The Implications of Beauvoirs Philosophical Realization - Essay Example

Discuss the implications of Beauvoir’s philosophical realization with relation to war time dilemmas explored in Le Sang Des Autres. Simone De Beauvoir wrote “Les Sang Des Autres” post World War II when the French were seeking to comprehend the occurrences of the war as well as the Resistance they offered against the German occupation. France was highly affected by the war which led to the emergence of a great many moral issues. “Le Sang des Autres” or “The Blood of Others” was published in 1945 and was the outcome of Beauvoir’s philosophical realization during war time and the exploration of her dilemmas in regard to the confrontation of a Resistance leader during the war. Although Beauvoir’s discussion of freedom may appear to emerge from a masculinist tradition, it is truly the dialogue of the same subject from an oppressed feminine view ( Singer 1985, 232). Linda Singer believes that Beauvoir’s show of freedom materializes from “ a situation of relatedness and affinity. This sense of a freedom which realizes itself in engagement with and for others provides Beauvoir with the basis for the morality of commitment and concern" (Singer 1985, 232). The conclusion that Singer’s discourse arrives at is that an ethics of obligation, autonomy and law stands in complete opposition to the ethics of ambiguity, in reference to the comparison of Beauvoir’s “ The Ethics of Ambiguity” ( Beauvoir 1947) to her “The Blood of Others” (Beauvoir 1945). It is important to discuss the philosophies of her realization in both the books to understand her philosophical situation in “The Blood of Others”. Beauvoir, in “The Ethics of Ambiguity” stresses on five vital philosophical views. (1) The most important basis of all values is human freedom. (2) The implementation of human freedom can be a blissful practice. (3) Existential alteration divulges her prospect for freedom and similar actions yet, she also keeps in mind the possibility of others who are grounded by similar conditions. (4) She accepts full responsibility for her actions in order to exercise her freedom of choice to the utmost since she believes in the originality of the responsibility of one’s own action that manifests itself into the freedom of self as well as others. (5) One’s liberty can be in disagreement with another’s; hence violence is always a possible option. Beauvior’s stance is that there is no absolution in universal values of objectivity. Human action is where freedom surfaces from; thus, freedom is always placed and represented. her other philosophical theme states that the various choices of freedom might and can be at conflict and hence, violence is justified in similar conditions of conflict. Although “Blood of Others” was written before “The Ethics of Ambiguity”, the expressions of philosophy in both the works are comparable. Both the protagonists in “The Blood of Others” have difficulty in coming to terms with free action and taking the responsibility for the same. Both Jean Blomart and Hélène Bertrand face complexity in living genuinely. Jean, the son of a rich printer, finds difficulty in living in circumstances which acts as an obstacle to the liberty of others. Even in childhood, he feels the responsibility of living as a bourgeois. One can note that Beauvoir chose to stress on the industry of printers since she herself as a writer and the proletariat, used it in a personally individual manner. Ina an act of rebellion against his parents, Jean leaves home and begins to work as a typographer for a different printing corporation.His discomfort with his material possessions is evident when he sacrifices all of it and reduces them to bare necessities. He chooses to live in an insignificant apartment. But when his friend Marcel says to him, “your cultural background, your friends, your boyish, well-fed bourgeois health--you can't rid yourself of the past" (Beau-voir 1948, 28-29), he realizes that he cannot escape his past no matter how much he wants it. This is a Beauvarian subject which states that one’s past is embodied in one’s being and one must act according to that past. Jean discontinues his political movement in the Communist party when a friend of his is killed by the police in a meeting break up. Soon after, he jins the French Trade Union movement which does not have any political ties and remains neutral throughout, even the Spanish civil war. He is paralyzed by the weight of conscientiousness and responsibility, totally refraining from taking any political actions. Whereas, Hélène Bertrand, chooses to believe in pure freedom. She pays no attention to her stagnate situation, her being and her societal position. Her actions prove that she has no responsibility and that she doesn’t need it or any one else for that matter. "I need no one. I, exist, me, Hélène; isn't that enough?" (Beauvoir 1948, 47). Her implication is that all young people believe themselves to be the only perception that exists like Cartesian – solipsists. This observation brings to mind “The Crisis” where Husserl identifies René Descartes's first reflection an "examination question for philosophical children" (Husserl 1970, 75). Hélène is the namesake of Beauvoir’s sister and is structured on Natalie Sorokine, a young fellow student who she admired. Another central character in this work is Paul, Hélène’s childhood sweetheart who is a Communist and who grades all people on the basis of their economic place in society. She disagrees with him since she believes in the uniqueness of all individuals. For her, existence itself is a great source of happiness and joy. She is the very source and reason of the joie d'exister, which is the center of the real in Beauvoir’s “Ethics” (Beauvoir 1996, 135). Hélène chooses to leave Paul and chase Jean freely. But in her actions which states that she chooses to live freely, Hélène in fact lives through others. This is manifested when Jean declines to get into a relationship with her, she goes out to get drunk and then picks up a man by whom she gets pregnant. How she lives through Jean is when, he as a sense of duty aids her in an illegal abortion and pretends to be in love with her. Her life is nothing other than a complete dedication to him. Even when Jean Jean is drafted, she goes and gets him a desk job out of influence which makes Jean angry. Even the invasion of Paris sees her a removed and objective observer. But it is during the time of German invasion that Hélène finally perceives her life and being as a responsible individual. She encounters many situations and people that drives her to be responsible for them. There are many scenes that lead to her development towards maturity. The dilemmas of living under occupied circumstances is evident in the example below. There is a scene when Hélène is trying to return to Paris with many other citizens in an attempt to get back after they had fled the premises due to the German invasion. She sees a small baby with an underprivileged mother and gives up her seat in the car to them. She empathizes with the mother’s situation because she can imagine herself in the poor mother’s place. The weight of the child and the appeal of its eyes is felt deeply by her, since she has had an abortion herself. She also shares her last piece of bread with a young woman and her grandmother who are also in the same distressful condition as herself. They even approach a German soldier to give them a lift back to Paris. The scene when the girl clambers to the truck and lends her hand to Hélène to drag her up to the truck, calling her, "She's my sister,” bears resemblance to a Sartrian case “Notebooks for an Ethics” (Sartre 1992). He takes the example of lending his hand to a latecomer in a bus platform emphasizing that the very act itself of lending suggests that he wants to help the stranger (Sartre 1992, 285). The choice of both the parties to make themselves submissive in order to help others and to make their liberty possible is highlighted here. It is important to notice here that Beauvoir’s description and theme is much richer and complex. It is also to be observed that it has been written much earlier as well. The reason is that none of the women are passive or submissive in their actions of helping each other out. It is an act of equality and sisterhood and an instance when both deed and speech concur. I have called you my sister and that’s what you are even if it’s a lie spoken to the male oppressor. The truth is the action of the other woman who makes room for Hélène as her sister at that occasion. The soldier only extends his hand because he believes both of them to be biological sisters. The difference in the understanding of bonds between men and women are the ethical implications here. Women can create bonds, men only accept it if it has a biological, geographical or familial derivation. The second scene is that of when Hélène arrives back in Paris. There is a scene where she watches the Jewish children being rounded up before their deportation. There is a woman crying out to a policeman when he takes a little girl from her mother’s arms and places her in the bus. The girl’s name is Ruth and as the woman runs after the bus of children, Hélène wants to cry out to say that it is all wrong ;yet she stays rooted to the spot and is a silent spectator to the occurrences. Julia Kristeva has compared Beauvoir’s “Ruth scene” to the Old Testament as an interpretation of Ruth, the Moabite’s story. Ruth chooses to go with her mother-in-law Naomi’s home in Bethlehem after her own husband’s death. She says that even if death should come between them, this is what Yahweh should do for her (Ruth 2:16-17, quoted in Kristeva 1991, 71). Ruth is the great grandmother of David and in poiting out so, Kristeva is stressing on tolerance being the very center of the Jewish religion, the ability to welcome others both foreign and one’s own. Beauvoir’s is referring back to the previous scenes where the women have declared themselves to be sisters. Even when women can make promises and build relationships based on situations, French women look on as “Naomi” cries after the bus which takes her “Ruth” away. The masculine world not only devastates the relationships of women created by promises but can also destroy biological families since it is the same world which diminishes women and children to owned possessions. The law does not recognize them and will not so, if women choose to be disinterested bystanders. In “The Blood of Others”, Hélène has an interesting role to play as she changes her philosophies in accordance to the responsibilities and actions of other women whom she finds in the same predicament as herself. Jean, the other protagonist also realizes that he too must change according to the choices he makes and the actions he implicates. The fact that his act of freedom might violate others’ is gradually accepted by him. His real act of commitment is the part where he helps Hélène out with her abortion. He recognizes the fact that he is the responsible agent here even if he is not the biological father. Here, Beauvoir has affirmed her male character in a point of deliberate good deed. His moral intention is highlighted. as he cares for Hélène and her unborn child. Jean becomes an eventual part of the Resistance and his acts of violence are discussed in “The Ethics of Ambiguity”. The Resistance’s acts of rebellion were countered by the Germans by picking up hostages and citizens in random and killing them for every German soldier dead. Jean as a Resistance leader had to make crucial decisions that led to innocent lives lost in sabotage or the accusation of supporting the Nazis in the oppression of the Jews if they stopped. But blood would be shed in either case. This is the best illustration of the antinomy of individual human exploits. Jean is still clear of what he is doing even when he continues his Resistance acts of violence. What he does in the Resistance with the Frenchmen is similar to what the Jews are being subject to; innocent people taken away from their friends and family to participate in violence. He is aware of the consequences of his actions and he can help them out by replacing them or putting himself in their place but he cannot do that for he has his own place and his position is there. At the end of the novel, Hélène dies because of a wound she receives while she tries to rescue Paul, driving a truck, in an attempt to get him back to Jean. Even when Jean stops her from going since it is too dangerous, all she says is, "It is Paul" (Beauvoir 1948, 284). Here, she understands the revelation of taking responsibility for one’s own actions and that is exactly what she does. She chooses freely and for the first time, her choice does not center on Jean. In Sartre's Troubled Sleep (Sartre 1973), the union of Mathieu and Brunet is comparable to the union of Paul and Jean through Hélène’s death. Both Mathieu and Brunet are two incompatible, different thinking “intellectuals”. But the difference between them is so vast that they could never be on the same road on their way to freedom. Beauvoir’s main characters, represent two aspects of freedom as in relation to the dilemmas of war time and its philosophical representation. They represent the negative and positive sides of situated freedom. Hélène demonstrates that being in accordance with others permits her to identify with them, to perform to lessen their pain, and to try to generate a world where the choice of all will be accepted. This is a constructive feature of placed human free will. Jean deems himself and others as conceptual persons, items in time that restore or turn into blockages for each other. Paul analyses all persons as dispensable for the future of a socialist utopia. This is a negative facet of situated liberty. “Le Sang Des Autres” reveals and creates the philosophy and the necessity of free will in all times. Works Cited Beauvoir, Simone. D. The Blood of Others.1945.Trans. Roger Senhouse and Yvonne Moyse. New York: Alfred. A. Knopf. Beauvoir, Simone. D. The Ethics of Ambiguity.1996. Trans. Bernard Frechtman. New York: Philosophical Library, 1948. Reprint, New York: Citadel. Davis, C. “Simone de Beauvoir's "Le Sang Des Autres" and the Ethics of Failure.” January 1998. The Modern Language Review, Vol. 93, No. 1 (Jan., 1998), pp. 35-47. Holveck, Eleanor. The Blood of Others: A Novel Approach to The Ethics of Ambiguity. 1999. http://iupjournals.org/hypatia/hyp14-4.html Husserl, Edmund. Cartesian Meditations.1960. Trans. Dorion Cairns. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Kristeva, Julia. “Strangers to Ourselves.” 1991.Trans. Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia University Press. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Troubled Sleep.1973.Trans. Gerard Hopkins. New York: Vintage. Singer, Linda. Interpretation and retrieval: Rereading Beauvoir. 1985. Hypatia 3, a special issue of Women's Studies International Forum 8 (3): 231-38. Read More