What do you think?
Rate this book
Sartre: A Life
First edition. Clean. Dust jacket slightly worn.
572 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1986
About the author
Ronald Hayman
67 books14 followersRonald Hayman is a critic, dramatist, director and writer best known for his biographies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
May 12, 2010
Reading Hayman's fine, long biography was a bit like meeting someone at a reunion that you had met briefly, but heard a lot about when you were young. Hayman suggests that Sartre's significance was in more than his writing; it is in his life. This biography successfully makes that point. In making that point, however, it left me wondering what Sartre's significance was. At this point it seems that Sartre was a mirror reflecting the twentieth century. Reading Sartre's biography was catching a glimpse of the world I lived in.
June 7, 2008
Pedestrian 1986 biography with few real insights into the man or his thoughts but it does have the virtue of laying out the basic facts of Sartre's life clearly. One for the library as reference text but not otherwise particularly recommended.
January 7, 2025
Jean-Paul Sartre is one of the most exciting and influential intellectuals of the 20th century, and so I was happy to give "Writing Against" a try after finding it in a box of my brother's old philosophy books from university.
Published in 1986, six years after Sartre's death, this book has the feel of the academic biography of the era, the sort I recall from my own uni days in the 90s.
Recent personal explorations in the philosophy (ideology?) of existentialism lead me to more modern sources such as Sarah Bakewell's "At the Existentialist Cafe", and the fascinating Nietzsche bio "I am Dynamite". While I am a layperson in both philosophy and biography-reviewing, compared to these texts, "Writing Against" falls short.
Not to say this is uninformative or poorly written - this is a thoroughly researched, professional biography from critic and writer Ronald Hayman, who I was unfamiliar with previously. He has an extensive history writing this sort of literary biography - Sartre contemporaries or influences such as Nietzsche, Kafka and Samuel Beckett among them - underlining his expertise in the field.
But this text perhaps suffers from an excess of biographical sincerity and intent - Hayman does not seem to have learned a fact about Sartre that he felt he could omit, leading to a strangely incomplete picture of the man, a protagonist at times lost amidst the details.
An inveterate vacationer with numerous mistresses and friends around the world, details of Sartre's lunches in July with so-and-so start to blend together, alongside characters in his fiction and details of his social circle.
Sartre's career, as a writer of beautifully crafted plays, novels and short stories, rambling, amphetamine-fueled philosophical works, a massive, incomplete and uncategorizable biography of the novelist Flaubert, of political texts and countless public talks, renders him hard to pin down.
And given that, central to his primary philosophy - existentialism - he believes in the inherent meaninglessness of existence beyond the meaning that one gives it in the act of living it, Sartre's life in many ways was his philosophy, constantly rejecting the past, including his own ideas and work.
I was grateful for my prior knowledge of 20th century history, existentialism and Sartre himself, as Hayman assumes these from his reader. Despite my background, I found myself frustrated reading so many untranslated French titles, or references to so many minor background figures, hence my 'academic-eighties' implication earlier.
My primary attraction to Sartre is existentialism, as it was to the French public in the middle of the 20th century. Prior to World War 2, young Sarte was a minor figure, teaching and living modestly in Paris with life partner Simone de Beauvoir. The lively cafe culture before the war enchanted Sartre. Impractical to a fault, he spent money whenever he had it, often giving generously to friends, necessitating a modest lifestyle.
The cafes provided heat and light for working, and the social stimulation Sartre craved. Witty and fiercely intelligent, many were captivated by the man, including many young women, a situation accepted by de Beauvoir in an early public example of a non-monogamous relationship.
It was at the cafes that he found existentialism, and it is to these cafes that he returned after his stint in the French army, participating in resistance efforts, writing emancipatory works such as the celebrated play "No Exit", and very much giving voice to the gestalt of the era.
In the aftermath of World War 2, ethical questions and the meaning of life were prime concerns for many Europeans, and existentialism became something of an international phenomenon. Sartre originally resisted the term before ultimately embracing it, (unlike other major figures in the movement), rendering him the public face of the movement.
And thus began his life as a public intellectual. He launched a major literary magazine, spoke to wildly enthusiastic audiences around the world, and became involved with a variety of trendy mid-20th century causes.
Some of these have aged less well than others. Like many mid-century Marxists, he was too slow to see the evils of Stalin in Russia or the failures of communism in countries like China and Cuba, but consistent with Sartre's relentless intellect and refusal to remain static, he eventually denounces the actions of these governments.
And yet he was undeniably an apologist for the earlier excesses of communism. He denounced violence in the war years, before concluding that violence against a corrupt state was justified as France struggled with her colonial legacy in Algeria. Sartre was an early champion of Jews and the state of Israel, which brought him into conflict with anti-colonial colleagues. Always, he was willing to change his mind, eventually even renouncing his own Marxism.
The clearest strength of Hayman's biography is his illustration of Sartre's drive to 'write against'. Against his own literary legacy and philosophical beliefs, against the decadent philosophies he despised in peers and ancestors, against received wisdom itself.
It's a shame that Hayman is not as bold in his writing. Amidst the laundry-list of details, I found myself left wondering about key figures in Sartre's sphere such as de Beauvoir, friends such as Camus and Merleau-Ponty, and even Flaubert, his lifelong literary obsession.
And I found my philosophical insights less frequently than I would have liked. Hayman seems to have a better sense of Sartre's political and literary impact than he does existentialism. Tighter editing would have improved this for the non-academic, clarifying key ideas, but if you have the background and patience to work as you read, "Writing Against" is a thorough introduction to this remarkable man and his remarkable, frustrating, relentless life.
Published in 1986, six years after Sartre's death, this book has the feel of the academic biography of the era, the sort I recall from my own uni days in the 90s.
Recent personal explorations in the philosophy (ideology?) of existentialism lead me to more modern sources such as Sarah Bakewell's "At the Existentialist Cafe", and the fascinating Nietzsche bio "I am Dynamite". While I am a layperson in both philosophy and biography-reviewing, compared to these texts, "Writing Against" falls short.
Not to say this is uninformative or poorly written - this is a thoroughly researched, professional biography from critic and writer Ronald Hayman, who I was unfamiliar with previously. He has an extensive history writing this sort of literary biography - Sartre contemporaries or influences such as Nietzsche, Kafka and Samuel Beckett among them - underlining his expertise in the field.
But this text perhaps suffers from an excess of biographical sincerity and intent - Hayman does not seem to have learned a fact about Sartre that he felt he could omit, leading to a strangely incomplete picture of the man, a protagonist at times lost amidst the details.
An inveterate vacationer with numerous mistresses and friends around the world, details of Sartre's lunches in July with so-and-so start to blend together, alongside characters in his fiction and details of his social circle.
Sartre's career, as a writer of beautifully crafted plays, novels and short stories, rambling, amphetamine-fueled philosophical works, a massive, incomplete and uncategorizable biography of the novelist Flaubert, of political texts and countless public talks, renders him hard to pin down.
And given that, central to his primary philosophy - existentialism - he believes in the inherent meaninglessness of existence beyond the meaning that one gives it in the act of living it, Sartre's life in many ways was his philosophy, constantly rejecting the past, including his own ideas and work.
I was grateful for my prior knowledge of 20th century history, existentialism and Sartre himself, as Hayman assumes these from his reader. Despite my background, I found myself frustrated reading so many untranslated French titles, or references to so many minor background figures, hence my 'academic-eighties' implication earlier.
My primary attraction to Sartre is existentialism, as it was to the French public in the middle of the 20th century. Prior to World War 2, young Sarte was a minor figure, teaching and living modestly in Paris with life partner Simone de Beauvoir. The lively cafe culture before the war enchanted Sartre. Impractical to a fault, he spent money whenever he had it, often giving generously to friends, necessitating a modest lifestyle.
The cafes provided heat and light for working, and the social stimulation Sartre craved. Witty and fiercely intelligent, many were captivated by the man, including many young women, a situation accepted by de Beauvoir in an early public example of a non-monogamous relationship.
It was at the cafes that he found existentialism, and it is to these cafes that he returned after his stint in the French army, participating in resistance efforts, writing emancipatory works such as the celebrated play "No Exit", and very much giving voice to the gestalt of the era.
In the aftermath of World War 2, ethical questions and the meaning of life were prime concerns for many Europeans, and existentialism became something of an international phenomenon. Sartre originally resisted the term before ultimately embracing it, (unlike other major figures in the movement), rendering him the public face of the movement.
And thus began his life as a public intellectual. He launched a major literary magazine, spoke to wildly enthusiastic audiences around the world, and became involved with a variety of trendy mid-20th century causes.
Some of these have aged less well than others. Like many mid-century Marxists, he was too slow to see the evils of Stalin in Russia or the failures of communism in countries like China and Cuba, but consistent with Sartre's relentless intellect and refusal to remain static, he eventually denounces the actions of these governments.
And yet he was undeniably an apologist for the earlier excesses of communism. He denounced violence in the war years, before concluding that violence against a corrupt state was justified as France struggled with her colonial legacy in Algeria. Sartre was an early champion of Jews and the state of Israel, which brought him into conflict with anti-colonial colleagues. Always, he was willing to change his mind, eventually even renouncing his own Marxism.
The clearest strength of Hayman's biography is his illustration of Sartre's drive to 'write against'. Against his own literary legacy and philosophical beliefs, against the decadent philosophies he despised in peers and ancestors, against received wisdom itself.
It's a shame that Hayman is not as bold in his writing. Amidst the laundry-list of details, I found myself left wondering about key figures in Sartre's sphere such as de Beauvoir, friends such as Camus and Merleau-Ponty, and even Flaubert, his lifelong literary obsession.
And I found my philosophical insights less frequently than I would have liked. Hayman seems to have a better sense of Sartre's political and literary impact than he does existentialism. Tighter editing would have improved this for the non-academic, clarifying key ideas, but if you have the background and patience to work as you read, "Writing Against" is a thorough introduction to this remarkable man and his remarkable, frustrating, relentless life.
July 31, 2021
Good but it does a few things which make it trip over it's own feet. It goes into long digressions into analysis of Sartre's writing, mostly from a biographical standpoint, which gets in the way of the normal biographical narrative. Unfortunately, in a way, the analysis is brilliant and perhaps better than the straight biography, but it gets in the way. It's hard to go on a ten page digression on something Sartre was writing and then land on a paragraph that begins something like :...then Sartre took his usual Rome holiday with de Beauvoir" when you've totally lost track of what year it is or what happened last in the day to day life of Sartre. I kind of wish the straight biography and the biographical analysis of Sartre's thought and wiring had been two separate volumes. This would have also allowed more room to flesh out what was wrong with the biography, which is mostly that everyone else is just a name and not a substance. Even major figures in Sartre's life like de Beauvoir, Camus and Merleau-Ponty are cardboard cutouts and you could almost forget that they were figures of any importance besides being a part of Sartre's life. Not enough of his life or theirs is fleshed out enough to give any of them substance. Also, since we are now forty or more years removed from a lot of the events, some deeper explanation of the post-war politics in France (and occasionally the world) is occasionally needed. I felt lucky to know a bit about it and still often felt lost (especially after the events of May 1968).
All that aside, this is exactly the sort of biography that I like in its attitude. It has a deep admiration and love for it's subject, but has no problem calling out the bullshit. In fact this biographer seems to love the early fiction of Sartre more than anything else he wrote, but has deep insight into all the problems in Sartre's political, philosophical and biographical works, the good and (mostly) bad. The biographical works have been especially problematic to me, having recently finished the incoherent rambling that was the Genet "biography" and the unfinished mess of a Mallarmé biography.
All that aside, this is exactly the sort of biography that I like in its attitude. It has a deep admiration and love for it's subject, but has no problem calling out the bullshit. In fact this biographer seems to love the early fiction of Sartre more than anything else he wrote, but has deep insight into all the problems in Sartre's political, philosophical and biographical works, the good and (mostly) bad. The biographical works have been especially problematic to me, having recently finished the incoherent rambling that was the Genet "biography" and the unfinished mess of a Mallarmé biography.
January 30, 2021
A very difficult book to read. Ronald Hayman has put so much in the book from Sartre's own autobiography and novels that the reader finds it very difficult to distinguish. I didn't enjoy reading it.
Read
June 28, 2011This author also wrote biographies of Kafka, Nietzsche and Brecht.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews