Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
South Atlantic Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to South Atlantic Bulletin.
http://www.jstor.org
A CRITIQUE
ROBERT W. ARTINIAN
Universityof Virginia
There can be little doubt that Jean-Paul Sartre is the great
man of contemporaryFrench letters.The enormous impact upon
the age of his philosophy,his plays,his novels,his varied contributions to topical problemshas shown him to be a worthysuccessor
to the traditionof Diderot, Voltaire, Hugo, and Gide. Naturally,
the formalexpositionof his estheticshas aroused a smaller degree
of public interestand yet,in this area also, the influenceof JeanPaul Sartrehas been immense.It is our endeavor to examine the
views of this critic toward the nineteenthcentury,with special
referenceto Flaubert and Maupassant.
The topic was suggestedby the recentbook of Benjamin Suhl,
Jean Paul Sartre: The Philosopher as Literary Critic, published
by Columbia UniversityPress, and by the consequent re-reading
of Situations II. This is supposed to be the centurywhen man
has become for the firsttime fullyand thoroughly"problematic"
to himself.If so, it would only seem natural that literatureshould
be posed as a new and extremekind of problem for literarymen.
Natural and inevitable, too, that this problem should be raised
particularlyby the French, whose literaturehas always been the
most programmaticof all literatures,and the most self-consciously
attachedto criticaltheory.
For some time now French criticshave been talking about a
"crisis"in theirliterature."Crisis" is a violentword,and therehas
possiblybeen some overdramatizationin its use; but there can be
no doubt about the seriousnessof the situationthathas evoked this
word: French literaturesuggestsa countrysideoverrunby generations of industriouscultivatorsuntil the point of diminishingreturns seems reached,where the soil continues to yield crops only
afterexactingverymuch more drasticmethodsof cultivationand
evermorepainfullabor. By the turnof the century,some traditional genres already appeared exhausted,and recentlyFrench critics
have been declaring that the language itselfdemands new means
of expression.
The backgroundof Qu'est-ceque la litterature,
then,is thiscontinuingcrisisin French literature,one which is still apparent on
the contemporaryliteraryscene. For in retrospectit seems clear
that Sartre is not, nor is likely to become, a great writer:clever,
enormously,furiouslyenergetic,he does not possess the authentic
40
Sartre
SouthAtlanticBulletin
41
hisletters
and earlyworks,
longpassagesfromFlaubert,
particularly
thatexpressan aristocratic
hatredof themob.This is all verywell;
but the accusationis renderedmeaningless
when we recall that
has producedin thefewpages
Flaubert,despitehiscorrespondence,
of Un Coeursimplea moreprofoundand sympathetic
pictureof
the poor than in all the thousandpages of Sartre'strilogyLes
Cheminsde la libertd.Moreover,
as Rene Girardhas noted,'there
are strongpointsof resemblance
betweenSartreand Flaubert,a
coincidencewhichmightgo a long way towardexplainingthe
former's
Thus,forexample,bothauthorsrebelagainst
antagonism.
the conceptof heroes:Garcinin Huis clos thinkshe is a hero,
thathe is not.The resultis thecreationof theantionlyto discover
hero,as typified
by Roquentinin his downfall,onlyto be reborn
unsureof his own identity.
Flaubert,who livedin an age of great
romanticheroes,renounceshis formeridols and sublimateshis
desiresto art,writing
of romantic
heroesand how theyare proved
wrong.Both Flaubertand Sartrecould be describedas execrating
the bourgeois.In the formerthis becamea revolt,an obsession
withla betise,and in thelatter,an obsessionwithle salaud. Even
thepersonallivesof thesemen,withtheirbrilliantintellects,
their
even the
voluntaryisolationin orderto writemore effectively,
presenceof an ageingmotherand une amie,all suggestthe close
physicaland metaphysical
rapportwhichexistsbetweenthem.That
Flaubertshould therefore
be so consistently
by
misinterpreted
Sartre,at leastthusfar,suggestsinteresting
and complexconclusions.
There are, to be sure,reasonsforthe Sartrianapproach.His
interestin literarycriticism,
is indirect:His concern
admittedly,
is chiefly
to understand
theconditionof thewriter,
theparticular
wayin whichhe remainsdependenton, but managesto be free
hisdayand place,hispublicand his language.To communifrom,
cate effectively
withhis readera writermust,in Sartre'sview,be
representative
yetoriginal,influenced
by his situationyetable to
asserthisownselfmuchmorethanmostofus areeverin a position
to do. Viewedin sucha way,thesituationof thewriteris a
privilegedinstanceof thehumancondition,
and the studyof it necessarilyoccupiesa considerable
whichis above
place in a philosophy
42
Sartre
SouthAtlanticBulletin
43
44
Sartre
le
45
cuistre.
")