Wednesday, March 28, 2007

The beginning of an infatuation is something that strikes you. At first you don't even know what it is that attracts you -- something in her face? Something in the way she smiles? You try to conjecture, to explain this mysterious emergence of attraction, but you remain uncertain. All you know is that you are in the clutches of a crush, and that you are helpless against it. Now, if it is a mild case, you'll wait for the storm to blow over. But if it is a severe case, you'll probably do something stupid. :)
The Russells will always have more fame and glory than the Wittgensteins.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

It is often said that the best things in life are free, but in a sense, nothing is free. Every thing costs something. Friends require time and money. Even for appreciating something as simple as rainfall, you need to have time... an expensive and rare commodity these days.

The Existentialist Couple: Sartre and Beauvoir
written by M. Awais Aftab


It is interesting to know that Jean-Paul Sartre, the famous existentialist philosopher and political activist, failed in his first attempt at his agrégation, a form of exit exam which qualifies a person for a teaching post, in 1928. Failing this was a blow to the young Sartre, especially because he considered himself to be the brightest mind of Ecole Normale Supérieure. But fate has its strange ways, and this failure proved to be of monumental importance in Sartre’s life—it gave him a chance to meet Simone de Beauvoir. Their intimate and enigmatic relationship would later produce a whole cultural and philosophical revolution.

Beauvoir began to study for her aggregation in 1929, and her boyfriend René Maheu introduced her to a study group, of which Sartre was also a part. The two, recognizing in each other their intellectual match, were instantly attracted. Beauvoir was a beautiful, intelligent woman. Sartre was not that handsome, but he had a sort of aggressive male ugliness that becomes charismatic. And even though Beauvoir was having a relationship with Maheu, she fell in love with Sartre, and they began to study together in the group. When the results of the next agrégation came, Sartre was placed first and following very closely, Beauvoir got the second position. It is now widely believed that Sartre was given the first position simply because he was a male; the examiners agreed that she was strictly the better philosopher. And we must also consider the fact Sartre was giving the exam for the second time, while it was the first attempt for Beauvoir. And Beauvoir also got the distinction for becoming the youngest person ever to obtain the agrégation in philosophy. In a sense, their destiny was revealed right then: this is how the two would remain together throughout their lives. And even though Beauvoir was probably the sharper and more intelligent of the two, Sartre would acquire a greater fame as a philosopher.

There is no doubt in the fact that the two were in love with each other. Beauvoir wrote in her Memoirs of a Dutiful Daughter, “Sartre corresponded exactly to the dream companion I had longed for since I was fifteen: he was the double in whom I found all my burning aspirations raised to the pitch of incandescence. I should always be able to share everything with him…” However, their relationship was also one of the most unconventional of relationships. The two felt that their relationship transcended the social institution of marriage, and therefore the two never married. This was explained by Beauvoir herself: “The comradeship that welded our lives together made a superfluous mockery of any other bond we might have forged for ourselves.”

Their love affair is well-known for its complexity. Sartre had proposed a pact to Beauvoir: The two would have individual, separate lives. They would be free to have other relationships. They could have affairs with other people. But they would share everything with each other, every detail of their liaisons. This was the kind of soul marriage they had. As Sartre explained to Beauvoir, “What we have is an essential love; but it is a good idea for us also to experience contingent love affairs.” This statement by Sartre is perhaps the best philosophical description of their relationship. Maybe it was the rebellious nature of Beauvoir and her desire to escape from the bourgeoisie culture of her family which attracted her to this settlement, but she must surely have realized that this pact gave a license to Sartre to be unfaithful.

Sartre was indeed famous as a Don Juan, as a seducer of women, and surely preferred the company of women, especially pretty and charming ones. Bianca Bienenfeld, one of the countless women with whom Sartre had had affairs, wrote about him, “Just as a waiter plays the role of a waiter, Sartre played to perfection the role of a man in love.” This allusion to waiter is perhaps one of the most sophisticated criticisms of the disparity between Sartre’s life and philosophy. Sartre has used the example of a waiter to elaborate his concept of mauvaise foi (‘bad faith’ or self-deception) that the waiter pretends that this particular role of café waiter determines his every action and attitude, but the truth is that he has chosen to behave in this way, and by doing so he lets himself be defined by the role society has given him.

Beauvoir’s works were often read and seen as an echo of Sartre’s philosophy, perhaps also because of Beauvoir’s own insistence on being called ‘Sartre’s desciple’. Beauvoir’s utter devotion to Sartre, even at the cost of her status as an original philosopher is incomprehensible. Edward and Kate Fullbrook have argued that it was Beauvoir, and not Sartre, who was the intellectual force behind some of the key existential ideas. Beauvoir and Sartre worked closely throughout their lives, and Beauvoir edited all books Sartre wrote, and Sartre read Beauvoir’s works before they got published. It has now been discovered that Sartre had read a manuscript of Beauvoir’s novel She came to Stay before he started writing the masterpiece of existentialism, Being and Nothingness. And therefore Beauvoir’s employment of concepts like bad faith was not under the influence of Sartre, but rather, vice versa. It was Sartre who took these ideas from Beauvoir. Existentialism was the child of the love of Sartre and Beauvoir.

The pact between Sartre and Beauvoir was supposed to be equal; both were free to have as many affairs they wanted. But it seems that in real life Sartre was far more equal than Beauvoir was. While Sartre was continuously engaged in an endless succession of affairs, Beauvoir responded with relatively few but longer-lasting relationships. It is quite evident that Beauvoir suffered from jealousy; the autobiographical writings of Beauvoir express a hyperbolic love for a man who was never sexually faithful to her. Although she had several love affairs, it is clear from her writings that she would have gladly given them all up if she could have Sartre all for herself. And yet, despite everything she achieved in her life as a writer, philosopher and feminist, Beauvoir is content to state, “Our relationship was the greatest achievement of my life.”

Monday, March 26, 2007

To all great philosophical questions, there is only one honest answer, "I do not know."
Why do we live? We live because we are in the habit of living. There is no other reason.

Saturday, March 24, 2007

You know that you are infatuated with someone when her[1] absence is more conspicuous than the presence of other people. And in every social gathering, your eyes lift and wander, expecting to see that face. The odds of statistical improbability stare at you, but you refuse to acknowledge them... and you hope that maybe, just maybe she'd be present there, and through a miraculous quirk of fate, you'll be able to meet her. It never happens, though. Maybe that's what infatuation is all about: a seductive denial of reality.

[1] Since i am talking from my point of view, allow me the use of feminine gender.
"Let no one who loves be unhappy, even love unreturned has its rainbow."
James M. Barrie

Let's construct a parallal statement:
"Let no one who loves be happy, even love returned has its thunder and thorns." :)

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

In the rainy season, romance pops up like mushrooms.
X: Tell me you love me, dear.
Y: My love, what can be shown, cannot be said!

Monday, March 12, 2007

Has anyone thought that there is a distinction between what you really believe and what you think you believe/want to believe? I have come to appreciate this distinction only recently.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Nobody welcomes a prophet of doom...

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Have you wondered how the society around us is trying to commit a subtle murder: an attempt to kill the person we really are. Through a sophisticated game of reward and punishment, it moulds our character, forces us to change ourselves, to become something which we are not... we are biological cells amidst radiation, which is mutating every single one of us into a monster.
 

Copyright 2013 A Myth in Creation.

Theme by WordpressCenter.com.
Blogger Template by Beta Templates.