Just like The Reprieve (1945), the second volume in a planned tetrology, the third installment Iron in the Soul (1949) sees Sartre developing the original story as told in The Age of Reason (1945), the first part in the series. In contrast to The Reprieve, Sartre returns to a style of writing that compares to The Age of Reason - no longer jumping from character to character with each sentence. This makes Iron in the Soul kind of a fresh breath of air.
The story itself is rather dull. France has been defeated by Nazi Germany in their Blitzkrieg, and now all characters find themselves in situations related to this invasion. Gomez, the communist Spaniard finds himself a refugee in New York, having abonded his French wife Sarah and their son Pablo, who are fleeing Paris in a massive stream of refugee. The fate of all three is unknown.
Daniel, the homosexual antagonist of The Age of Reason decides to stay in Paris, to see this city being raped by the Germans. He revels in resentment towards anything French, being determined solely by the other - in effect projecting his feelings of rejection by society on the dead city. Boris, the student of protagonist Mathieu has to decide - against the clock - whether to flee to London or stay in France with his girlfriend Lola. He cannot decide and he outsources his decision to Lola, who has yet to arrive - if she isn't dead by now. In contrast, Mathieu is serving in the defeated French army and is longing to kill. At the end of the book, he is defending a church and shooting at Germans. The church collapses and Mathieu's fate remains unknown.
The overarching theme is the design of your own life. Are you willing to face up to the Nothingness that you, as a consciousness, are? Are you willing to overcome the anguish and alienation this realization brings? If so, will you take up your freedom and be responsible for who you are? or would you rather lose yourself in the everdayness and make up excuses for yourself - live in bad faith with yourself and others?
All characters have to decide, in the here and now, who they are. It is their choices which determine the meaning of their existence. Some, like Gomez, fall into bad faith. This is the man who took up his responsibility to fight in his homeland Spain against Franco's forces, flees his homeland and abandon his family, to live life as a down-trodden refugee writing cynical articles about modern art. From a once authentic individual he transforms into a person of bad faith. Mathieu, in contrast, travels the other road. In The Age of Reason we see him cheat, steal and lie to anyone, living the life of an apathetic vagabond and shun all responsibilities, yet at the end of Iron in the Soul, we see him pick up arms voluntarily against the Germans and fully follow up his decision to shoot some of them. Finally, Daniel is a typical Nietzschean nihilist - a nobody full of resentment towards the world, hurting others to escape his own suffering. He never changes during the three volumes of The Roads to Freedom.
Sartre is able to develop his characters throughout the three volumes and to implement some very interesting themes - all to do with his existentalist philosophy. The problem is, not all volumes are equally readable and/or interesting. And after a while, Sartre's style becomes rather repetitive. I noticed my curiosity dropping quickly in Iron in the Soul; and the further I got in the book, the duller its contents became...
Nevertheless, I think the trilogy (the fourth and final volume was never finished) is interesting from a philosophical perspective as well as from a historical standpoint. The books are a case study of existentialism, and is much more readable (and enjoyable) than Sartre's philosophical magnum opus Being and Nothingness (1943). Also, it details the time period summer 1938 - summer 1940, conveying the feelings of uncertainty and the looming abyss of a nation threatened with invasion, and the coping of everyday people with the loss in war. Historically, Sartre's novels are thus interesting to get a sense of what normal people were feeling, thinking and doing in these very chaotic and dangerous times - and this is worth much more than the usual dry descriptions in history books.
It's just, I have become tired of Sartre. And I have become tired of existentialism. It is one of the key ideologies in twentieth century philosophy, but I think it rather over-hyped. Sartre selectively took the ingredients he liked from Descartes, Hegel, Husserl and Heidegger and concocted his own witches brew. Of course this is permissible, and we cannot deny Sartre his creativity and originality. But having recently studied Husserl and Heidegger, and being familiar with the ideas of Descartes and Hegel, I cannot help but feel that Sartre's loose use of these philosopher's ideas is genuine. It is illustrative that in his Being and Nothingness - a 800 page long essay on these doctrines - he never mentions any sources or names. One of the more common critiques of Sartre thus is that he distorts, selects and misuses whatever he can get his hands on to fit his own theories. Again, illustrative of this selectivity is the rumor that Heidegger started reading Being and Nothingness and piut it down after having read the first couple of pages. Alledgedly, when an acquaintance asked what his take on Sartre's work was, he shook his head.
Anyway, The Roads of Freedom are philsophically and historically interesting time capsules of the 1930-1940's from a French perspective. The books differ in their style and content, and it's probably a hit-or-miss kind of reading. Personally, I disliked volume 2, while being hugely impressed with volume 1. Volume 3 is a decent but not outstanding novel.