Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre is our February 2022 New School Classic Group Read.

This is the SPOILER THREAD.

I am at page 118 (56%).

This is heavy going for me. Had it been a long book I would have given up. I just read the part in the art museum, and the passage with all the painted eyes looking as him is really great. The best thing so far. Otherwise I feel overwhelmed by seemingly unrelevant details.

Seems I am not alone:

Question on goodreads: "Did anyone finish reading the entire book? Any recommendations of how to move forward and wrap my head around this book? "

Answer: " Throw it across the room, like I did. "

Lol J Blueflower! 😄

I still haven’t decided if I’m going to read this one or not. It’s not that easy to access and I’m just not sure it’s worth the effort.

I am having a much better experience than J Blueflower at a little more rhan 50% into the book. Part of the reason is that I read a lot of contemporary literature and "autofiction" has been popular the last couple of years with this having much similarity conentrating on mood an atmosphere. Another reason is the allusions to or influences from earler writers. You can see the influence of Proust and Céline and probably a host of others that I am missing. There is also an influence from certain artists, especicially fin de sieclè examples like Toulouse-Lautrec. So far it is the aesthetic aspects I find appealing; I haven't absorbed much of the philosophy.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Seems I am not alone:

Question on goodreads: "Did anyone finish reading the entire book? Any recommendations of how to move forward and wrap my head around this book? "

Answer: " Throw it across ..."

Ha ha, J Blue Flower! :)

I will get to this one hopefully late in the month.

I've barely gotten started- hopefully will be able to keep going. I did like his friend (?) Camus' The Stranger/Outsider and The Plague (which is great reading for during a pandemic).

I'm a bit curious about this book so I browsed some more for a copy I could access. I ended up finding one and dipped my toes in. I only read a couple pages and I think I'll keep going for now.

I admit it's a difficult read. At the same time, it was curiously compelling. :) I think I enjoyed the philosophical aspect more than the aesthetic part.

p. 139 now. It got better after around page 100. I am starting to suspect that the first 100 pages of boring, irrelevant details may be some sort of meta-point. "This is your life: a long sting of boring details."

Some of this reads like a psychotic event in some places. Hope he figures out existence soon.

Currently on....page 6....not making much progress. Lol.

I've now read about a sixth- 30 pages and part of the introduction. What do you think about the protagonist? Is he nuts? He seems schizoid to me, exacerbated by social isolation. Even the woman he has sex with he barely speaks to.
A few years ago I read Journey to the End of the Night by the French author Louis-Ferdinand Céline which preceeded the publication of Nausea by a few years (1932) and the writing style of Nausea reminds me a lot of that, perhaps carried to almost a stream-of-consciousness mode. Sam mentioned Celine's influence in a previous post. I haven't yet read Proust but plan to this year. If you find Nausea's style too far-out you might enjoy Journey to the End of Night more.

Wiki schizoid: "feeling as though one is an "observer" rather than a participant in life".

I see what you mean. He seems very tired, but not like if he was depressed.

I think the narrator shows a lot of self absorption but I didn't get a sense of his being schizoid, or to qualify, I don't think that is Sartre's intent. If you are more specifically referring to Roquentin's malaise, I suggest Gregory Sadler's videos on the book. I only sampled the first but Sadler quickly starts addressing the possible causes of the nausea. I will watch these after I have finished the book and am posting the link to part one.

https://youtu.be/UUulxkAk68o

I also think we can see the similarities with this book and knut Hamson's, Hunger.

Since when did literary analysis involve armchair diagnoses.

Finished this one. Has he found himself or his place? Maybe. Or will he abandon his project like before? Or will he end up in the No Exit cast?

Finished.

Yes, I think he found the purpose: The women singing did something for him. Her existence could be justified by her singling. He wants to be able to justify his own in the same way - but not singing. I think we are going full circle here: He is about to write the book, we just read. So since we just read it, yes, he did write it ;-)

I had a hard time getting through this book. Too many long boring passages. What did I not understand?

There are some great passages, the museum, the walnut tree, and a few others..... but 200 pages. Sigh.

Existentialism is a Humanism is far, far shorter, more clear and to the point.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "

Answer: " Throw it across the room, like I did. "

Yes, I think he found the purpose: The women singing did something for him. Her existence could be justified by her singling. He wants to be able to justify his own in the same way - but..."

Lol XD


I found it also a bit hard to read at first, but the second half of the book was much more readable. It was just to slow and dull in the beginning, not sure when some action will start. Then I realized, it's one of those books where you have to get into the moment and absorb all the details after a couple of glasses of wine, no matter how boring they are (since there isn't much of a plot, but more of a struggle with an existential crisis of the narrator).
So, I guess it's very subjective, like all other art (as Sartre cited within this book).

And of course, I googled the song that solved all the problems and I really liked it.

P.S. This review is really on point:
http://www.fractiousfiction.com/nause...

"an existential horror novel".... I see the point.

Still.... I started Dostoevsky: The Idiot, and just felt so much more at home. You always know what Dostoevsky is trying to make you feel or think.

My main take-away from that review was that Bertrand Russell wrote fiction. Need to look for that. I wouldn't mind we read some Russell some day. He did receive the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950.

J_BlueFlower wrote: ""an existential horror novel".... I see the point.

Still.... I started Dostoevsky: The Idiot, and just felt so much more at home. You always know what Dostoevsky is t..."

I finished the "Idiot" just before "Nausea".
I don't think it's comparable, since those two books are from completely different timelines and have different writing styles, but Dostoevsky is much more readable.
Even if it was a big book of 680 pages, I didn't had any hold ups and urges to stop reading it, in opposition to "Nausea".

Armin wrote: "I don't think it's comparable, since those two books are from completely different timelines..."

What I got from Nausea, the level of complexity of the ideas and thoughts are comparable. Dostoevsky is just way more clear in his communication. Of course it is a high standard to set for any one: You have to be as least as clear as Dostoevsky.... ;-)

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Armin wrote: "I don't think it's comparable, since those two books are from completely different timelines..."

What I got from Nausea, the level of complexity of the ideas and thoughts are compara..."

I agree.
Technically, Sartre is a very good writer. I love the short sentences and his dialogues. He's just to abstract in his descriptions, which are way to long for my taste.

I agree Armin! I’m still at the beginning but I was actually thinking that I quite enjoy the style he just takes the rambling one step too far each time.

I just finished his other collection of 5 short stories The Wall and Other Stories and find it much more interesting and readable.

Armin wrote: "I just finished his other collection of 5 short stories The Wall and Other Stories and find it much more interesting and readable."

Sounds interesting. Did you have a favorite story? Maybe nominate it as a short story read?
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

There are a number of quotes that strike me. I'm about 1/5 of the way through, so not very far, but here are a few that stuck out:

I have such a desire to sleep and am so behind in my sleep. A good night, one good night, and all this nonsense will be swept away. (So relatable!)

Well, when I heard him come up the stairs, it gave me quite a thrill, it was so reassuring: what is there to fear in such a regular world?
*I liked this because it made sense. There is something so comforting in hearing normal everyday sounds, especially when you're lost in your own head. For instance, I like hearing the neighbor's dog bark. It's very rare, so it's not annoying, but it keeps me grounded.

Something happened to me, I can't doubt it anymore. It came as an illness does, not like an ordinary certainty, not like anything evident. It came cunningly, little by little; O felt a little strange, a little put-out, that's all. Once established it never moved, it stayed quiet, and I was able to persuade myself that nothing was the matte riwht me, that it was a false alarm. And now it's blossoming.
*This was a perfect description of how I feel when I get in a funk. It just creeps up on you and takes root.

Three o'clock. Three o'clock is always too late or too early for anything you want to do. An odd moment in the afternoon.

I ruminate heavily near the gas stove; I know in advance the day is lost. I shall do nothing good, except, perhaps, after nightfall. It is because of the sun; it ephemerally touches the dirty, white wisps of fot, which float in the air above the construction-yards, it flows into my room, all gold, all pale, it spreads four dull, false reflections on my table.
*I just love how the scene here is captured so vividly in so few words.

M. de Rollebon bores me to tears.
*I was glad he brought it up because I feel the same every time he's mentioned. LOL!

Aubrey wrote: "Since when did literary analysis involve armchair diagnoses."

The reviewer Ted Gioia cited by Armin above, said [Sartre] "wants
to make clear that his story's narrator does not suffer from mental illness. "The Nausea is not inside me: I feel it out there…everywhere around me," Roquentin insists. "I am the one who is within it."
When I was reading the story I didn't feel at all convinced that this was the case (that the protagonist was mentally healthy). Other readers may have other interpretations certainly. Apparently Sartre would say Roquentin was suffering "an existential horror", not an illness, and I don't think this is an invalid viewpoint, but I have a hard time completely sharing it.
I've read 2/3 of the novel at this point, maybe my perceptions will change somewhat by the time I've finished.
Incidentally, I'm also currently reading the novel The Inhabited Woman by Gioconda Belli of Nicaragua, and I read a part a couple days ago in which the protagonist visits a nurse she had met and notices that she has books on a bookshelf that seem unexpected, including Madame Bovary and Nausea. I don't know if this a great coincidence or perhaps not so much because the reader who is inclined to read Belli's book is also the sort inclined to read Sartre's.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Armin wrote: "I just finished his other collection of 5 short stories The Wall and Other Stories and find it much more interesting and readable."

Sounds interesting. Did you have a f..."

Thanks for the idea, I nominated it :)
My favorites were "The Childhood of a Leader", which is a Bildungsroman, and is the longest between them and "The Wall" which tells the story of political prisoners.

I would never have chosen to read this book if it didn’t make the grade in the Monthly Group reads. When I was in college, fifty years ago, I was fascinated with existentialism and existential writers and their works. I read Camus, Kafka, Beckett and others. I read essays, novels and philosophy books.

Then I got a career and a family and didn’t have the time to luxuriate staring at my belly button wondering about the nature of existence.

Now a grandfather, I take existence for granted. I have gone back in recent years and read Camus and Kafka. I think of myself as having an existential outlook on life, mainly based on Camus’ essay “The Myth of Sisyphus.”

Normally, the fiction I read now has to stand on its own merits without reference to time, place, or circumstance in which it was written or by whom. I don’t think this work can be made much sense of if the reader doesn’t know those external facts.

I read the New Direction Kindle edition and listened simultaneously to the linked audio book. The intro by James Woods was helpful. I was surprised that the book kept me engaged, even while having no expectation of a plot nor sympathy for the narrator. I highlighted a lot.

This was Sartre’s first published work published when he was 33. Later in life he considered it his best work. Acknowledging Sartre’s place in 20th Century philosophy, literature, and Western Civilization, I had to read it tongue in cheek.

I find it dated, over thought, overwrought and “all over the place.”

One quote, near the end made me laugh out loud at the irony, “I know very well that I don’t want to do anything: to do something is to create existence—and there’s quite enough existence as it is.”

Well Mr Sartre, unlike your protagonist, who is assumed to be grappling with your own philosophic conundrums, you created a very large existence in history, leaving the rest of us to puzzle over what you created

That’s a great review, Dave. I don’t have a lot of experience with these authors or existentialism and I wouldn’t have ever picked up this book without the group, but the more I read the more I like it. It’s weird because I usually need a good plot and characters to keep me going but I find myself relating so much to a lot of what’s said. I also think that Satre can brilliantly capture a moment in few words and that the descriptions are lovely.

Natalie wrote: "That’s a great review, Dave. I don’t have a lot of experience with these authors or existentialism and I wouldn’t have ever picked up this book without the group, but the more I read the more I lik..."

Yes, that is one of the paradoxes about the book. While pondering whether existence is real, the narrator describes existence in such marvelous detail.

“A real case of possession, I thought. Once Right has taken hold of a man exorcism cannot drive it out; Jean Parrottin had consecrated his whole life to thinking about his Right: nothing else.”

This quote really struck me, especially in the current scene of our world. Someone at a meeting the other day asked “how many people are really willing to change their mind when presented with evidence?” It got me thinking. There are many personal beliefs I’ve changed over time but I can see certain areas where I might be a bit “possessed.”

I remember a time at lunch with my friends and they were debating over a scene in a movie, both remembered it differently and both were sure they were right. We eventually pulled it up to “check” who was correct. That’s a very silly example but it shows that sometimes even our memories can’t be wholly trusted.

I think a lot of times, over big things and small things, people base their identities over being Right. That’s a hard thing to let go of. Satre uses that brilliant simplicity to describe it.

I thought this was brilliant, as well, a couple paragraphs later:

“…that when one is confronted with a face sparkling with righteousness, after a moment this sparkle dies away, and only an ashy residue remains: this residue interested me. Parrottin put up a good fight. But suddenly his look burned out, the picture grew dim. What was left? Blind eyes, the thin mouth of a dead snake, and cheeks.”

What happens when that Right that we placed our whole being in vanishes? What is left behind?

It reminds me of the analogy of the tree bending with the wind. If it doesn’t bend it can break.

I also found this to be a bit of a heavy lift. To be fair, it was what I expected. I previously read the 1st in a trilogy written by Sartre The Age of Reason and found it to be heavy slogging. With that being said, I fell into a nice pace with this book and found it enjoyable. A number of passages are so well written and descriptive. If I were younger, I imagine this book would have left me pondering life's big questions. In this case, it did not elicit that response, but I still found the book worth reading and enjoyable.

I also enjoyed the book, much more than I thought would. The literary illustration of phenomenology with the tension between Sartre's descriptions of Roquentin's conscious thoughts and his detailed observations (as already noted by Natalie and Dave) was enough to keep me reading the book. I would not want to elaborate on the philosophy without reading more Husserl but as literature I thought the book worked and was entertaining.
The scene under the tree in the park is exaggerated and dramatic, even a bit funny, but I think the rumor that it was written in response to a mescaline trip lends the scene more interest. Did anyone else detect a masturbatory element to that scene when Roquentin thinks of Anny? Check it out.
Sartre's treatment of the Anny character is thought provoking. It almost seems as if Roquentin is in denial of whatever feelings he had for her, and whatever those might have been, they certainly aren't reflected by her from Roquentin's description of her behavior. Do we hear him voice his true feelings? And I loved Satre's use of the Ethel Waters song.
I think there is also a contradiction in Roquentin's feelings toward the Self-Taught Man. Roquentin is at first is a bit snobby, looking down on him, but finally ends up defending him and wishing continued friendship when it would be most advantageous to be rid of him. From my perspective there is reason to find Roquentin unreliable as a narrator, but that reading would be contrary to the philosophy I think.

I am left with plenty of questions after reading and thinking about Nausea, enough to warrant a reread in the future. I hope Simone de Beauvoir wins the poll so we can follow another connection to Sartre.

I didn't quite finish this one in time. Oops.

I started it too late and it's not really one I enjoy sitting and reading in one long stretch. My Kindle book says it's 254 pages and I can only last about 10-15 pages at a time.

I am enjoying it. It's quite different from anything I've read before. I'll finish it up in the next week or so. :)

Natalie wrote: "I didn't quite finish this one in time. Oops. ..."

Don't worry. Many people around in the recent treads if there is any activity. I also didn't finish The Idiot in time. And worse: I haven't really started The Wasteland and other poems.