Nausea is a novel by the
existentialist philosopher Jean Paul
Sartre. This novel fictionalizes Sartrean
brand of existentialism. It represents a world without god or meaning. It
discovers the meaninglessness of existence through an enquiry into the
perceptual understanding of the universe. In Nausea, we see Antoine Roquentin confronting his
existence in its pre-categorized, primitive nakedness prior to his free choice
for writing a novel. Based on these observations, we shall attempt to reveal
how Sartre's Nausea combines phenomenology and existentialism.
According
to phenomenology,
objects do not have intrinsic meaning other than what we construct for them
even at the perceptional level. Our perception of a thing is influenced by the
ideas we have in our consciousness. That’s why different people perceive a
thing differently. For example,
looking at a particular flower, an ordinary person and a botanist come across
different perceptions. Sartre agrees
with Husserl’s view that perception
is subjective, not objective.
As
a phenomenological ontologist, Sartre likes human consciousness with
worldly objects. Normally we control the objects by endowing them with
essences. But if we become uncertain of our existence and fail to dictate the
objects, they in turn might impinge on our consciousness thwarting the function
of perceptual machinery. With the fall of perceptual control, labels vanish and
things appear in their bare existence, as a formless, shapeless, chaotic mass.
Consequently, the constructed senses of order break down producing an
ontological uncertainty. Out of this situation emerges nausea. Antoine Roquentin, the protagonist of
the novel is visited by such momentary bouts of nausea.
Roquentin’s
confrontation
with the surrounding phenomena leads us to an understanding of one of the
central themes of perceptional crisis can be seen as a process of recognition
of the predominance of existence over essence. As he looks at objects and
people their essences melt away forcing him to encounter the raw existence. He
begins to realize that as a conscious being he needs to freely create his
essences in order to define his existence.
Revolting
against all doctrines and institutions that curb individual freedom, Sartre maintains that human beings are
free to do whatever they want, but they consequently must accept full
responsibility for their actions. The more Roquentin proceeds to acknowledge
this existential reality, the more seriously he examines his own actions as well
as the way other people behave. When Anny
writes a letter to Roquentin that she is in Paris and desperately needs to see him, he realizes that it is
completely his decision what happens next: he can either go to see her or do
nothing. But this freedom demands a huge price, as Roquentin admits: “I was bowed down under the weight of my
responsibility”. It is, in fact, the sheer burden of responsibility
that prompts anxiety and ultimately, the self-deception of denying the freedom.
Sartre
first gave
the term existentialism general currency by using it for his own philosophy and
by becoming the leading figure of a distinct movement in France that became internationally influential after World War-II. Sartre's philosophy is
explicitly atheistic and pessimistic; he declared that human beings require a
rational basis for their lives but are unable to achieve one, and thus human
life is a ‘futile passion’. Sartre nevertheless insisted that his
existentialism is a form of humanism, and he strongly emphasized human freedom,
choice, and responsibility. He eventually tried to reconcile these
existentialist concepts with a Marxist
analysis of society and history.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks