]). It is not mired in despair, because there is no correct reponse to the absolute freedom on which morality depends; despair is one reaction; glee is another; and none is more natural or correct than another.

Sartre Defends Existentialism
This book will either make you want to read more about existentialism or it will lead you into making quite the opposite choice by leaving existentialism to others possibly more patient than yourself though not necessarily more intelligent.

Whatever your choice you will nonetheless be making a choice even if that choice is not to make a choice.

Or as Sartre would put it, in a far more philosophical manner, you can always choose but you must know that even if you do not choose that would still be a choice. For what is not possible is not to choose.

This is the first book I have read about existentialism so I cannot judge whether it is a good introduction to this philosophical movement yet the very fact that the purpose of the lecture delivered by Sartre is to offer a defence of existentialism against certain reproaches laid against it, seems by itself to shape the content of the lecture into an attempt by necessity to capture the essence of existentialism. In particular, in relation to the reactions existentialism has provoked.

There are certain key ideas that are very plainly put across to the reader which may well capture one's attention and actually lead to a further exploration of other books about existentialism.

For example, Sartre after referring to the two kinds of existentialists that there are and declaring that he is a representative of atheistic existentialism explains that if God does not exist there is at least one being whose existence comes before its essence, that is to say a being which exists before it can be defined by any conception of it.

That being, of course, is man.

Thus, existence precedes essence. Man first exists and then defines himself.

Basically, in conclusion to his reference to atheistic existentialism, Sartre adds that the first principle of existentialism is that man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. Not as what he conceives himself to be after already existing but that which he wills himself to be subsequent to a necessary leap towards existence. Basically, man only attains existence when he is what he purposes to be. Whereas, before that projection of the self, nothing exists.

Doubtless this first principle of existentialism gave rise to a reproach against the subjectivity of existentialism. Other ideas and terms used are also examined always with reference made to the particular reproaches Sartre has to answer in relation to such ideas and terms.

All in all, he makes out quite a solid and intelligible defence of existentialism as he explains that the first effect of existentialism is to put every man in possession of himself with the entire responsibility of his existence being placed on his shoulders.

The emphasis in the doctrine presented by Sartre is that there is no reality except in action. Man is described as nothing else but what he purposes with his existence being attained only in so far as he realizes himself. Man is therefore, nothing else but the sum of his actions.

He clarifies further this basic idea by stating - rather poetically in fact - that for the existentialist (though also in reality) there is no love apart from the deeds of love, no potentiality of love other than that which is manifested in loving and no genius other than that which is expressed in works of art.

Throughout the lecture the basic theme delivered by Sartre is that reality alone is reliable and dreams, expectations and hopes serve only to define man negatively and not positively since man is nothing else but what he lives.

One can easily understand how a basic idea such as this could give rise to a reproach for the pessimism of existentialism. Yet, Sartre manages to turn around this reproach and to declare that what people reproach existentialists with is not their pessimism but the sternness of their optimism.

As to the structure of the book, this is divided into three parts each of which can be enjoyed in its own right even though the parts are actually interrelated. First, there is a rather helpful introduction, then the lecture itself and finally the actual discussion that followed the lecture.

An additional benefit to the newcomer to the study of existentialism is the slimness of the book. This means the entire book or any part of it can easily be read time and time again. No doubt each fresh reading will be to the advantage of the reader as it will add to his understanding of the ideas expressed while simultaneously increasing his appreciation of the manner of their expression.

Man Is What He Wills Himself To Be
EXISTENTIALISM AND HUMANISM did not start life as a book.It is actually a translation of a lecture delivered by Sartre in Paris in 1945 at a time when the term "existentialism" was being bandied about ratherloosely.My 1947 copy also incorporates the discussion which immediatelyfollowed the lecture.It is interesting to note that, after a fewlegitimate questions, the discussion became a series of challenges to theexistentialist philosophy by a M. Naville who was a leading French Marxistin post World War II Paris.

Contrary to some comments contained inreviews of Sartre's books and collections of his essays, existentialism isnot an easily understood philosophy and there were, and still are,differences of opinions regarding existentialism, and what it might mean,between major proponents of the philosophy such as Sartre and Gide. (Sartre alludes to this in this lecture.)For this review I will attemptto stick to the opinions stated herein by Sartre.

He led off his lectureby making the point that existentialism was under attack by The Church onone side and the Marxists on the other.He stated that both attacks werebased on misunderstandings of the existentialist philosophy.

As is to beexpected, his starting point for his discussion is the basic concept thatexistence precedes essence, or, putting it into his own words, "Notonly is man what he conceives himself to be, he is also only what he willshimself to be."Carrying this to its logical conclusion; man,individually and collectively, is responsible for his own choices andactions.No excuses accepted.

Another often misunderstood term used indefining existentialism is "anguish."In layman's terms, anguishin existentialism has to do with the doubts surrounding making choices. Sartre uses "the anguish of Abraham" to illustrate.When Abrahamwas instructed to sacrifice Isaac, Abraham had to decide if the instructionreally came from a messinger of God, or, conversely, was the messenger atool of Satan.Then, when he was told not to perform the sacrifice, he wasfaced with exactly the same dilemna.

What I have covered in the lastparagraph was merely the beginning of Sartre's discussion onanguish.

Another aspect has to do with being forlorn.In oversimplifiedterms, this means that we have nothing such as "human nature" orsome predetermined value system to fall back on.Even when relying onsomeone else's advice our final decision is our own. We are trulyresponsible for our choices.How much more alone can one get.

AlthoughSartre discusses many other aspects of the existentialist philosophy, I'dlike to leave these discussions to those who choose to read this lecture. I would, however, like to sum up with the followingquotation.

"(Existentialism) can not be taken for a philosophy ofquietism, since it defines man in terms of action;nor for a pessimisticdescription of man--there is no doctrine more optimistic, since man'sdestiny is within himself;....It tells him that action is theonly thing that enables man to live.Consequently, we are dealing with anethics (sic) of action and involvement."

There's a lot more depth tothose few aspects of existentialism that I did touch upon.For those whoare tempted to use the term, "existentialism," to categorize aschool of writing or as an excuse for certain excesses of behavior, or forinactivity, I would recommend reading this lecture as a starting point inunderstanding the term you are using.If it interests you, you mightdecide to expand your investigation to include other works on the subjectand, perhaps, to further expand, and investigate other philosophicalthoughts of both classical and contemporary thinkers.

Calm and to-the-point...
This book is what got me started on Sartre, it's fairly easy to follow and it explains the basics of Sartre. Quality reading that gets you thinking... GET IT NOW! ... Read more

Product Description
It is September 1938 and during a heatwave, Europe tensely awaits the outcome of the Munich conference, where they will learn if there is to be a war. In Paris, people are waiting too, among them Mathieu, Jacques and Philippe, each wrestling with their own love affairs, doubts and angsts - and none of them ready to fight. The second volume in Sartre's wartime Roads to Freedom trilogy, "The Reprieve" cuts between locations and characters to build an impressionistic collage of the hopes, fears and self-deception of an entire continent as it blinkers itself against the imminent threat of war. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Sartre the Genius
Covering a week in september (23-30) 1938 the novel concerns the Sudetan crisis. Everywhere people brace themselves for the inevitable war. Tensions increase when a general mobilization is called then comes news of a last ditch attempt for resolution-the infamous Munich conference. A nation celebrates a phoney peace....
The second book in Sartres 'Roads to Freedom' trilogy is an absolute masterpiece. I had no hesitation rating the first part ('Age of Reason')as 5 star stuff. 'The Reprieve' is infinitely better-and that doesn't take anything away from 'Age of Reason'.
Sartre weaves in the characters we encountered in the first book with historical figures and completely captures the tension and stress of that time. He captures the various political slants, each person is trapped by the bigger fate of world politics; each reacts differently from the upper class Phillipe who believes he is at one with the proletariat and opposes war as a pacifist, to the communists happily going to war and the bourgeoise apologists. It is superb.
This book also scores heavily on a literary front. It is lyrical, profound, enlightening and-maybe most important-gripping.It completely absorbs. Sartre uses the 'streams of conciousness' style -ie the 'James Joyce' school of writing and pulls it off with bags to spare. I've always felt that a lot of writers inspired by Joyce ended up being a lot better at being James Joyce than James Joyce was! Sartre is certainly that. If Joyces work were the Sistine Chapels foundations, Hemingway Faulkner and Sartre are the ceiling and frescos!
The style may perplex to start with as you are confronted with different people places and plots in unbroken paragraphs, but this so wonderfully gives the feeling of time-things happening at a specific time-Hitler says something whilst someone else has a drink-and each story line is so vivid the book just mesmerizes.
Sartre opposed appeasement;that inertia leads to loss of liberty and freedom and he gets his ideas accross magnificently.
Such wonderful work will always lead to the riddle that is Sartre;his political leanings; his support of dubious regimes and causes -particularily communism (a nice idea in theory;just a disaster in practice!)- that seem at odds with his writings. But nothing should detract from this superb book or the 'Roads to..' trilogy. Breathtaking stuff. ... Read more

Product Description