Existentialism Books

Anyone who wants to understand their world better should definitely read this book. It is a step-by-step introduction to phenomenology, from Husserl and Heidegger all the way up to Derrida. Extremely well-written, this book helped me understand the main concepts and ideas of phenomenology. I highly recommend it those who want to look at the world in a different way.

This book advances the notion and necessity of a "committed" literature. Reading is not a light hobby, nor is writing. The function of a committed writer is to reveal the world so that every reader loses her innocence and assumes all her responsibilities in front of it.
The world, in the sartrian existentialism, is in fact the action's field of individuals. The writer shows the world as human project (which reminds the reader of what Heidegger said about the human existence as a project, Entwurf, which is pro-jected or geworfen).
And it is exactly because of the projectual nature of the world that individuals can be involved and engaged in a project of change.
Writing is then an "appeal" to the freedom of the readers so that they committ themself to make the world more and more impregnated with the freedom.
Every literary work suggests a concrete liberation starting from a particular alienation, because the man is always "in situation".
The theory expounded in "What is Literature?" excludes the poetry from committed arts. Only the prose can be committed because there the words are sign of an aspect of the reality, whereas the poetic words are auto-referenzial and so opaque toward the world. If you think of a surrealist, dadaist or futurist poetry, one can clearly understand this exclusion--though it's probably more difficult to agree with it in the case of Dante's poem.
Readers familiar with Heidegger's late writings about poetry, will not appreciate this part of the book.
Knowledge or at least familiarity with Sartre's "Being and Nothingness", his masterpiece, will help the reader to gain a better understanding of this interesting book.

When I first came across this outstanding book, I was a little confused as to how Nietzsche and Marx could be read as critics of the technological Enframing, as well as how Heidegger could be read as *politically* radical in any meaningful sense. However, after looking through the various sections dealing with these questions I can see much more clearly now that he is not simply deploying these thinkers in their original bodies, as I was originally thinking, but is instead hybridizing the most critical elements of each of them into a new kind of patchwork, thus allowing each to become much more radical than they would have been prior to this process. Clearly this can be an interesting and productive approach to doing critical theory after the 'death of the author' - there really is no good reason we cannot have for instance, an anarchist Marx, a Marxist Heidegger, or even say, a Nietzschean Virilio (despite his likely protestations). I especially like the way Kroker has been recently emphasizing the importance of bringing back the 'public intellectual', a desire reflected not only in his lecture series and texts accesible for free online, but also in the sympathetic discussion of the antiglobalization movement of the 'digital proletarians' and its unhappy 'double-movement' relationship of resistance to the 'virtual class' - in my mind it is absolutely crucial in our time to tie critical theory to actually existing political struggles and this book does that quite well - well worth the read!

Edmund Husserl is best known as the probably unintentional godfather of existentialism but Edie's review combines an inclusive review with notably
helpful critical analysis that makes this an invaluable introduction to phenomenology, both for the curious student and the professional philosopher. An interesting feature is Edie's discussion of the similarity of Husserl's language theory with the ideas of Noam Chomsky.
There's a great deal in Husserl's thought that didn't find expression in Sartre, Merleau-Ponty or Heidegger.

As a scholar whose intellectual life has been continually guided and inspired by the work of Merleau-Ponty for three and a half decades, I am overjoyed by the translation and publication of these seven radio lectures given by Merleau-Ponty in France in 1948. For the serious scholar, these are beautifully written and elegant statements about the heart of Merleau-Ponty's project to shift the ground of philosophy and phenomenology by diving into the depth of the perceptual world and turning to art as a touchstone for a reawakened perceptual experience. However, for the beginning philosophy student, they are wonderfully clear, engaging, and immediately comprehensible. For many of us, it has been frustrating that for the introductory student, much of Merleau-Ponty's oeuvre is intimidating or calls for a greater investment of concentration than many students are willing to make. This book is the perfect solution: it is brief, clear, and inviting. The perfect introduction... I can't recommend it highly enough! ... A sheer delight, as well as subtle, nuanced and evocative!

This was my bible during college. If you're on a search, given to deep thinking, and want exposure to many existentialist perspectives, this is you're book. I really care about these subjects, and read the book for my own edification. But the added benefit was the fertile ground of ideas it offered for term papers, etc. The book is laid out in sections -- precursors to existentialism, religious, atheist, psycological perspectives, etc, and offers brief selections from a great many authors. So one does not need to read this book page by page but instead can jump around. This is a great book.

Just in case, if one wants to ascertain the level of endurance human beings possess, he needs to go no further than read through the experiences at concentration camps as recalled by a survivor - Viktor Frankl - in this book.

And considering that a will to survive does not manifest only in situations where life is at stake, physically, but at various stages in life, where even smallest of problems can seem mammoth and wreck havoc in making life miserable at psychological level, the lessons contained in this book have vast practical applications, when it comes to understanding our survival instinct.

The basic principle which differentiates a survivor from a loser is well highlighted by the following quote, which is often cited by the author in the book - 'The one who has a why to live can bear almost any how.'

I would highly recommend this book and would suggest re-reading it a few times because it would better enable on to grasp and internalize the importance of the subject addressed in this book and appreciate the viewpoint of the author.

I first read this book in college many years ago as I was working on my degree in psychology. An excerpt from it is in John McCain's autobiographical book, Faith of My Fathers: A Family Memoir. I was glad to be reminded of this book which I had not read in years. I found my old copy on the shelf but I am also glad to learn it is still available.

The comparison between Frankl and McCain as prisoners is striking. Both of them emphasize the basic human need for meaning and purpose. Both share incredible horrors of prison camp as well as the human ability to look beyond present circumstances, to keep the horrid memories from continuing as sources of torture years after the actual experiences.
We can apply this ability to many of the unfortunate experiences in our lives. It is not only an attitude of forgive and forget, it is the need to keep the horrors or smaller angers from continuing to torment us.

It is more than a little frightening that there are people who deny that the Holocaust even happened. I hope you read Frankl's book. Fully grasp the reality of his day and apply it to today's needs and problems.

This is a wonderful book to read merely because of it's main message. Read it and find out the meaning of the title.

This book is incredibly inspiring, both from a theoretical and practical perspective. I highly recommend it for anyone who is in an "existential vacuum" as Frankl says, or for anyone who just wants to get more ideas about what the "meaning of life" might be.

The book is not only very well laid out and well written, but the content is rich. I highly recommend perusing it with a pen at hand to mark a response to a lot of his statements, then re-reading your own comments with his text... I think you'll learn a lot about yourself that way.

I bought this book because I was searching for yet another book on workplace bullying and another book came up in my search based on Frankl's book. I read the customer reviews on that book and one reviewer said something to the effect of, "If you want to read a book based on Viktor Frankl's opinion of how to get along at a bad work environment (like a Nazi death camp), why don't you just read Frankl's book?" So, that's where I started. I read it. Twice. Then I got out my computer and typed in passages that had meaning to me so I could re-read them during difficult times. I compressed the entire book down to about 10 pages, single spaced. I must admit that I consider myself a negative, often depressed sort of person, mostly because my work situation is so demoralizing. I was amazed by Frankl's coping mechanisms on how to get along in a difficult situation; every day meant multiple incidents of having to choose the correct path to avoid death or worse, making the choice to give up on your own life (suicide). He went through 5 years of that and lived to tell about it. It is a must read for everyone, particularly when you are having the hardest time of your life. I could tell that if I had read it as a college student, it wouldn't have the same meaning as now, when I am 50 and have had many ups and downs. I see everything at such a deeper level and appreciated this book so much more than I would have if I were younger. Briefly, the lessons in the book written 50 years ago still apply today. Here they are: Let luck be your guide. It's not what you know, it's who you know. Network with the equivalent of a one-step-up lateral (not your own) middle manager and they will help you when they can. Schmooze. Be kind to others. Don't complain, it doesn't help. You can't fix, deal with or appeal to a sadist, so don't try. Avoid sadists at all costs. Keep your mouth shut unless asked for your opinion and then be short and to the point. Praise, even when praise isn't deserved. Keep criticisms to yourself. Be inconspicuous. Work hard for the sake of doing a good job. Fantasize for escape. Everything can be taken away from you except for your past, so relish in it. When something good happens to you, write it down (keep a gratitude journal). Don't do anything that compromises your own values so you won't have regrets. Be careful who you abuse today because tomorrow they may be your master. You are not your job, your title or your position. You are a unique person loved by others. The only thing in life that really matters is the people you love and the people who love and need you. Love shared is eternal. Treat everyone with respect. The meaning of life is not what life can do for you, but what life expects of you; how you make the world a better place with your presence. The purpose of life is not happiness. The purpose of life is discovering what you can contribute to it. Save a slice of bread (or whatever is the only material thing that matters to you when there is nothing left) for later when you are really depressed and it's the only thing left that can get you through that difficult moment. (For me it's chocolate and a dark beer at the same time.) Apathy is the signaling of the beginning of the end of one's life. Everyone that you respect and look up to has human failings. Even tough guys cry. Suffering without purpose is meaningless. The larger the suffering, the bigger the lesson. There's lots more in the book for you to discover and it's an easy read.

The two main characters in the book have one thing in common, and that is they both don't like grown-ups (this despite one of the characters being a grown-up). In the book, the narrator's plane crashes in the middle of the desert, and he meets a little boy from another planet. In this particular universe, all the planets (including the little prince's) are inhabited by one person, except Earth (in which there are many people). The little prince's planet is so small, that the prince can go in a different time-zone just by moving his chair a little.

The little prince's planet has a rose which the prince loves a lot and takes care of by watering it. Now, the prince asks the narrator to draw a sheep, which he does, and a sheep comes to life in the prince's planet as if in a fantasy. The prince then wants to protect the rose from the sheep who would like to eat it, and the narrator draws a muzzle around the sheep's mouth, and that too becomes a reality in the prince's planet.

The best part of the book is when the little prince visits other planets like his, and meets their lone inhabitants, such as the king, the tippler, the businessman, the lamplighter and the geographer. The book starts out being a comedy but it becomes more emotional as it progresses until we reach the touching ending.

Ah, the amount of philosophy and beauty and imagination you can cram into a story this short! I have never read the original French version, but the English translation is as powerful as I could hope for, a surreal story of fantasy that speaks such eternal truths of love and life and the sheer faith of childhood.

We have a man who has put aside his childhood dreams to grow up. His plane crashes in the desert, and it is here he meets a young prince from a distant asteroid.

As we have the gritty real story of survival, we have a powerful and yet just as real story of this little boy's adventures and discovery.

It's a strong and complex parable, and also just a great story besides.

Reporter of little prince

I was reading a book which is named little prince. It is a French writer's writing.
The story of little prince is a fairy tale. The whole content is very interesting. The relater was a pilot, and he had an accident with his plane in the desert of sahara in six years ago. In that time, he met a little prince. He knew the little prince was from another celestial body though by talking to him. Then the little prince related to him everything about the celestial body where he came from, especial his rose. The writer retails the everything in another six celestial bodies besides the earth where the little prince had been gone. At last , the little prince gone. The writer was very sad, as a result he wrote a book to commemorate him.
On his all-alone journey, the little prince met different kinds of people, which includes a king, a conceited man, a tippler, a businessman, a lamplighter and a geographer. From these people he got a conclusion that the grown-ups are very odd. Following the first character, he went to the Sahara, on the earth.
Traveling on the earth, the little prince, who saw a garden of five-thousand roses, was overcome with astonishment and sadness, as he considered his rose was unique in the universe before. At that time a fox appeared. The fox, who told the little prince about the meaning of the word "tame", becomes his new friend. At the time to said farewell, the fox made him know that his rose was unique because she was his rose and tamed by him. From that the little prince began to treasure friendship and be responsible to his rose.
The little prince was a guy who was artless and always curious. He did everything seriously. But he also was alone; enjoy watching the sundown on the chair. He even was sad, he loved a rose deeply.
Maybe it's more significant for us to imagine, and for more, think over.

Written in 1943, this little book long ago attained the status of timeless classic. Yet, when discussed at our book club, our members could agree on little about the book's interpretation, sensibility, or even if it is appropriate for children. Some viewed it as an innovative form of literature requiring both a narrator and an inquisitor: What did that mean daddy? Where did the Little Prince go daddy? Does he love the rose? Who tamed whom? Some viewed it as a sort of religious work designed to teach our children "what is really important in life". Do you like butterflies? What sort of voice does she have? On the other hand, some felt that the book allowed children to question the wisdom of adults, especially parents. Is this one of those deals Like Text Messaging where kids get it but adults never can? Others, who knew something about the author's life---why should it matter--- read it as a sort of suicide note disguised as a children's book. It was during these darker moments that one wag commented that any work that can stimulate a discussion this gloomy had to be something really special. And, here's where we all started to agree. This is not a work that speaks for itself. It is, instead, a sort of catalyst that will produce different enlightenments for different readers and narrators. While Saint-Exupery's little book can open doors to wisdom, you have to enter by yourself. That so many continue to choose to do so is testimony to his greatness as a writer and a teacher.

I don't know how to begin to describe The Little Prince. In some ways it is like reviewing love itself. While many books have touched me emotionally, this short children's story has gone farther and deeper than any other. Everything about it is perfection: sweet, sad, flawed perfection. It is a tale of tears. It is about loving so much that you would embrace pain, even death, for the beloved, of loving sorrow because it comes from the beloved. It is about allowing yourself to be tamed even if it hurts.
Love is a goal in and of itself, a goal that the Little Prince learns to embrace at great cost to himself, but it is not the pure, perfect little one who I love most, nor the hardened but softening adult narrator. My true soul mate is the Fox who invites the Prince, pleads for the Prince, to tame him, to make him his own even though it brings tears and heartbreak. Oh! To love like that! That is the joy and sorrow of human existence, the gift of life. This book is perfection.

Just picked it up on a whim a year or so back - very interesting underrated book that we can all relate to in some manner, but still retains an air of mystery (since his "crime" is never disclosed) to make you think a bit.

Hopefully I don't sound pretentious, but shortly after I read Ivan Illich Deschooling Society. While justice systems aren't schools, I think the phrase "We confuse teaching with being taught...police for security...politics for order...and overall trained to confuse service in place of value" comes into play with The Trial.

Maybe I'm off, but to me, I think Kafka's main goal was illustrating this concept, even though it predates Illich by quite some time.

By stripping away the actual accusation, it doesn't become a book about stopping a murderer, thief, rapist, embezzler. If the accusation were revealed, you would be tricked into confusing service over value - ie you'd naturally feel the protagonist was guilty if accused of something, or you'd naturally feel the court is in perfect right to investigate a SPECIFIC CRIME...and automatically trust that it's order.

But without an accusation, all you are left to examine is what has been accomplished...ie you question the value, no longer blinded by the service. As the book progresses, you see it's just a show people are tricked buying into - judges are important by title alone not because they stop criminals, defendants are automatically in fear of something they haven't done and question their guilt despite it being ambiguous if it's good or bad, and people automatically judge you on what they're told vs. what they believe and abandon any practical thought of their own to the point where strangers can convict someone you've known for quite some time. In the end, you see little is accomplished and people are just following a 9-5 routine uninspired by actual productivity, actual right or wrong, and everyone trapped into the service, not value, mindset.

Interesting to see what others think,but to me, The Trial is a verbatim portrayal of Illich's books.

Kafka depicts a terrifying world, a man lost in a world of utter unintelligibility - it is the horror story of the 20th century, where man has sought to negate both his own intelligibility and that of the world. Kafka pre-empts the regimes of Stalin, Hitler and all the other crazies of the 20th Century.

So I read this book for a small book club and I could NOT make myself finish it. The whole "no paragraph" thing totally made it unreadable for me. I got through like 2 or 3 chapters before shuting it closed and throwing it on the floor. It had the potential to be a good story too. I say skip it.

Behind Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, this is perhaps the greatest book in which the author immerses his reader into the protagonist's soul. The damnable truth of the matter is there is little absurd in Kafka's "absurd" prose. This book grips you in the protagonist's fear, despair, despondency, boldness, and indecisiveness. He can trust no one, and everyone turns out to be his enemy. Just imagine how great the story would be if the author lived to complete it. Alas, maybe it would not be as good at all. Anyway, enjoy this classic tale, and learn how little stands between Kafka's written word, and current day.

I can't "review" The Trial. As George Steiner writes in the introduction: "The thought that there is anything fresh to be said of Franz Kafka's The Trial is implausible." I will however, comment on this particular edition. I have not read any other translation of the novel, but I was satisfied by the job done by Willa and Edwin Muir. The so-called "Definitive Edition" is worth having, not only for the classic translation, but also for the supplemental material: the introductory essay, unfinished chapters, passages deleted by Kafka, excerpts from Kafka's diaries, drawings by Kafka, and Max Brod's postscripts to previous editions.

The development of the characters during the months of plague is rich and well-explored. The contrasting viewpoints of each character drive home Camus' ideas. I can't recommend it more

if you like to feel depressed, then by all means read this book....it is dark and imaginary smells are those of death....yuk....totally discusting.

In light of the constant scare of chemical warfare we are faced with in this age where even the barbarians in the middle east have access to technology, this book still has much to offer.
There is one major theme in this novel and that is stay maintain a level head. Many of the casualties in the story are victimized by their own fear and irrational actions. From the rushed and fatal antidote to the brutallity inside the quarantined city.
This book also holds relevence to the fear that had gripped society in the 80's with the AIDS scare.

The Plague is another of Camus's magnificently constructed plots, a story created as a way to present his philosophy of life and existence.
The novel is about a plague that sweeps the Algerian city of Oran. Characters deal with the plague and the imprisonment they face because of the disease in different ways, but all characters mature greatly along the way. Interestingly, the ethical, noble, and charismatic characters like Dr. Rieux and Tarrou-just like Camus-are atheist. Both characters think all humans are bound up with a destiny of death, and that their existence has no higher spiritual dimension.

Another interesting transformation that Camus portrays is the religious point of view presented through Father Paneloux, who's explanation of the plague at the beginning was a punishment sent from God to the people of Oran for their sins, but when Father Paneloux sees innocent children are suffering, Paneloux's explanation of the plague changes to say it is a possible divine test from god of people's faith. Paneloux reaction when he got the disease was very predictable as a religious man. Even though, Camus always rejected religion, the way he dealt with Paneloux ending shows a tremendous respect to what humans choose to believe.

The process of maturity transforms each character based on their ethics and morals. Again, Camus has an outstanding way of analyzing humans and existence.

Not to ruin the pleasure of finding out; but the reader might enjoy the special reflections of Camus's own understanding of people on the development of Raymond Rambert, Joseph Grand, and Jean Tarrou. At the end of the novel Dr. Rieux, the narrator, presents a brilliant summary about human suffering and their ability to forget or ignore life's absurdity.

To an extent, all of Camus' novels are vehicles for his philosophy. Camus' philosophy begins with a simple idea, that life is absurd. Camus did not believe in God -- did not believe human actions hold any ultimate higher meaning -- he thought "death would undermine the value of anything that precedes it." From this, Camus drew that life was "absurd." In The Stranger, Camus illustrates this principle of the absurd. Only towards the end of The Stranger does Camus bring up another point in his worldview, and that is, that life is worth living. In The Plague, Camus introduces a concept he called "Revolt"; that is, revolting against the absurdity and meaningless of existence. It seems like an oxymoron, but here Camus wants to try to make sense of an absurd life.

There you have a brief overview of Camus' philosophical ideas. In the Plague, Camus briefly criticizes the Catholic Church. If you are a Christian who is particularly sensative to opposing world-views, you may find Camus' non-faith to be offensive. With an open mind, however, it is likely you will find much said by Camus that is true. Actually, this book often feels a lot like a christian parable.

If you want a straight and simple story as opposed to Camus' philosophical ideal laced story, then you might look elsewhere. Still, read the rest of my review. You may find the plot, which I will discuss next, is something that interests you regardless of philosophy.

The city of Oran is quarantined due to the outbreak of a deadly plague. No one is allowed to leave or enter. The narrative focuses on a handful of people living in the quarantined city, as well as on the general conditions of life in Oran while the plague wreaks havoc. Actually, the native begins just before the plot, and ends shortly after the quarantine is lifted. The characters discuss life during plague conditions. Their activities range from writing a book, to trying to escape, to discussing football, above all, the main focus is given to combating the plague. About the Oran--bureaucracy, religion, burial procedures, and quarantine conditions are popular plot points, as is attempting to define the general outlook of the populous during the hard times of Plague infestation. One of his common themes is separation from a loved one.

I hope I have been of some help. Personally, I find Camus' ideas to be captivating. I loved the Stranger and the Plague, and look forward to reading more of his books soon. Although the Plague reaches farther than the Stranger, I cannot conclude that it is the better of the two novels. Personally, I felt Stranger to be more to my liking; Stranger felt more natural and therefore more complete as a novel; whereas the people, places, and events of The Plague felt constructed as if only for novelistic purposes.

I strongly suggest you at least look at this The Plague, The Fall, Exile and the Kingdom, and Selected Essays (Everyman's Library) before you buy the Plague, or any other work by Albert Camus. Thought it is Five Dollars more expensive, it includes 4 books and 2 essays (The Plague, The Fall, Exile, Myth of Sisyphus, and Reflections on the Guillotine) and a helpfull introduction from David Bellos. It draws from two translators (Gilbert and O'Brien) and has a durrable cloth bound frame that should outlast any paperback.