Where I Agree with Sartre.

Sartre seems to have been right, however, in these respects:

* People do tend to label one's self and to pigeonhole one, whether wittingly or unwittingly.

* People allow themselves to be pigeonholed.

* People want you to behave a certain way, or otherwise they become offended.

My experiences with the Gavrilovs and Mother's ex post facto criticism of my 'behavior' is evidence of this.

Did I create the nausea?
Probably not; I only sought to understand Sartre and to be solitary as I would usually be.
That was why I did not want to tell Leonid what 'kind' of philosophy I enjoyed.

I can also find admiration in him for his nerve to acknowledge the Sinking House and the fallacy of history.

Although I do delight in history at times. As a protest.

dm.A.A.



Another peculiarly endearing aspect of Sartre is his notion of the Gaze. To me, I can speak from experience in having been caught in the Gaze of another. It is a perpetual Appeal to Authority. Where convincing one's self in the absence of others and in Solitude has the qualities of Rapture and Novelty, to project onto the Other one's own personal source of Authority does have a quality of dryness and futility, marked by an arid tension in the throat, a dryness of the skin, and a depressive mood and bearing upon the eyes in general.

One feels cut off from Being, because what had been Being in its Openness takes on the quality of a mental figure: The Authority projected outwards. In this sense, Sartre speaks of what Jung calls participation mistique and subjectivisation of the Object.

dm.A.A.

One becomes encapsulated in the artifice of the agreed-upon World and is severred from the rapturous Joy of Solitude and Truth.

dm.A.A.


In this situation, the Sinking House becomes a problem often, and so does the Perpetuation of the Old and Subversion of the New. There is also the sense of division betwixt Internal Monologue and Speech, suggesting the Questioner-Questioned dialectic.

dm.A.A.