San Genet, comediante y mártir

by Jean-Paul Sartre, Eduardo Grüner (prologuist), Luis Echávarri (translator)

Este libro es una obra literalmente monstruosa, apunta Eduardo Grüner, autor del prólogo especialmente preparado para esta edición. No se trata simplemente de su extensión; tampoco del hecho de que, pensada originalmente como prólogo a las obras completas de Jean Genet, terminó casi soprepasando el volumen total de páginas de dichas obras, con el efecto de que ellas son hoy inseparables sin el suplemento de lectura que les proporciona este libro…, de modo que no podemos, hoy, leer a Genet sin invocar a Sartre.

Pero si Genet no hubiera existido, Sartre lo habría inventado; para alguien como Sartre, obsesionado por desentrañar las contradicciones de un alma, una figura como la de Genet tenía que ser fascinante: un delincuente, mentiroso, homosexual sadomasoquista que al mismo tiempo es un extraordinario escritor, un espíritu brutalmente exquisito, un santo y mártir al revés que se hace apóstol del Mal, un místico de los infiernos.

Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) publicó San Genet, comediante y mártir en 1952. Jean Genet (1910-1986) fue condenado en 1948 a cadena perpetua, pero la presión de un grupo de intelectuales francesas, Jean Cocteau y Sartre entre ellos, que habían leído sus primeras obras, le proporcionó el indulto.

Genres: Philosophy, Biography, Nonfiction, Literary Criticism, France, Queer, French Literature

728 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1952

About the author

Jean-Paul Charles Aymard Sartre was a French philosopher, playwright, novelist, screenwriter, political activist, biographer, and literary critic, considered a leading figure in 20th-century French philosophy and Marxism. Sartre was one of the key figures in the philosophy of existentialism (and phenomenology). His work has influenced sociology, critical theory, post-colonial theory, and literary studies. He was awarded the 1964 Nobel Prize in Literature despite attempting to refuse it, saying that he always declined official honors and that "a writer should not allow himself to be turned into an institution."
Sartre held an open relationship with prominent feminist and fellow existentialist philosopher Simone de Beauvoir. Together, Sartre and de Beauvoir challenged the cultural and social assumptions and expectations of their upbringings, which they considered bourgeois, in both lifestyles and thought. The conflict between oppressive, spiritually destructive conformity (mauvaise foi, literally, 'bad faith') and an "authentic" way of "being" became the dominant theme of Sartre's early work, a theme embodied in his principal philosophical work Being and Nothingness (L'Être et le Néant, 1943). Sartre's introduction to his philosophy is his work Existentialism Is a Humanism (L'existentialisme est un humanisme, 1946), originally presented as a lecture.

Reviews

[Julio The Fox · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Aw, Jean Genie, let yourself go!". This oeuvre is typical of Sartre the genius. Commissioned by his publisher to write an introduction to the collected plays of Jean Genet, Jean-Paul produced a 700-page opus dedicated to another genial contemporary. Genet perfectly defined the existentialist maxim of not being defined by society: Outlaw, thief, homosexual, prostitute, homosexual prostitute, and man of letters. Genet's passion (and Passion, in the Christian sense) for being the permanent outsider is what fascinates Sartre, and the reader: "I am with the outlaws until they become insiders and then I am against them too." The inversion of the roles society assigned him is what makes Genet a saint in the eyes of Sartre. Falsely accused of being a thief by his foster family he decided to become a thief to prove them both right and wrong. Genet could castigate the American police for beating up on demonstrators while admiring "their perfect black uniforms and phallic truncheons". Genet was in fact an inspiration to everyone from William Burroughs to David Bowie. He embodied the notion of "revolution for the hell of it", not for political causes. Read this tome to try and catch the spirit of a literary, and by extension, political chameleon.

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

within the first 70 pages, this book helped me to decipher my complete modus operendi in terms of socialization. But, more importantly, it's a biographical dissection of a critical and controversial 20th century figure whom Sartre regards as the existential man-- within him, we can find elements of the existensial crisis in us all. Brilliantly written but incredibly dense, its something I keep returning to but cannot read continually without drying out or, conversely, exploding, my brain.

[Phillip · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic - I learned a lot about myself reading this book - he starts with the hypothesis that the artist (in this case, Genet) is someone that may have had their concept of the world shattered in childhood, and spends the rest of their life trying to reassemble those shattered pieces through the journey of creative acts. A great study of one of my favorite writers, and perhaps one of the clearest prose works Sartre ever wrote.

[Durand Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have such mixed feelings about this book, at first it seems to help decipher the Genet books, but in reality is another writer's misunderstanding of Genet's work. Sartre creates his own character named Genet, gives this character his own world view totally removed from the real Genet and his work. Luckily this tome did not color my view of Genet's writing. This book tried to define Genet in a single dimension and time, Genet is so much more than this study. I would suggest reading Genet, immerse yourself and find your own interpretation of his work, it's more worthwhile.

[Tosh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Worthwhile to read but not as good as reading the great Genet. But it's nice to know that Genet has his obsessive fans. Sartre is a little too serious for my taste, but nevertheless a man of great taste in literature. Genet needed him at a time he needed friends. 'Saint Genet' is a saint, but i don't know if I want him in my house due to the fact that he will for sure steal one of my books or at least a fork and knife.

[Tamar Nagel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Poetic filth: revealing the Evil within us, which is Nothingness.

A will to create, annihilate, celebrate, destroy; a will to action, to push self and choice to their limits; a will to give, to embody asceticism and saintliness, to give oneself as the sacrificial scapegoat society needs.

Reading Genet passed through me like water through an open hand, with no residue except an inexplicable love for his writing; now I am closer to understanding why.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Genet's books are brothels, where you slip inside through a crack in the door, hoping no one will see you there; as soon as you are inside, it turns out you are utterly alone." (Jean-Paul Sartre)

When Gallimard decided to publish a Complete Works of Jean Genet at the beginning of the 1950's, they asked the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, who had been a friend of Genet since the latter got out of prison and his first clandestine published novel made the rounds of the Parisian literary crowd, to write an introduction for the project. Famously it grew out to be a 600 page tome in the original French version and it went on to constitute the entire first volume of these Complete Works.
It's a book that could well be unique in the literal sense of the word, I for one have never heard of anything comparable to Saint Genet. Part psychoanalytical study, part biographical sketch, part literary interpretation, part philosophy book. The total and relentless vivisection of a life and a writer's career at a time that said writer is a mere 42 years old. And let's not forget that when Saint Genet was published in 1952, Genet had only started writing 10 years earlier in prison, with his novels being published for the first time non-clandestine some years later, at the end of the Second World War. Some Genet scholars have suggested Genet became paralyzed as a writer by Sartre's book and in fact Genet himself admitted in an interview with Playboy magazine in 1964:

"(...) I saw myself naked and stripped bare by someone other than myself. (...) Sartre let me read the manuscript. I finally allowed him to publish it because my concern has always been to take responsibility for what I give rise to. But it took me a while to recover. I was almost unable to continue writing."

If you are like me (not in the habit of reading philosophy books, took a couple of mandatory metaphysics courses in college, but most of that has evaporated), than this book will probably be a challenge. After 30 pages I laid it aside, and proceeded by first of all reading some summaries of Sartre's existentialist philosophy, so that I would at least have a little bit of a grasp on some of the concepts he uses and of which he seems to suppose the reader to have foreknowledge. Apparently he goes back to a lot of the concepts and ideas that he developed in Being and Nothingness. So I suppose someone who has read and studied that work will get a lot more out of Saint Genet than I did. It certainly is a difficult book that requires full concentration all the time. To be honest, there were sections, that even after rereading them three times, I still didn't grasp what Sartre was saying. (As a side note the book intrinsically maybe deserves a slightly higher rating, but I stubbornly stick by rating purely on the basis of my own hyper-personal reading experience, and my own lack of comprehending certain sections cost it some.)
I read all of Genet's novels years ago and reread a few later, and I think this is probably essential as well. Saint Genet goes into such minute analysis of the novels, that I can't imagine anyone enjoying it who hasn't read those novels. (This is not really the case for Querelle, which is treated in a bit of a stepmotherly way by Sartre as he hardly mentions it and appears to consider it inferior, but the other four novels are crucial.)

While, as others have stated, this book is anything but a biography of Genet, it does have a lot of biographical facts and anecdotes. The two men had been friends for some years and had spent hours upon hours conversing with each other in Parisian cafés. This is why Sartre has so many interesting biographical tidbits about Genet that have no other sources but Sartre. Of course, in interviews later in life Genet was famous for lying, distorting and exaggerating the facts of his personal history. So one has to wonder about how truthful he was with Sartre during their conversations. But Sartre seems to be aware of this and he is always on guard with what Genet tells him. Oftentimes Sartre says something like "Genet says (...) but I don't believe him", and he will proceed to explain how he himself interprets things. This is actually a quite fascinating dynamic.
In fact, Saint Genet is a tale of two brilliant men. In this book it's not just the great novelist and cult figure Jean Genet who beguiles the reader, at the same time you get overwhelmed by the virtuoso display of Jean-Paul Sartre's immense intellect. For instance Sartre at times dedicates 4 or 5 dense pages to a single quatrain from one of the rare Genet poems or to a single prose passage of a few sentences. But when he is through with his analysis, your insight has indeed multiplied, and your understanding of Genet, who can be a very hermetic writer, increases markedly.
As an aside I should mention though that some of the lines of thought Sartre develops in this book are now antiquated because of later developments in sociology and genetics. The book was published nearly 70 years ago so this is to be expected.
As a final thought, I have just read Saint Genet once, but to truly appreciate it one would probably need to reread it several times and study it, so as to fully savour all it has to offer.

[Federico · Rating 5 out of 5]

"L'important n'est pas ce qu'on fait de nous mais ce que nous faisons nous-mêmes de ce qu'on a fait de nous"

[Jessie B. · Rating 4 out of 5]

While parts of this book are a bit dated, overall it is a fascinating examination of an interesting author and I quite enjoyed it

[Andrew Noselli · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading "Saint Genet: Actor and Martyr" decades after it was first published, I find myself asking, does this book hold together as a psychobiographical portrait? Personally, I have to wonder when Sartre says, "the criminal does not make beauty, he himself is raw beauty [and that] by virtue of his act he changes into what he is." Is such language only glorifying murders and wanton destruction by those who seek to take advantage of others? In addition, it seems only too convenient for the author to find approval of his existentialist philosophy in Genet's writings, which is concisely summed up when he says, "One of the chief aspects of the beautiful is the perfect appropriateness of act to essence, the subordination of becoming to being; destiny is thus perceptible and temporality is subdued to expressing only the eternal...pride requires that you retain consciousness of [your] freedom." Or when he suggests that "Beyond [the world of] instinct, the Kantian noumenal world has decided, in an intelligible world, [to act] in favor of radical evil."

I find that Sartre's text has the faults found in all French literature, from Racine to Badiou, of being overwritten and over-thought until the argument proved the reverse of the author's contentions, the subject of the text being dissolved from being assaulted by double-sided conjectures, changes of tense, reversals of meaning, and lapses of ethical-centeredness... Maybe it's my pragmatic American utilitarian approach to reading this text that is speaking now, but however much I admire Sartre's writing, I find I do not have the desire to pick up more fragments of the author than have been thrown down from my high-chair of critical reading. I simply don't approve of how he shatters his subject beyond recognition; to me that is nihilism, and so if you consider that 'looking down one's nose', I may as well admit I am guilty as charged. Indeed, I find that nothing on this scale of interpretation based on such a little examination of the text itself has been done until my essay on the relative merits of Rousseau according to Jacques Derrida and Paul de Man. (Fuck the rational, I was instructed in a dream!)

Sartre's analysis leaves us asking, to what extent does the intense turmoil in the subject's consciousness, as derived from feelings of inferiority and the resultant drives to overcompensation, manifest itself as an arc that can be traced from childhood to adulthood, and ultimately take shape according to the perfect geometry of the ideal psychoanalytic situation... What seems belabored in Sartre's stylized synopsis of Genet's metaphysics changes radically as it then shifts its center of focus in the author's texts from the question of evil not only in terms of ethical intention, but of a more basic question of the existence of freedom of the will in the individual.

The homosexual male, in pretending to be a woman, Sartre tells us, consumes everything--the human world of objects and the entire culture of ideas as well as the men and women who inhabit them--in a vortex of Nonbeing where the guideposts of the ego are thrown into a process of "derealization" as all possible ego-relations are obliterated and replaced by world of appearances. This is the true pitfall one encounters by conflating the world with its surface and resulting retreat into a world of images. Such a world is contingent on aesthetics and the ideal, and the most perfect aesthetician who inhabits it, such as Sartre's version of Genet, is the true evildoer who, he says, "dreams a hate-ridden dream of universal conflagration."

"All societies," Sartre says, "castrate the maladjusted" and I find I am no exception to this sociological rule. While not a homosexual or being 'gay' in popular commercial jargon, I did experience a uncommonly powerful hetero-sex mania that made it impossible for me to find sexual equanimity until relatively late in life. I identify strongly with the phrase Sartre uses to describe Genet's notion of love as "a magical ceremony where the lover steals the loved one's being in order to incorporate it into himself." For me, it was my faith in the religiosity of sex that became my God, whereas Genet felt it necessary to profane the Host at the altar of an empty church to signalize his belief in the hollowness of the Deity. Possibly because, as Sartre reveals, he was raped while still a child, that he found himself learning the arts of thievery, and God became a half-poetic catechism in his mind for his approval he sought before creating his confessional texts of perversion, texts where he displayed his loathing of his onerous and self-accusatory "disgusting" alienation.

In his reversal of the theodicy of Leibnitz, Sartre concludes, if God wills evil, even as a test, then evil is good. Sartre proceeds to show that since he failed to find the power to kill himself outright, Genet embarks on a plan to kill himself bit by bit: "he will internalize his suicide and spread it out over his entire existence." And this can and ought to be done because "existence is no longer anything but an interminable death-agony which has been willed."

The child Genet commits crime not so much because of the evil they bring into the universe of guilt but because his crimes are the manifestation of his compulsory repetition of his original abuse. "One kills in order to kill one's self," Sartre says, and thus in experiencing this symbolic death, Genet was free to experience the joy of living and the ecstatic happiness of dying in an absolute moment of being as the Good-in-Life. Like much of Sartre's philosophical writing itself, the last thesis is not so convincing and may be said to beg the question of whether the literary works of Jean Genet have merit and interest for us. Sartre doesn't even leave me with a feeling that Genet is an authentic literary artist or if his homosexuality/criminality is to be understood as an accidental obstacle incidental to his life-history.

Still, I think this book is valuable as a meditation on the ethical etiology on the genesis of good and evil in the human metaphysical heart. In saying that one kills in order to kill oneself, Sartre does make a compelling identification between Genet and the perpetrator of crime in that he is furthering the trans-valuation of guilt and innocence and seeks to pass beyond the realm of good and evil established by Western Aristotelian-based forms of rationality and all Judaeo-Christian codes of ethics. This is accomplished definitively in Genet's writing since, just as Good depends on the external situation, Evil depends on internal reflection. After Genet, we come to recognize that the balance of power is ultimately left unchanged, because Good always existed prior to Evil and Being prior to nothingness.

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

Self-indulgent would be putting it nicely. Everything after "metamorphosis 1: Evil" is pretty weak. The book up through Evil (which is 350 pages, a book in itself and basically where this should have stopped) was brilliant. Having read some of the other reviews I can see the same impact: that sort of high you read philosophy and theory for, an overpowering clarity. My head was humming with the wealth of ideas. But I've lost nearly all of that exciting feeling with the slog through the next 275 pages. I was left feeling blase about the whole production - the phenomenology of Genet's development as a writer felt more pretentious than anything. And the paragraphs that went on for 3 or 4 pages within 60 page chapters with no section breaks were positively crushing. But I do feel as though I could retry Genet's Funeral Rights one day thanks to some of the interpretive heavy-lifting Sartre does here - the point at which an enormous chapter finally resolves in depicting FR as a sort of contrapuntal orchestration putting in play all of Genet's themes at the same time was pretty awesome.

To be sure there were really interesting elements discussed in the latter half but it didn't merit doubling the book's length - it's largely repetition and exaggeration. One interesting element that stood out in part 2 was the discussion of the theatrical gesture (not limited to the theater but depicted as an erotic act in everyday life) - this seemed to be a clear influence/forerunner on Deleuze's concept of the cinematic image (towards the end Sartre even says "Genet constructs a war machine," a term that is peppered through much of Deleuze's collaborations with Felix Guattari). This book would have benefitted greatly from a restrictive editor - it could have been an essential text with some tightening.

[Steven · Rating 1 out of 5]

Reading Saint Homicide put me in mind of this "biography" of Jean Genet by Sartre, which I had read in college and was surprised to find I still had on one of my bookshelves. Despite finding the book heavily marked up with underlined passages and notes and symbols in the margins, I find it almost completely unreadable now. Reading Sartre, like reading Heideggar, requires learning the foreign language of their terminology, otherwise it is gobbledygook. And even then, who knows? Although, the marks in the book indicate that at some point in time I thought I understood. Even reading these marked passages and my notes in the margin, now all I can manage is WTF? It all just seems so needlessly inaccessible and repetitive. For Sartre, Genet was his archetype for the existentialist man, and perhaps he brilliantly proves it in these 625 pages of tiny type. But one could argue that if it takes 625 pages to prove your point . . . anyway, as provocative as some of the passages are, and after spending a few hours trying to decipher the lingo, I've decided that I did this once before and don't really want to go there again.

[Lance Grabmiller · Rating 3 out of 5]

I heard this described once as a biography of Genet. It isn't really that at all. It's a chance for Sartre to philosophize about the idea of Genet. VERY dense book. It's about 10% biography, 20% literary criticism and 110% philosophy. How did I come up with 140%? This is Sartre. Dude's brain was cranked to 11.

[John Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite a long read - perhaps a bit long-winded - on Sartre's relationship with Genet. Mainly concerned with Sartre's concerns for the underdog. Very good on how Genet forged himself a sense of self in a world that had rejected him.

[Syd · Rating 4 out of 5]

sartre writing on genet. need i say more?

[Sean A. · Rating 4 out of 5]

A wonderful book about queerness and crime and (marginally) writing as an entry into or escape from the world.

Sartre’s prose is intensely circular but hey that’s dialectics.

[Henry L. Racicot · Rating 1 out of 5]

C'mon. . .one of the most tedious meditations ever written. . .only an egghead like Sartre could make Genet boring. It will take you years to slog through this 600 page snoozer.

[Austin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Histrionic, hysterical, frequently tedious, occasionally radically insightful!

[A YOGAM · Rating 4 out of 5]

Saint Genet, comédien et martyr: Die Freiheit im Angesicht der Verzweiflung
Jean-Paul Sartres monumentale Studie „Saint Genet, comédien et martyr“ (erstmals 1952 veröffentlicht) ist sowohl eine meisterhafte Einführung in die Œuvres complètes von Jean Genet als auch ein philosophisches Schlüsselwerk des Existenzialismus.
Die Untersuchung ist eine tiefgründige existenzialistische Biografie, die über psychoanalytische oder marxistische Erklärungen hinausgeht. Sartre zeigt, dass allein die Freiheit eine Person in ihrer Gesamtheit erfassen kann: Genets Freiheit wird zunächst von Schicksal und fatalen Umständen erdrückt, richtet sich dann aber gegen diese, um sie nach und nach selbst zu gestalten.
Sartre betont, dass Genie kein Talent, sondern eine Erfindung ist – ein Ausweg, den man in verzweifelten Situationen schafft. Er verfolgt detailliert, wie Genet sein Leben, sein Selbstverständnis und sogar den Sinn des Universums wählt, und wie dieser freie Wille sich in seinem Stil, seiner Bildsprache und seinen spezifischen Vorlieben (goûts) manifestiert.
Das berühmte Credo, der existentialistischen Philosophie zugeschrieben:
„L'important n'est pas ce qu'on fait de nous, mais ce que nous faisons nous-même de ce qu'on a fait de nous“ – „Wichtig ist nicht, was man aus uns gemacht hat, sondern was wir selbst aus dem machen, was man aus uns gemacht hat“, oder alternativ: „Es kommt nicht darauf an, was andere aus uns gemacht haben, sondern darauf, was wir aus dem machen, was andere aus uns gemacht haben. “– bildet die ethische Kernthese des Buches. Es fasst Genets Kampf zusammen, seine vorbestimmten Umstände durch radikale Freiheit in ein selbstbestimmtes Leben zu verwandeln.

[Camilla · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this at a perfect time. The character Genet is the perfect essence of the realized banality of childhood and the horror of individuality. The use of deviance as a normative element for feeling connected to reality, while feeling exiled from the social structure that inhabits it—is accompanied by everyday reconstruction of the self. We try everyday to renew ourself through repetitive actions. “Acts” are a way of establishing the self. For Genet, that is playing the role of possession. Sartre describes Genet’s failure to never be caught in his acts of larceny. In playing the role of “thief” he becomes his own police—trapped by modes of repetition that no longer align with reality. Only when he is caught, or rather seen by adults, he is finally able to exist. He is free of guilt. In his adolescent world of ten years old, secretive acts do not exist as adults are often the ones to recognize his actions and place them into categories of time, reward and punishment.

[Ahmed · Rating 4 out of 5]

طيب السيرة الذاتية هذه مختلفة بسبب بطل السيرة 🤷🏻‍♂️
جينيه هذا يمثل أسلوب الصعاليك في الأدب العربي فهو لا يعرف عرفاً ولا يلتزم بمبدأ، يحاول تبرير كل تصرف و رميه على المجتمع

الرائع في العمل هو أسلوب سارتر التحليلي ( رغم اختلافي معه في اوقات) . لكن أثبت أنه روائي مميز

عمل ضخم لكن يستحق القراءة

[BRE · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wanted to be a lawyer until I read Jean Genet and now I’m on the side of crime

[Ali · Rating 4 out of 5]

برای درک بهتر این اثر سارتر، باید با شرح احوال "ژان ژنه" و آثارش آشنایی داشت. ژنه که از نوجوانی به خاطر دزدیدن نان و چیزهای کوچک، بارها به زندان افتاده بود، هم جنس گرایی بود که نمایش نامه های نبوغ آمیز اولیه اش را در زندان نوشت. سارتر و گروهی از روشنفکران اروپایی، بیانیه ای صادر کردند و خواهان آزادی ژنه شدند. "ژنه ی مقدس" که به شکلی تکان دهنده، عریان به زندگی این نویسنده ی زندانی می پردازد، در اصل رساله ای ست بلند در دفاع از آزادی انسان. ژنه پس از آزادی، تا هنگام مرگ، در هتلی در مراکش زندگی می کرد و نسبت به فرهنگ و جامعه ی فرانسه ابراز تنفر می نمود. نمایش نامه های ژنه از آثار شگرف دهه های پنجاه و شصت قرن گذشته است. او که فرزندی نامشروع بود، و سپس "نویسنده ی دزد" لقب گرفت، در تمامی آثارش از دزدان و فرزندان نامشروع و فاحشه ها و همجنس گرایان سخن گفته و آنچه را به عنوان تهمت به او، بکار برده بودند، به عنوان پدیده های واقعی زندگی مطرح کرد، و تثبیت نمود. ژنه ی مقدس اثری ست شایسته در مورد یکی از فرزندان بزرگ قرن بیستم! اگرچه با تصویر جامعه ی فرانسه از ژان ژنه، بکلی متفاوت بود. ژنه که خود با تمام قد در مقابل ارزش هایی که او را محکوم می کرد، ایستاد، پس از آزادی از تماس با جامعه ی روشنفکری فرانسه نیز، خودداری کرد و معتقد بود که سارتر در این اثرش، نگاه ترحم انگیزی به او داشته است.

در مورد ژان پل سارتر، مطلبی جداگانه نوشته ام؛
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...

در مورد "تیاتر ابزورد" اینجا را بخوانید
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...

[Banu]

" Kibar zevkleri olan Culafoy ve Divine, biraz da azizliklerinden, hep nefret ettikleri şeyleri sevmek zounda kalacaklar; çünkü aziz olmak her şeyden vazgeçebilmeyi gerektirir."

// Genet'in en büyük özlemi olan azizliğ tanımlar; kutsal kelimesine günah lezzetinn verilmesiyle elde edilen azizlik, Sartre'a göre dilinin en güzel sözüdür.

Gerçeken de, en büyük kötülüğün tercih edilmesi en büyük iyiliğin tercih edilmesiyle bağlantılıdır ve bunlardan biri ne kadar kesin bir şekilde diğerine bağlanıyorsa, diğeriyle aynı ölçüde ilişki kurar. //

[Jakub Kopeć · Rating 5 out of 5]

An exceptional biography touching a very unexploited subject which is existential psychoanalysis. It helped me broaden my views on the concept of intention. On est seuls, personne nous n'excusera.