Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,393
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
Sometimes I surprise myself. I Just finished “The Age of Reason” by Jean-Paul Sartre (who turned down the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1964. “No writer should become an institution.”) To my surprise, it was well written and held my attention right through to the amazing pyrotechnic ending. He stuck the landing! Keep in mind that the story includes no chases, no explosions, and no shootouts. The “action” is people sitting around in cafe’s and talking.
The story takes place in the summer of 1938 in Paris. The threat of imminent war with Germany looms in the background. Sartre does a good job of keeping the political situation in Europe mostly in the wings… but it intrudes Into people‘s thinking at key moments. Thoughts of the civil war in Spain bookend the first chapter and the last chapter. But, with pointed exceptions, the story is about the interpersonal dramas of ordinary people who are somewhat in denial about the big picture.
The drama centers around Matthieu, who is a philosophy teacher on summer break. Sartre tees-up the surprise (to me) ending by emphasizing Matthieu’s philosophical commitment to the idea of “freedom” and how he should go about maintaining his personal freedom. Matthieu has a lot on his plate. His girlfriend of seven years is pregnant. Should they pursue an abortion? Should he marry her? On top of this, Matthieu finds himself infatuated with the sister of one of his students. Trying to get a financial loan is a big issue. Old friends are inflicting their own personal dramas on him in several ways. (One estranged old friend wants him to join the communist party so that he can prepare for a resistance fight against the Germans. But this is a side issue that is all but lost in the swirling drama of people‘s lives.)
One of the things that struck me about the book is how modern it reads. The abortion issue is in play, closeted gays and lesbians are there, money issues are always looming, and the threat of war in Europe hovers in the background. There is plenty of existential angst and questions about the meaning of life to go around. But Sartre does not preach. Instead we get good people doing bad things for right or wrong reasons… and horrible people doing good things for wicked reasons.
The ending is a surprising whirlwind. It is a strangely uplifting conclusion, given what we are led to expect. Hint: freedom is not what most people think it is.
This is book one of a trilogy about the fall of France in WWII. The next book (“the reprieve”) focuses on the days around the Munich Agreement of September 1938. Reviews say it is even better than the first book. Am about to order it.
Traditionally, I have always taken wartime/postwar French intellectuals with a big grain of salt. Especially, Sartre (he was only “involved” in the resistance if you are very generous with what “involved” means. But I guess you had to be there.) Anyway, despite my reservations, the man sure can write… and I actually found myself agreeing with his conclusion at the end of the book. As I said: strangely reaffirming.
Not for everyone. But I was bowled over by the ending and I liked the kind of Casablanca-like feel of Paris just before the cataclysm. Well written. I was surprised by how Jean-Paul Sartre was able to reel me in.
The story takes place in the summer of 1938 in Paris. The threat of imminent war with Germany looms in the background. Sartre does a good job of keeping the political situation in Europe mostly in the wings… but it intrudes Into people‘s thinking at key moments. Thoughts of the civil war in Spain bookend the first chapter and the last chapter. But, with pointed exceptions, the story is about the interpersonal dramas of ordinary people who are somewhat in denial about the big picture.
The drama centers around Matthieu, who is a philosophy teacher on summer break. Sartre tees-up the surprise (to me) ending by emphasizing Matthieu’s philosophical commitment to the idea of “freedom” and how he should go about maintaining his personal freedom. Matthieu has a lot on his plate. His girlfriend of seven years is pregnant. Should they pursue an abortion? Should he marry her? On top of this, Matthieu finds himself infatuated with the sister of one of his students. Trying to get a financial loan is a big issue. Old friends are inflicting their own personal dramas on him in several ways. (One estranged old friend wants him to join the communist party so that he can prepare for a resistance fight against the Germans. But this is a side issue that is all but lost in the swirling drama of people‘s lives.)
One of the things that struck me about the book is how modern it reads. The abortion issue is in play, closeted gays and lesbians are there, money issues are always looming, and the threat of war in Europe hovers in the background. There is plenty of existential angst and questions about the meaning of life to go around. But Sartre does not preach. Instead we get good people doing bad things for right or wrong reasons… and horrible people doing good things for wicked reasons.
The ending is a surprising whirlwind. It is a strangely uplifting conclusion, given what we are led to expect. Hint: freedom is not what most people think it is.
This is book one of a trilogy about the fall of France in WWII. The next book (“the reprieve”) focuses on the days around the Munich Agreement of September 1938. Reviews say it is even better than the first book. Am about to order it.
Traditionally, I have always taken wartime/postwar French intellectuals with a big grain of salt. Especially, Sartre (he was only “involved” in the resistance if you are very generous with what “involved” means. But I guess you had to be there.) Anyway, despite my reservations, the man sure can write… and I actually found myself agreeing with his conclusion at the end of the book. As I said: strangely reaffirming.
Not for everyone. But I was bowled over by the ending and I liked the kind of Casablanca-like feel of Paris just before the cataclysm. Well written. I was surprised by how Jean-Paul Sartre was able to reel me in.
Last edited: