Simone de Beauvoir: on writing “The Second Sex”, Camus being a bitch and anti-feministic approaches to the book upon its release


Everything below this paragraph is culled from Sarah Bakewell‘s excellent, new book named “At the Existentialist Café“; the parts below are mainly about how Simone de Beauvoir got going on writing “The Second Sex“, what people thought of it at the time, and how come it’s not “established in the canon as one of the great cultural re-evaluations of modern times”. True that! Also, Camus was acting a bitch. Buy the book, or else. Please note that paragraphs have been copied from the book piece-by-piece; Bakewell’s book makes a lot more sense than this, and is an absolute roller-coaster ride of the mind, in truly great and mind-expanding ways. Here we go:

One day, somewhere around the time of the 1948 Berlin trip, Beauvoir was sitting with pen in hand, staring at a sheet of paper. Alberto Giacometti said to her, ‘How wild you look!’ She replied, ‘It’s because I want to write and I don’t know what.’ With the sagacity that came from its being someone else’s problem, he said, ‘Write anything.’

She did, and it worked. She took further inspiration from her friend Michel Leiris’ experimental autobiographical writings, which she had recently read: these inspired her to try a free-form way of writing about her memories, basing them around the theme of what it had meant to her to grow up as a girl. When she discussed this idea with Sartre, he urged her to explore the question in more depth. Thus it is in relation to three men that Simone de Beauvoir describes the origin of her great feminist work, The Second Sex.

Perhaps the starting point had been a modest idea in need of masculine encouragement, but Beauvoir soon developed the project into something revolutionary in every sense: her book overturned accepted ideas about the nature of human existence, and encouraged its readers to overturn their own existences. It was also a confident experiment in what we might call ‘applied existentialism’. Beauvoir used philosophy to tackle two huge subjects: the history of humanity — which she reinterpreted as a history of patriarchy — and the history of an individual woman’s whole life as it plays itself out from birth to old age.

The two stories are interdependent, but occupy two separate parts of the book. To flesh them out, Beauvoir combined elements of her own experience with stories gathered from other women she knew, and with extensive studies in history, sociology, biology and psychology. She wrote quickly. Chapters and early versions appeared in Les Temps modernes through 1948; the full tome came out in 1949. It was greeted with shock. This freethinking lady existentialist was already considered a disturbing figure, with her open relationship, her childlessness and her godlessness. Now here was a book filled with descriptions of women’s sexual experience, including a chapter on lesbianism. Even her friends recoiled. One of the most conservative responses came from Albert Camus, who, as she wrote in her memoirs, ‘in a few morose sentences, accused me of making the French male look ridiculous’.

But if men found it uncomfortable, women who read it often found themselves thinking about their lives in a new way. After it was translated into English in 1953 — three years before Being and Nothingness and nine years before Heidegger’s Being and Time — The Second Sex had an even greater impact in Britain and America than in France. It can be considered the single most influential work ever to come out of the existentialist movement. Beauvoir’s guiding principle was that growing up female made a bigger difference to a person than most people realised, including women themselves. Some differences were obvious and practical. French women had only just gained the right to vote (with Liberation in 1944), and continued to lack many other basic rights; a married woman could not open her own bank account until 1965. But the legal differences reflected deeper existential ones.

Women’s everyday experiences and their Being-in-the-world diverged from men’s so early in life that few thought of them as being developmental at all; people assumed the differences to be ‘natural’ expressions of femininity. For Beauvoir, instead, they were myths of femininity — a term she adapted from the anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss, and which ultimately derived from Friedrich Nietzsche’s ‘genealogical’ way of digging out fallacies about culture and morality. In Beauvoir’s usage, a myth is something like Husserl’s notion of the encrusted theories which accumulate on phenomena, and which need scraping off in order to get to the ‘things themselves’.

After a broad-brush historical overview of myth and reality in the first half of the book, Beauvoir devoted the second half to relating a typical woman’s life from infancy on, showing how — as she said — ‘One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.’ The first influences begin in early childhood, she wrote. While boys are told to be brave, a girl is expected to cry and be weak. Both sexes hear similar fairy tales, but in them the males are heroes, princes or warriors, while the females are locked up in towers, put to sleep, or chained to a rock to wait to be rescued. Hearing the stories, a girl notices that her own mother stays mostly in her home, like an imprisoned princess, while her father goes off to the outside world like a warrior going to war. She understands which way her own role will lie.

Growing older, the girl learns to behave modestly and decorously. Boys run, seize, climb, grasp, punch; they literally grab hold of the physical world and wrestle with it. Girls wear pretty dresses and dare not run in case they get dirty. Later, they wear high heels, corsets and skirts; they grow long fingernails which they have to worry about breaking. They learn, in countless small ways, to hesitate about damaging their delicate persons if they do anything at all. As Iris Marion Young later put it in ‘Throwing Like a Girl’, a 1980 essay applying Beauvoir’s analysis in more detail, girls come to think of themselves as ‘positioned in space’ rather than as defining or constituting the space around them by their movements.

Beauvoir sees every element of women’s situation as conspiring to box them in to mediocrity, not because they are innately inferior, but because they learn to become inward-looking, passive, self-doubting and overeager to please.

For Beauvoir, the greatest inhibition for women comes from their acquired tendency to see themselves as ‘other’ rather than as a transcendent subject.

The Second Sex could have become established in the canon as one of the great cultural re-evaluations of modern times, a book to set alongside the works of Charles Darwin (who resituated humans in relation to other animals), Karl Marx (who resituated high culture in relation to economics) and Sigmund Freud (who resituated the conscious mind in relation to the unconscious). Beauvoir evaluated human lives afresh by showing that we are profoundly gendered beings: she resituated men in relation to women. Like the other books, The Second Sex exposed myths. Like the others, its argument was controversial and open to criticism in its specifics — as inevitably happens when one makes major claims. Yet it was never elevated into the pantheon. Is this further proof of sexism? Or is it because her existentialist terminology gets in the way?

English-speaking readers never even saw most of the latter. It was cut by its first translator in 1953, the zoology professor Howard M. Parshley, largely on the urging of his publisher. Only later, reading the work, did his editor ask him to go easy with the scissors, saying, ‘I am now quite persuaded that this is one of the handful of greatest books on sex ever written.’ It was not just omissions that were the problem; Parshley rendered Beauvoir’s pour-soi (for-itself) as ‘her true nature in itself’, which precisely reverses the existentialist meaning. He turned the title of the second part, ‘L’expérience vécue’ (‘lived experience’), into ‘Woman’s Life Today’ — which, as Toril Moi has observed, makes it sound like the title of a ladies’ magazine.

To make matters more confusing and further demean the book, English-language paperback editions through the 1960s and 1970s tended to feature misty-focus naked women on the cover, making it look like a work of soft porn. Her novels got similar treatment. Strangely, this never happened with Sartre’s books. No edition of Being and Nothingness ever featured a muscleman on the cover wearing only a waiter’s apron. Nor did Sartre’s translator Hazel Barnes simplify his terminology — although she notes in her memoirs that at least one reviewer thought she should have. If sexism and the existentialist language were not to blame, another reason for The Second Sex’s intellectual sidelining might be that it presents itself as a case study: an existentialist study of just one particular type of life. In philosophy, as in many other fields, applied studies tend to be dismissed as postscripts to more serious works. But that was never existentialism’s way. It was always meant to be about real, individual lives. If done correctly, all existentialism is applied existentialism.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Movies I've watched recently:

  • Johan Falk: Vapenbröder (Video 2009) - IMDb 1/10

    2016-04-21 13:44

    This film is actually worse than the first one, leaving no care behind; actually, if "no care left behind" would be the title, I'd given it higher grade out from courtesy. There's just nothing in here, not even anything little that aids or progresses action, for the sake of action. Even tipping a jar of paint onto the street would be more actionable and less questionable, than anything that goes on in this film.

  • Johan Falk: GSI - Gruppen för särskilda... 2/10

    2016-04-17 13:42
    * *

    What a heap of troubles. Sweden often combats crime; one may say it's "our" forté. Trouble is, the same actors adapt the same dour, sour stance when affronting the crimes perpetrated by other film-makers and actors, all from Sweden. It's a downward trajectory. Here, the biggest crime is courtesy of Jacob Eklund, who would not be able to act his way out of a paper bag; he's far too lackadaisical and apathetic to be a lead guy, and his character's simply not believable. This story is somewhat interesting as one specific criminal quickly proves to be an informant for the police. That's about it, really. The action is questionable as I kept looking at my wall behind the TV at times, for more exciting stuff; I'm not exaggerating when writing it. Fingers crossed for more excitement.

  • Sisters (2015) - IMDb 7/10

    2016-03-05 21:17
    * * * * * * *

    I'm a sucker for Fey/Poehler, and this time they've managed to be as brash and simultaneously fun as they should always have been; I mean, they've obviously honed their craft. They play sisters who walk down memory lane, and what keeps this from being a regular haw-haw SNL showboat is how they keep their eyes on the prize, story-wise. It's a complete film, lavish with jokes that not only prey upon the remember-when-we-were-young? thing, but show-cases humor in its simplest forms. There are not that many gimmicks, really, but mostly humor. Things work because of the words, not the context, e.g. in comparison with films like almost everything Adam Sandler has made. All in all, fun and funny, they make it work.

  • Fuk sau (2009) - IMDb 8/10

    2016-03-05 12:07
    * * * * * * * *

    This is a pure action-and-vengeance film, from start to finish. There's really no logic to some things, e.g. why the main character does not visit his estranged and brutally hurt (physically and mentally speaking) daughter in hospital, but is on a mission. Apart from that, though, this film is a study in cinematography, vengeance, neat tricks and sheer love for the kind of drama that I think all vengeance-based films should carry. There's a lot of fun too. What Hallyday keeps back because of his limited performance - just imagine if Alain Delon would have played the main character, which is what the director originally wanted - the sidekicks and the beauty of the film gives back. It's a bit like "Blade Runner" meets "Memento" and some ancient John Ford/Akira Kurosawa thing going on. A must-see for all action/vengeance flick buffs.

  • Macbeth (2015) - IMDb 9/10

    2016-01-23 21:49
    * * * * * * * * *

    This is a masterpiece. Where William Shakespeare's tale of betrayal, greed and blindness leaves much room for interpretation, this cinematic version goes beyond what could easily have been a flat, drab interpretation, and makes it come alive and breathe new air into the tale. I hope this adaptation goes around and is seen by all. Fassbender is really involved in this film, as previously seen in "Shame", as opposed the crappy role he had to play in "Prometheus"; Marion Cotillard elevates, both by herself and together with Fassbender. The calmness before the storm, breathtakingly filmed and shot first during the initial scenes, is cinematography, acting and direction in wondrous collaboration. It seems all actors are on-point, with one singular goal. This is truly brilliant. The language comes alive, through death and humanity.


The Titanic sinking in real-time: scary and eerily calming

The above video is (naturally) a computer-created animation that displays the Titanic sinking in real-time. It’s 2 hours and 40 minutes, and is annotated in real-time.

No people, which makes it even more strange.

Tags: , , ,

My saved links (weekly)

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

My saved links (weekly)

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Georges Delerues – “Thème de Camille”

If I’d written that schmaltzy overture, I could compose well enough to happily decompose.

Almost a theme to being lost to yourself (in a bad way), the romantic, plodding gait of the track suggests a Lament, an adagio, a very late-night walk.

I love this fucking track. Hearing it while en route to work, riding what’s in Stockholm called one of the green subway lines, which are mostly placed overground, the frosted landscape, with the sun coming up tinting things sparkling yellow, de-frosting all Swedes, it’s just a stupefying thing.

Also, I see that Jean-Luc Godard has made the film to which this song is part of the soundtrack. It’s called “Contempt“, and I’ve not seen it.


Tags: , ,