Last Post Ever... HELL YES

   As much fun as these book blogs have been (and I have actually really enjoyed this project), it is time to close. I really appreciated having you as a teacher. Granted, the year has been rough, but it's really nothing you did. It sucks that you got stuck with that gigantic class, it really disabled you from doing the things you really wanted to do. I know you are brilliant, and you enjoy finding brilliance in your students. Also, I thank you for pointing me in the right direction to the literature that has allowed me to grow so much in my philosophies. I promise I'm not suicidal, and I promise I don't hate the English department. Rather, I thought the English department hated me, and I was trying to let it blow over xD. But I do find liberation in my denial of a soul, god, meaning to life, etc. It's the freedom from culture and superficiality and idiocy that makes me able to accept myself and the world around me—the same freedom that Sartre talks about by denying "bad faith." Existentialism and Nihilism are two beautiful philosophies, despite their outward appearance as colorless and dark. Everything makes sense now, and I can't wait to really study Sartre and his ideas to continue my path on the exit from Hell. Thank you for having that debate with me on May 18, 2011. I honestly have no one to have deep debates with like that, and I'm sure that's no surprise to you. I may be an ass, but I'm one that is looking for the truth. Have a good one, Rebeske.

Hell is—other people!

   This is the climax of the play. Garcin, after only a few short pages of being antagonized, comes to the realization that Hell is not a place of hot pokers and fire, but it is merely other people that bore into the perception that one has for themselves, completely disabling them from freedom. This is one of the main points in Sartre's philosophy as well. The self is easily free, but as soon as there is an observer, the need to fulfill some role eradicates that freedom. I find this absolutely hilarious. Every Disney Channel movie uses the whole "be yourself" bull shit to give self-esteem to kids, but they are simultaneously pressuring a child to fulfill the role of themselves with a "reward" of the same admiration and fortune the character in the movie/show receives from "being themselves." There is honestly not a whole lot more cruel than that. Instead of promoting freedom from society, they push viewers to seek a role that will reward them with acceptance by the same society that imprisons them! It is just like Garcin. He wants to avenge himself from the "coward" legacy he has by convincing those around him by continuing to harp on that which imprisons him. Garcin could easily let it all go, because, now that he is Hell, what difference does it make? No one cares. Just let himself be free of those self-imposed limitations. Bah. People can suck it.

What the Hell is Going on?

   I suppose I should at least give you a synopsis of what the play is about.

   The play is about three people who are assigned to torture each other for eternity. Of course, one does not know this right from the get go, but essentially the three form a little triangle of not-love; each pair is the punishment of the odd one out. The play has four characters, the Valet (basically a chill demon), Garcin (a complete asshole who seeks refuge through solitary reflection, but of course fails), Inez (a sadistic lesbian who refuses to allow the other two characters to be happy, as well as acts as the voice of Sartre), and Estelle (a bimbo who seeks only pleasure in the most superficial of things, i.e. attention and self-ignorance). The Valet is more or less the character that sets the sarcastic tone for the play, who, from the very beginning, laughs in Garcin's face about his human dignity. The other three simply duke it out, pulling at the wits of each other (being each others' torturers). I do not want to spoil the ending, but the entire story is very enlightening as to the social implications of living a lie (however, those who are not self-aware will most likely not pick up on this. Such a shame). I highly recommend reading the play as well as looking into Sartre's philosophies. He is extremely intense, and it is well worth your while to take a few hours to read up on it. You only have one shot on the impact you make, so choose wisely ;]

Boy, You Fine as Hell

I couldn't help posting this picture again. It is absolutely hilarious, and actually exhibits Sartre's philosophy that a rejection of societal and cultural norms manifests freedom from reality. I'll post a side by side for your viewing pleasure, and yes, this is my media post.

Well, Monsieur Sartre, give 'em Hell!

Yes, he was stricken with Strabismus (lazy eyes)
    Jean- Paul Sartre was born in Paris in 1905. Being the beast he was, Sartre became a professor of Philosophy in 1931 (that's at 26, by the way). Although he primarily studied the philosophies of Husserl and Heidegger, Sartre made his own definition and philosophy for existentialism, one that is based on the freedom that a being is ultimately ruled by. Sartre gained success with his first novel, La Nausée (Nausea), and a collection of stories Le Mur (The Wall and other Stories), both in 1938. These laid out his early existential ideas of alienation and commitment, while utilizing art as a means of salvation. Sartre won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1964. If you would like more information, feel free to use the link below.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1964/sartre-bio.html

Publication Blurb... To Hell with that!

   Huis Clos, or as we Amerricahns calls it No Exit, was originally published in 1944. The author, of course, is Jean-Paul Sartre (that's Sar-trah), with the version I used being a translation by Stuart Gilbert and Lionel Abel. The play is published in English with three other plays (conveniently titled No Exit and Three Other Plays) in 1955, but I used the 1989 version of the same title released by Vintage International out of New York. The play debuted live in May of 1944, right before the liberation of Paris. Since then, the play has taken movie form many times, and none of which have found much success (on account of my inability to find any kind of clip from any of the legitimate movie attempts). Nonetheless, the play is fantastic, a quick read, and absolutely worth your time. There are several gems of insight to be gained from the play, and, if nothing else, it has a very interesting perspective on Hell. Enjoy.

No Chance In Hell

   The following quotation was more or less of a revelation to me. I mean, I understood it, and it should be obvious, but to a generation conditioned to assume they always have a second chance, or a do over, or even the opportunity "try and try again", do not fully comprehend the gravity and truth behind this principle:

   "One always dies too soon... or too late. And yet one's who life is complete at that one moment, with a line

        drawn neatly under it, ready for the summing up. You are—your life, and nothing else."

   Honestly, I don't think anyone's life means anything, save the sanctity of the happiness and self-awareness that we are able to experience (and even that is my decision to find worth in, as that too is meaningless). But in this context,whatever a person holds as having worth is ultimately confined to a definite period of time, be it teddy bears or having a good time or being a complete goodygoody throughout the entire lifetime. It will all be summed up once dead, literally and figuratively. And that's all anyone gets. One shot. There is, literally, no room for mistakes. Death is definite. Each second is a period of time that could be utilized to reach the dreams we have. I hadn't really thought about it that way until I read this play. One shot. That's it. Now, for me, it's less a problem with efficiency, and now a problem of wasting the definite amount of time I have to pursue happiness, as that's all that truly matters. Why waste, make excuses... it's a crime against oneself. The only person stopping anyone from reaching peace is themselves. At that point, pragmatism, self-awareness, and reason are the most important tools anyone can have. Dig?

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.9

Yah, I'll Let It Go When Hell Freezes Over

    "So you haven't yet got over your—what-do-you-call-it?—sense of human dignity? Excuse my smiling."

    Of all places for someone to care what others think of them, the last place, in my opinon, would be "Hell". Granted, if they are in "Hell", they probably don't have that kind of self-awareness and sense. However, for someone condemned to an eternity of suffering, I would think that person would just let it go for the betterment of the group, make a joke out of it, perhaps. But that, too, would be the pragmatic thing to do, and the "condemned" obviously don't exhibit that kind of sensibility. I suppose the argument is moot, at any rate. There's not a hell anyway :]

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.9