What do you think?
Rate this book
She Came to Stay
Written in 1943, this book was written as an act of revenge against the woman who nearly destroyed the author's life with the celebrated philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre.
416 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1943
529 people are currently reading
11448 people want to read
About the author
Simone de Beauvoir
411 books10.9k followersSimone de Beauvoir was a French author and philosopher. She wrote novels, monographs on philosophy, political and social issues, essays, biographies, and an autobiography. She is now best known for her metaphysical novels, including She Came to Stay and The Mandarins, and for her 1949 treatise The Second Sex, a detailed analysis of women's oppression and a foundational tract of contemporary feminism.
----
Simone de Beauvoir est née à Paris le 9 janvier 1908. Elle fit ses études jusqu'au baccalauréat dans le très catholique cours Désir. Agrégée de philosophie en 1929, elle enseigna à Marseille, à Rouen et à Paris jusqu'en 1943. C'est L'Invitée (1943) qu'on doit considérer comme son véritable début littéraire. Viennent ensuite Le sang des autres (1945), Tous les hommes sont mortels (1946), Les Mandarins (prix Goncourt 1954), Les Belles Images (1966) et La Femme rompue (1968).
Simone de Beauvoir a écrit des mémoires où elle nous donne elle-même à connaître sa vie, son œuvre. L'ampleur de l'entreprise autobiographique trouve sa justification, son sens, dans une contradiction essentielle à l'écrivain : choisir lui fut toujours impossible entre le bonheur de vivre et la nécessité d'écrire ; d'une part la splendeur contingente, de l'autre la rigueur salvatrice. Faire de sa propre existence l'objet de son écriture, c'était en partie sortir de ce dilemme.
Outre le célèbre Deuxième sexe (1949) devenu l'ouvrage de référence du mouvement féministe mondial, l'œuvre théorique de Simone de Beauvoir comprend de nombreux essais philosophiques ou polémiques.
Après la mort de Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir a publié La Cérémonie des adieux (1981) et les Lettres au Castor (1983) qui rassemblent une partie de l'abondante correspondance qu'elle reçut de lui. Jusqu'au jour de sa mort, le 14 avril 1986, elle a collaboré activement à la revue fondée par Sartre et elle-même, Les Temps Modernes, et manifesté sous des formes diverses et innombrables sa solidarité avec le féminisme.
----
Simone de Beauvoir est née à Paris le 9 janvier 1908. Elle fit ses études jusqu'au baccalauréat dans le très catholique cours Désir. Agrégée de philosophie en 1929, elle enseigna à Marseille, à Rouen et à Paris jusqu'en 1943. C'est L'Invitée (1943) qu'on doit considérer comme son véritable début littéraire. Viennent ensuite Le sang des autres (1945), Tous les hommes sont mortels (1946), Les Mandarins (prix Goncourt 1954), Les Belles Images (1966) et La Femme rompue (1968).
Simone de Beauvoir a écrit des mémoires où elle nous donne elle-même à connaître sa vie, son œuvre. L'ampleur de l'entreprise autobiographique trouve sa justification, son sens, dans une contradiction essentielle à l'écrivain : choisir lui fut toujours impossible entre le bonheur de vivre et la nécessité d'écrire ; d'une part la splendeur contingente, de l'autre la rigueur salvatrice. Faire de sa propre existence l'objet de son écriture, c'était en partie sortir de ce dilemme.
Outre le célèbre Deuxième sexe (1949) devenu l'ouvrage de référence du mouvement féministe mondial, l'œuvre théorique de Simone de Beauvoir comprend de nombreux essais philosophiques ou polémiques.
Après la mort de Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir a publié La Cérémonie des adieux (1981) et les Lettres au Castor (1983) qui rassemblent une partie de l'abondante correspondance qu'elle reçut de lui. Jusqu'au jour de sa mort, le 14 avril 1986, elle a collaboré activement à la revue fondée par Sartre et elle-même, Les Temps Modernes, et manifesté sous des formes diverses et innombrables sa solidarité avec le féminisme.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 436 reviews
March 29, 2012
The subject matter of this novel by Simone De Beauvoir, who was the long-term partner of famed French existential philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, seems a somewhat odd one for a prominent feminist. The relationship between De Beauvoir and Sartre was not a conventional one- far from it in fact- and is explored in this story of a woman suffering an existential crisis caused by the introduction of another woman to form what becomes a rather bizarre menage à trois.
Françoise (quite obviously a representation of De Beauvoir) is a writer living in Paris who enjoys an open relationship with actor and director Pierre. Whilst Pierre enjoys numerous relationships with other women, Françoise remains content with the knowledge that he cares for none of them so much as he cares for her. Theirs is not a relationship of contrived romance or epic declarations, but of simplicity, comfort and fondness which in many ways is more touching and relatable than the all-consuming, in-your-face romances so often found in literature which, whilst very good at capturing the hearts of twenty-something women like me, but are, as much as it pains me to admit it, often totally ludicrous. Enter Xaviere: a tempestuous and, frankly, irritating young woman and protegée of Françoise who quickly attracts the attention of Pierre. Unlike his other affairs, Pierre ingratiates Xaviere into his life with Françoise and allows her to eventually take over.
As a firm feminist, the admission of depression bought on by the loss of a man might be seen by many as a brave one, but it must be said, a wholly understandable one. There is after all nothing in feminism which says you can't be in love with a man. Françoise undergoes something of a breakdown when she fears she has lost Pierre's affection, and De Beauvoir's sense of abandonment and betrayal is practically tangible as she sinks further and further into despair. Pierre and Xaviere seem to be two of the most emotionally stunted characters to be found in literature as they carry out their tempestuous love affair whilst making Françoise totally complicit in every single detail. Her eternal forced optimism that their life together can be happy, despite her obvious upset is truly heart-breaking at times, as is her slow realisation that it will never be the same again.
The book is often described as an act of revenge against the real-life woman who came between De Beauvoir and Sartre, but reading the book, it is not vengeful sentiments. Xaviere is not introduced as the seductive 'other woman' in an otherwise happy relationship, but a young girl struggling to find what she wants in life, whom Françoise, a woman already clearly wracked with insecurities, regards a younger sister figure, it is only the reader who sees her for what she truly is. The main purpose of the novel is not revenge, but catharsis. De Beauvoir examines the feelings that the relationship evoked in her from a philosophical perspective, not the perspective of a woman scorned. She wishes to explore why she feels the way she does with the reader, and perhaps never fully finds the answer
Françoise (quite obviously a representation of De Beauvoir) is a writer living in Paris who enjoys an open relationship with actor and director Pierre. Whilst Pierre enjoys numerous relationships with other women, Françoise remains content with the knowledge that he cares for none of them so much as he cares for her. Theirs is not a relationship of contrived romance or epic declarations, but of simplicity, comfort and fondness which in many ways is more touching and relatable than the all-consuming, in-your-face romances so often found in literature which, whilst very good at capturing the hearts of twenty-something women like me, but are, as much as it pains me to admit it, often totally ludicrous. Enter Xaviere: a tempestuous and, frankly, irritating young woman and protegée of Françoise who quickly attracts the attention of Pierre. Unlike his other affairs, Pierre ingratiates Xaviere into his life with Françoise and allows her to eventually take over.
As a firm feminist, the admission of depression bought on by the loss of a man might be seen by many as a brave one, but it must be said, a wholly understandable one. There is after all nothing in feminism which says you can't be in love with a man. Françoise undergoes something of a breakdown when she fears she has lost Pierre's affection, and De Beauvoir's sense of abandonment and betrayal is practically tangible as she sinks further and further into despair. Pierre and Xaviere seem to be two of the most emotionally stunted characters to be found in literature as they carry out their tempestuous love affair whilst making Françoise totally complicit in every single detail. Her eternal forced optimism that their life together can be happy, despite her obvious upset is truly heart-breaking at times, as is her slow realisation that it will never be the same again.
The book is often described as an act of revenge against the real-life woman who came between De Beauvoir and Sartre, but reading the book, it is not vengeful sentiments. Xaviere is not introduced as the seductive 'other woman' in an otherwise happy relationship, but a young girl struggling to find what she wants in life, whom Françoise, a woman already clearly wracked with insecurities, regards a younger sister figure, it is only the reader who sees her for what she truly is. The main purpose of the novel is not revenge, but catharsis. De Beauvoir examines the feelings that the relationship evoked in her from a philosophical perspective, not the perspective of a woman scorned. She wishes to explore why she feels the way she does with the reader, and perhaps never fully finds the answer
June 28, 2022
Your guy, whom you are totally smitten with, somehow talks you into agreeing that it's OK for him to extend your relationship into a menage a trois including another, younger woman, that you don't really like very much. You're seething with jealousy, but, because of various abstract principles, you can't even admit it to yourself in so many words. So you write a novel based on real events, where you describe her as the empty-headed little bitch she is, and conclude by killing her, which you always wanted to do in real life.
Well... possibly there's a little more to it than that, but it's fun!
Well... possibly there's a little more to it than that, but it's fun!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 8, 2019
I read this book for the first time about twenty years ago, when my French was considerably weaker than it is now. My overall evaluation is pretty much the same as in my original review - I'm not sure my improved command of the language has made much difference - but some new thoughts:
○ I kept changing my mind about whether it was a good bad novel (the overall story is surprisingly chicklittish, but it's well above average for that genre) or a bad good novel (it also has pretensions to be a piece of philosophy, but I didn't find it at all convincing as such).
○ As de Beauvoir says herself in her memoirs, the ending is terrible.
○ I don't know why this didn't register more strongly on the first reading, but Sartre's Huis clos, which came out within a few months of L'invitée, is clearly the same story. Huis clos is by far the better of the two: instead of de Beauvoir's clunky and overlong literal retelling, Sartre abstracts away the personal details and trims it down to its bare essentials. It's much more powerful that way.
○ You have to hand it to them. Most couples who'd been through this kind of experience would never have spoken to each other again, but they both managed to turn it into worthwhile pieces of art and stayed best friends. Chapeau.
○ I kept changing my mind about whether it was a good bad novel (the overall story is surprisingly chicklittish, but it's well above average for that genre) or a bad good novel (it also has pretensions to be a piece of philosophy, but I didn't find it at all convincing as such).
○ As de Beauvoir says herself in her memoirs, the ending is terrible.
○ I don't know why this didn't register more strongly on the first reading, but Sartre's Huis clos, which came out within a few months of L'invitée, is clearly the same story. Huis clos is by far the better of the two: instead of de Beauvoir's clunky and overlong literal retelling, Sartre abstracts away the personal details and trims it down to its bare essentials. It's much more powerful that way.
○ You have to hand it to them. Most couples who'd been through this kind of experience would never have spoken to each other again, but they both managed to turn it into worthwhile pieces of art and stayed best friends. Chapeau.
August 7, 2020
Love in theory is not the same as love in practice - you can wrap feelings and principles in beautiful intellectual discourses about freedom, acceptance and bonds that transcend social conventions only to have the values you were brought up with rear their ugly heads and bite you in the ass when you are confronted with the reality than the man you love wants to sleep with someone else - and that your philosophical rhetoric gave him permission to do just that, and that you'd be a hypocrite for not letting him get away with it. What's a girl to do in a situation like this? Change the names and details and write a novel about it, obviously!
"L'Invitée" ("She Came to Stay") is not exactly a roman à clef, but it is heavily autobiographical, as Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre really were in a strange ménage à trois with a younger woman named Olga Kosakiewicz (and eventually Olga's sister Wanda) for many years. Their rejection of bourgeois ideals of marriage and conventional relationships, their yearning for living authentically and honestly, combined with Sartre's insatiable appetite for sexual conquest, led them into a very complicated place, that De Beauvoir could only untangle and resolve for herself by fictionalizing it into her first novel (Sartre also wrote about it, in his play "Huis Clos").
Is it worse to suffer the humiliation of not being the one and only, or the bruised ego of letting everyone know you are jealous - even if you despise the very notion of jealousy? The character of Françoise wrestles with that idea as her friendship with the young Xavière throws a wrench into her relationship with fellow writer Pierre: Xavière wants them both to herself, and doesn’t care about their already existing bond, and how her (often extremely childish and selfish) actions fragilize the lovers’ bond. While that story is fascinating, I must say that I simply couldn’t see what Françoise and Pierre see in Xavière: I found her unbearably fickle, stupid and immature – and I wondered if the non-fictional Olga was as much of an insufferable brat. Why two intelligent and sophisticated adults could compromise their relationship over the whims of an infantile idiot is beyond me.
As usual with De Beauvoir, the gorgeous prose makes this book amazing right off the bat. No matter how flawed she might have been, Simone had a beautiful strong voice and it translated so well on the page - and she was very far ahead of her time! I was surprised by the frankness of the emotions laid out on the page, considering it was originally published in 1943! Whether or not she was riding Sartre's coattails to get published hardly matters as she was the superior writer of the pair.
Somewhere between 4 and 5 stars.
"L'Invitée" ("She Came to Stay") is not exactly a roman à clef, but it is heavily autobiographical, as Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre really were in a strange ménage à trois with a younger woman named Olga Kosakiewicz (and eventually Olga's sister Wanda) for many years. Their rejection of bourgeois ideals of marriage and conventional relationships, their yearning for living authentically and honestly, combined with Sartre's insatiable appetite for sexual conquest, led them into a very complicated place, that De Beauvoir could only untangle and resolve for herself by fictionalizing it into her first novel (Sartre also wrote about it, in his play "Huis Clos").
Is it worse to suffer the humiliation of not being the one and only, or the bruised ego of letting everyone know you are jealous - even if you despise the very notion of jealousy? The character of Françoise wrestles with that idea as her friendship with the young Xavière throws a wrench into her relationship with fellow writer Pierre: Xavière wants them both to herself, and doesn’t care about their already existing bond, and how her (often extremely childish and selfish) actions fragilize the lovers’ bond. While that story is fascinating, I must say that I simply couldn’t see what Françoise and Pierre see in Xavière: I found her unbearably fickle, stupid and immature – and I wondered if the non-fictional Olga was as much of an insufferable brat. Why two intelligent and sophisticated adults could compromise their relationship over the whims of an infantile idiot is beyond me.
As usual with De Beauvoir, the gorgeous prose makes this book amazing right off the bat. No matter how flawed she might have been, Simone had a beautiful strong voice and it translated so well on the page - and she was very far ahead of her time! I was surprised by the frankness of the emotions laid out on the page, considering it was originally published in 1943! Whether or not she was riding Sartre's coattails to get published hardly matters as she was the superior writer of the pair.
Somewhere between 4 and 5 stars.
February 11, 2013
I was trembling with anger during the entire book. The characters are intentionally led to the extreme of their emotions. Simone did this to question love and relationships: how tolerant and honest can you get? Francoise couldn't bare to be honest, but she was extremely tolerant. Did she suffer her "tolerant" humiliation because of love or pride? She wanted to hide this petty human emotion that consumed her and that's why she was silent until the end. She couldn't bare the thought of someone knowing that she was jealous.
October 21, 2021
A 40s novel in which the open relationship project between Francoise and Pierre is threatened by the arrival of the young Xavier. On one level I am always fascinated with these period novels set in Paris where the characters are found at La Dome on boulevard du Montparnasse at 3 or 4 o’clock in the morning sitting around a table, listening to jazz , ordering another bottle of Chateau Margot, and talking about the meaning of life, and how they venture out into the early morning to walk the Parisian streets and drop into La Rotund for an early morning coffee. I can soak this world up forever. As for the story, I am well aware that one should read this from a metaphysical standpoint, and when I managed to do so, it proved interesting. Unfortunately, I kept being dragged into the rather mundane psychological drama being played out and that was much was less satisfying.
February 8, 2016
VOLUPTUOUS DOCILITY AND SYLLABISM
"Xaviere was watching Pierre with a kind of voluptuous docility..." (page 238)
"Her fresh lips slowly plucked off each syllable of the word: vol..up..tu..ous." (page 151)
Simone de Beauvoir's novel was first published in French in 1943 and in English in 1949. Nabokov's famous syllabic enunciation of "Lo-lee-ta" appeared in the novel "Lolita", which was written in English, and first published in 1955 in Paris, in 1958 in New York City, and in 1959 in London.
SHE CAME TO STAY (AND WOULDN'T GO AWAY)
[A Three Act Play with an Alternative Ending]
ACT ONE:
A booth in the brasserie at la Coupole on the Boulevard du Montparnasse.
XAVIERE: You have nice breasts.
FRANCOISE: They used to be nice, but I’m 26 now.
XAVIERE: I’m only 17.
FRANCOISE: Your breasts are so much nicer. More pert.
XAVIERE: I’d love to kiss yours.
FRANCOISE: You will, in time.
XAVIERE: I’d like to kiss you now. Your lips, I mean. Here.
FRANCOISE: You can – but subject to one small condition.
XAVIERE: What’s that? Would I like it?
FRANCOISE: I’m sure you would.
XAVIERE: Well?
FRANCOISE: I’d like you to kiss Pierre as well. Both of us.
XAVIERE: A menage a trois? A triad?
FRANCOISE: Everything would be so easy.
XAVIERE: I can't imagine how it would work. I haven't slept with one person yet, let alone two.
FRANCOISE: A couple who are closely united is something beautiful enough, but how much more wonderful would be a trio who loved each other with all their being!
XAVIERE: Um...
PIERRE: Well, well, my two favourite women!
XAVIERE: We were just talking about that!
FRANCOISE: Pierre, you're not one man between two women, but all three of us could form something very special...
PIERRE: ...something difficult?
FRANCOISE: Perhaps, but something which could be beautiful and happy.
PIERRE: Well, count me in then!
ACT TWO:
PIERRE: Xaviere, I want nothing more from you than what I have, but I could not bear that anyone else should have more.
FRANCOISE: She's no more than a capricious child, Pierre.
PIERRE: No, don't believe a word of it, Xaviere...you’re a wild and exacting soul. I love you. I want to sleep with you.
XAVIERE: I'm having a wonderful time with you, Pierre.
FRANCOISE: Beware, she wants to take revenge on you for the desire you arouse in her.
la Coupole
ACT THREE:
PIERRE: Why are you so morose when I'm so much in love with you?
XAVIERE: The pleasures of the mind are repulsive to me.
PIERRE: Go ahead, tell me frankly that you don't love me.
FRANCOISE: Give her time to breathe, Pierre, you're badgering her.
XAVIERE: I don’t love you. I never loved you.
PIERRE: You just don’t know how to receive my love. Yet.
FRANCOISE: What exasperates you so much is that Pierre and I are always on such good terms.
XAVIERE: You both oppress me.
PIERRE: I no longer enjoy this affair. It’s frivolous and wasteful.
XAVIERE: I'm such a coward. I ought to kill myself, I ought to have done it a long time ago. I will do it.
PIERRE: You’re just trying to make me feel guilty.
XAVIERE: I could kill myself right now, if I wanted to.
FRANCOISE: Don’t do it. You mustn’t!
XAVIERE: Why not?
FRANCOISE: Because I want to.
XAVIERE: Are you joking?
FRANCOISE: You’re a bitch. I hate you. You just wanted to take Pierre away from me. I could kill you.
XAVIERE: Here’s my gun. Be my guest!
FRANCOISE: What have you got a gun for?
XAVIERE: I thought I might have to shoot Pierre.
PIERRE: What? I’m going to the bar. Does anybody else want a drink?
XAVIERE: No thanks.
FRANCOISE: That’s a plastic pistol. A theatre prop, if I’m not mistaken!
XAVIERE: I only wanted to scare him.
FRANCOISE: This is a gun. Feel it.
XAVIERE: It’s heavy.
FRANCOISE: That’s because it’s real.
XAVIERE: Francoise, I’m frightened. Put it back on the table. Where we can both see it.
FRANCOISE: OK, but remember it’s loaded. And there’s only one bullet.
The lights go off. A woman screams like a banshee and a solitary gunshot rings out.
PIERRE: Francoise? Xaviere?
The curtains come down.
Cover painting: "Yvonne in Green Dress" (1938) by Guy Pene Du Bois
THE INCIPIENT LANGUAGE OF EXISTENTIALISM:
"L'Invitee"
The English title has different connotations to the original French title.
The French title implies that Xaviere was invited, which was the case, both with respect to her living arrangements and the formation of the triad.
In both cases, Francoise seems to have been the inviter or instigator of the relationship.
Correspondence with Reality
There are approximations, if not precise equations, with real life characters.
Francoise is most obviously modelled on de Beauvoir.
Pierre is Sartre, who was writing "Being and Nothingness" at the same time. (The character "Pierre" appears in some of that work's illustrations of philosophical principles.)
Xaviere is a conflation of the sisters Olga and Wanda Kosakiewicz/Kosakievicz.
The novel is dedicated to
The novel was set in the 12 months immediately before World War II. The real events occurred during the period 1932 to 1937, although the friendships continued subsequently.
Pierre
Pierre comes across as warm, but naive and often manipulative, if not necessarily malicious. His interest in sex and sensuality is almost academic. He seemed to have sex, so that he could think about it then and afterwards. To the extent that Pierre ever suffers, what hurts is his ego or vanity, rather than his feelings.
Francoise
Francoise is genuinely intellectually committed to both a relationship with Pierre and whatever other relationships occur. However, she is also genuinely hurt by what happens in these relationships.
She is a much more sensitive person than she comes across:
"Gerbert wondered why people usually thought Francoise looked stern and intimidating; she did not try to act girlishly, but her face was full of gaiety, life and healthy zest; she seemed so completely at ease that it made you feel perfectly at ease when you were near her."
She is the most generous of the core three characters. However, it worries me that she seems to bring women to Pierre, almost as if they are her offerings to him. Inevitably, she hurts when they distract his attention away from her.
Xaviere
Xaviere is probably almost as egotistical as Pierre, only she is much younger (a "mere gamine", as de Beauvoir would describe her in her memoirs), less experienced and less intellectually gifted. She causes chaos precisely because she doesn't yet know what she wants.
Consciously or unconsciously, she brings out the worst in Pierre, even though he projects the fault on to her:
"It's not my fault if the thoughts you inspire are filthy."
Of course, it isn't necessarily or always Xaviere who is inspiring anything in Pierre or anybody else.
The Triad
A triad necessarily and inevitably splits each being in two, at least temporally. It's almost impossible to give one's whole being to two separate people, at the same time:
"It can't spoil anything vital, but the fact is that when I'm worried because of her, I neglect you. When I look at her I don't look at you. I wonder if it wouldn't be better to call a halt to this affair. It's not love that I feel for her: it savours more of superstition. If she resists, I become obstinate, but as soon as I'm sure of her, I become indifferent about her."
It's tempting to describe Olga as the most self-absorbed of the three. However, is she any different from the others? Each is out to satisfy and protect their own self or "I" with the help or at the expense of the "other", well, at least two others in fact.
Closing the Book on Real Life
It's interesting that de Beauvoir uses the novel to document and explore her actual relationships, so that she can better understand what happened. She also uses the fictional denouement to obtain a more satisfactory closure or punctuation mark with respect to the sentence she served.
Below are passages that reflect or anticipate some of the philosophical concerns of both de Beauvoir and Sartre in their non-fiction.
We Two Are One
"It's impossible to talk about faithfulness and unfaithfulness where we are concerned...You and I are simply one. That's the truth, you know. Neither of us can be described without the other."
"You and Francoise have a way of pooling everything."
"Pierre still repeated: 'We are one,' but now she had discovered that he lived only for himself. Without losing its perfect form, their love, their life, was slowly losing its substance, like those huge, apparently invulnerable cocoons, whose soft integument yet conceals microscopic worms that painstakingly consume them...
Sex and Sensuality
”What exactly did [Pierre] want of Xaviere? Polite [encounters] on the hotel staircase? An affaire? Love? Friendship?”
"I wanted to give you more than you were prepared to accept. And, if one is sincere, to give is a way of insisting on some return."
'I no longer enjoy these affaires,' said Pierre. 'It's not as if I were a great sensualist, I don't even have that excuse!...The truth is that I enjoy the early stages.'
“You know I'm no sensualist. All I ask is to be able at any time to see an expression like the one I saw last night, and moments when I alone in this world exist for her.”
"Pure sensuality does not interest me...and besides, does pure sensuality even have a meaning?"
"[Xaviere's] cheeks were flushed with anger. Her face was extremely attractive, with such subtly variable shadings that it seemed not to be composed of flesh, but rather of ecstasy, of bitterness, of sorrow, to which the eye became magically sensitive. Yet, despite this ethereal transparency, the outlines of her nose and mouth were extremely sensual.”
”...I shall sleep with other men...Sexual faithfulness is perfectly ridiculous. It leads to pure slavery. I don't understand how you can tolerate it.”
”I've no ardent desire to see much of people, that's quite true.”
Freedom
”The fact remains that I love you. Do you really think that freedom consists in questioning things at every turn? We've often said, apropos of Xaviere, that this way was the way to become the slaves of our slightest moods...”
”She smiled at him. What was she uneasy about? He could easily cross-examine himself, he could question the world. She knew she had nothing to fear from this freedom that separated him from her. Nothing would ever change their love.”
”She had loved him too blindly, and for too long, for what she received from him; but she had promised herself to love him for himself, and even in that condition of freedom of which he was now availing himself to escape from her; she would not stumble over the first obstacle.”
Being and Existence
"Elsewhere something was in the process of existing without her being there, and it was that thing which really mattered. This time, she couldn't say: 'It doesn't know it exists, it doesn't exist.' For it did know."
”Xaviere existed and was not to be refuted, all the risks involved in her existence had to be accepted.”
"It's you who always deliberately introduce a kind of Germanic ponderosity into our discussions."
The Clash of Two Existences or Beings
"Henceforth, Xaviere belonged to Pierre."
”...she really makes me uncomfortable, that creature, with her philosophy which makes us less than dust. It seems to me that if she loved me I'd be as sure of myself as I was before. I would feel that I'd compelled her approval. To make her love me is to dominate her, to enter into her world and there conquer in accordance with her own values. You know this is the kind of victory for which I have an insane need."
”Xaviere's existence had always threatened her, even beyond the very limits of her life, and it was this old anguish that she recognised with terror.”
“How was a conscience not her own capable of existing? If it were so, then it was she who was not existing. She repeated 'She or I.'”
At One with the World
”At last the circle of violent emotion and anxiety, in which Xaviere's sorcery imprisoned them, had been broken, and they found themselves once more at one at the central point of the vast world. Behind them stretched the limitless past. Continents and oceans were spread like huge sheets over the surface of the globe, and the miraculous certainty of existing amid this incalculable wealth overran even the too narrow bounds of space and time.”
SOUNDTRACK:
"Xaviere was watching Pierre with a kind of voluptuous docility..." (page 238)
"Her fresh lips slowly plucked off each syllable of the word: vol..up..tu..ous." (page 151)
Simone de Beauvoir's novel was first published in French in 1943 and in English in 1949. Nabokov's famous syllabic enunciation of "Lo-lee-ta" appeared in the novel "Lolita", which was written in English, and first published in 1955 in Paris, in 1958 in New York City, and in 1959 in London.
SHE CAME TO STAY (AND WOULDN'T GO AWAY)
[A Three Act Play with an Alternative Ending]
ACT ONE:
A booth in the brasserie at la Coupole on the Boulevard du Montparnasse.
XAVIERE: You have nice breasts.
FRANCOISE: They used to be nice, but I’m 26 now.
XAVIERE: I’m only 17.
FRANCOISE: Your breasts are so much nicer. More pert.
XAVIERE: I’d love to kiss yours.
FRANCOISE: You will, in time.
XAVIERE: I’d like to kiss you now. Your lips, I mean. Here.
FRANCOISE: You can – but subject to one small condition.
XAVIERE: What’s that? Would I like it?
FRANCOISE: I’m sure you would.
XAVIERE: Well?
FRANCOISE: I’d like you to kiss Pierre as well. Both of us.
XAVIERE: A menage a trois? A triad?
FRANCOISE: Everything would be so easy.
XAVIERE: I can't imagine how it would work. I haven't slept with one person yet, let alone two.
FRANCOISE: A couple who are closely united is something beautiful enough, but how much more wonderful would be a trio who loved each other with all their being!
XAVIERE: Um...
PIERRE: Well, well, my two favourite women!
XAVIERE: We were just talking about that!
FRANCOISE: Pierre, you're not one man between two women, but all three of us could form something very special...
PIERRE: ...something difficult?
FRANCOISE: Perhaps, but something which could be beautiful and happy.
PIERRE: Well, count me in then!
ACT TWO:
PIERRE: Xaviere, I want nothing more from you than what I have, but I could not bear that anyone else should have more.
FRANCOISE: She's no more than a capricious child, Pierre.
PIERRE: No, don't believe a word of it, Xaviere...you’re a wild and exacting soul. I love you. I want to sleep with you.
XAVIERE: I'm having a wonderful time with you, Pierre.
FRANCOISE: Beware, she wants to take revenge on you for the desire you arouse in her.
la Coupole
ACT THREE:
PIERRE: Why are you so morose when I'm so much in love with you?
XAVIERE: The pleasures of the mind are repulsive to me.
PIERRE: Go ahead, tell me frankly that you don't love me.
FRANCOISE: Give her time to breathe, Pierre, you're badgering her.
XAVIERE: I don’t love you. I never loved you.
PIERRE: You just don’t know how to receive my love. Yet.
FRANCOISE: What exasperates you so much is that Pierre and I are always on such good terms.
XAVIERE: You both oppress me.
PIERRE: I no longer enjoy this affair. It’s frivolous and wasteful.
XAVIERE: I'm such a coward. I ought to kill myself, I ought to have done it a long time ago. I will do it.
PIERRE: You’re just trying to make me feel guilty.
XAVIERE: I could kill myself right now, if I wanted to.
FRANCOISE: Don’t do it. You mustn’t!
XAVIERE: Why not?
FRANCOISE: Because I want to.
XAVIERE: Are you joking?
FRANCOISE: You’re a bitch. I hate you. You just wanted to take Pierre away from me. I could kill you.
XAVIERE: Here’s my gun. Be my guest!
FRANCOISE: What have you got a gun for?
XAVIERE: I thought I might have to shoot Pierre.
PIERRE: What? I’m going to the bar. Does anybody else want a drink?
XAVIERE: No thanks.
FRANCOISE: That’s a plastic pistol. A theatre prop, if I’m not mistaken!
XAVIERE: I only wanted to scare him.
FRANCOISE: This is a gun. Feel it.
XAVIERE: It’s heavy.
FRANCOISE: That’s because it’s real.
XAVIERE: Francoise, I’m frightened. Put it back on the table. Where we can both see it.
FRANCOISE: OK, but remember it’s loaded. And there’s only one bullet.
The lights go off. A woman screams like a banshee and a solitary gunshot rings out.
PIERRE: Francoise? Xaviere?
The curtains come down.
Cover painting: "Yvonne in Green Dress" (1938) by Guy Pene Du Bois
THE INCIPIENT LANGUAGE OF EXISTENTIALISM:
"L'Invitee"
The English title has different connotations to the original French title.
The French title implies that Xaviere was invited, which was the case, both with respect to her living arrangements and the formation of the triad.
In both cases, Francoise seems to have been the inviter or instigator of the relationship.
Correspondence with Reality
There are approximations, if not precise equations, with real life characters.
Francoise is most obviously modelled on de Beauvoir.
Pierre is Sartre, who was writing "Being and Nothingness" at the same time. (The character "Pierre" appears in some of that work's illustrations of philosophical principles.)
Xaviere is a conflation of the sisters Olga and Wanda Kosakiewicz/Kosakievicz.
The novel is dedicated to
The novel was set in the 12 months immediately before World War II. The real events occurred during the period 1932 to 1937, although the friendships continued subsequently.
Pierre
Pierre comes across as warm, but naive and often manipulative, if not necessarily malicious. His interest in sex and sensuality is almost academic. He seemed to have sex, so that he could think about it then and afterwards. To the extent that Pierre ever suffers, what hurts is his ego or vanity, rather than his feelings.
Francoise
Francoise is genuinely intellectually committed to both a relationship with Pierre and whatever other relationships occur. However, she is also genuinely hurt by what happens in these relationships.
She is a much more sensitive person than she comes across:
"Gerbert wondered why people usually thought Francoise looked stern and intimidating; she did not try to act girlishly, but her face was full of gaiety, life and healthy zest; she seemed so completely at ease that it made you feel perfectly at ease when you were near her."
She is the most generous of the core three characters. However, it worries me that she seems to bring women to Pierre, almost as if they are her offerings to him. Inevitably, she hurts when they distract his attention away from her.
Xaviere
Xaviere is probably almost as egotistical as Pierre, only she is much younger (a "mere gamine", as de Beauvoir would describe her in her memoirs), less experienced and less intellectually gifted. She causes chaos precisely because she doesn't yet know what she wants.
Consciously or unconsciously, she brings out the worst in Pierre, even though he projects the fault on to her:
"It's not my fault if the thoughts you inspire are filthy."
Of course, it isn't necessarily or always Xaviere who is inspiring anything in Pierre or anybody else.
The Triad
A triad necessarily and inevitably splits each being in two, at least temporally. It's almost impossible to give one's whole being to two separate people, at the same time:
"It can't spoil anything vital, but the fact is that when I'm worried because of her, I neglect you. When I look at her I don't look at you. I wonder if it wouldn't be better to call a halt to this affair. It's not love that I feel for her: it savours more of superstition. If she resists, I become obstinate, but as soon as I'm sure of her, I become indifferent about her."
It's tempting to describe Olga as the most self-absorbed of the three. However, is she any different from the others? Each is out to satisfy and protect their own self or "I" with the help or at the expense of the "other", well, at least two others in fact.
Closing the Book on Real Life
It's interesting that de Beauvoir uses the novel to document and explore her actual relationships, so that she can better understand what happened. She also uses the fictional denouement to obtain a more satisfactory closure or punctuation mark with respect to the sentence she served.
Below are passages that reflect or anticipate some of the philosophical concerns of both de Beauvoir and Sartre in their non-fiction.
We Two Are One
"It's impossible to talk about faithfulness and unfaithfulness where we are concerned...You and I are simply one. That's the truth, you know. Neither of us can be described without the other."
"You and Francoise have a way of pooling everything."
"Pierre still repeated: 'We are one,' but now she had discovered that he lived only for himself. Without losing its perfect form, their love, their life, was slowly losing its substance, like those huge, apparently invulnerable cocoons, whose soft integument yet conceals microscopic worms that painstakingly consume them...
Sex and Sensuality
”What exactly did [Pierre] want of Xaviere? Polite [encounters] on the hotel staircase? An affaire? Love? Friendship?”
"I wanted to give you more than you were prepared to accept. And, if one is sincere, to give is a way of insisting on some return."
'I no longer enjoy these affaires,' said Pierre. 'It's not as if I were a great sensualist, I don't even have that excuse!...The truth is that I enjoy the early stages.'
“You know I'm no sensualist. All I ask is to be able at any time to see an expression like the one I saw last night, and moments when I alone in this world exist for her.”
"Pure sensuality does not interest me...and besides, does pure sensuality even have a meaning?"
"[Xaviere's] cheeks were flushed with anger. Her face was extremely attractive, with such subtly variable shadings that it seemed not to be composed of flesh, but rather of ecstasy, of bitterness, of sorrow, to which the eye became magically sensitive. Yet, despite this ethereal transparency, the outlines of her nose and mouth were extremely sensual.”
”...I shall sleep with other men...Sexual faithfulness is perfectly ridiculous. It leads to pure slavery. I don't understand how you can tolerate it.”
”I've no ardent desire to see much of people, that's quite true.”
Freedom
”The fact remains that I love you. Do you really think that freedom consists in questioning things at every turn? We've often said, apropos of Xaviere, that this way was the way to become the slaves of our slightest moods...”
”She smiled at him. What was she uneasy about? He could easily cross-examine himself, he could question the world. She knew she had nothing to fear from this freedom that separated him from her. Nothing would ever change their love.”
”She had loved him too blindly, and for too long, for what she received from him; but she had promised herself to love him for himself, and even in that condition of freedom of which he was now availing himself to escape from her; she would not stumble over the first obstacle.”
Being and Existence
"Elsewhere something was in the process of existing without her being there, and it was that thing which really mattered. This time, she couldn't say: 'It doesn't know it exists, it doesn't exist.' For it did know."
”Xaviere existed and was not to be refuted, all the risks involved in her existence had to be accepted.”
"It's you who always deliberately introduce a kind of Germanic ponderosity into our discussions."
The Clash of Two Existences or Beings
"Henceforth, Xaviere belonged to Pierre."
”...she really makes me uncomfortable, that creature, with her philosophy which makes us less than dust. It seems to me that if she loved me I'd be as sure of myself as I was before. I would feel that I'd compelled her approval. To make her love me is to dominate her, to enter into her world and there conquer in accordance with her own values. You know this is the kind of victory for which I have an insane need."
”Xaviere's existence had always threatened her, even beyond the very limits of her life, and it was this old anguish that she recognised with terror.”
“How was a conscience not her own capable of existing? If it were so, then it was she who was not existing. She repeated 'She or I.'”
At One with the World
”At last the circle of violent emotion and anxiety, in which Xaviere's sorcery imprisoned them, had been broken, and they found themselves once more at one at the central point of the vast world. Behind them stretched the limitless past. Continents and oceans were spread like huge sheets over the surface of the globe, and the miraculous certainty of existing amid this incalculable wealth overran even the too narrow bounds of space and time.”
SOUNDTRACK:
January 29, 2009
This is billed as the book SDB wrote when one of Sartre's lovers (Olga Kosakievics) entered their lives and threatened to disrupt the famous partnership about which so much has been speculated. This description doesn't do the book justice.
It does, nevertheless, need to be admitted from the start that Beauvoir is not remembered best for her novels and this one illustrates why: this is no literary classic. It is not a page turner, not a tour de force - at times I had to make myself pick it up to get on reading it.
She Came To Staty is interesting because it is an illustrative non-philosophical tract that (as Fullbrook & Fullbrook write in Sex and Philosophy, see my review) pre-dates some of Sartre's formal arguments. It is most easily enjoyable as a historical document of the way things were in France in the pre-War period, when SDB wrote the book. It is most compelling as an insight into SDB herself - in do doubt one of the most intriguing published minds of the 20th century and a formidable intellect.
Was she a feminist? Yes - if that means someone who, having been born at a time when women were supposed to get married and settle down, simply didn't, and did the attention-getting things she did. But she was more a woman of her time than this description would suggest. Francoise (the SDB character in the book) was always secondary to Pierre (the Sartre character). Francoise's attempts at independent 'being' were always relative to Pierre and his status.
He, on the other hand, was self-centred, rather arrogant, unempathetic, unsensuous - albeit devoted to Francoise. For many 21st century women, he might also come across as being a little too cerebral. The Francoise-Pierre relationship is almost platonic to the point that it wouldn't surprise modern readers that both parties looked for sensual pleasures elsewhere!
In fact, that was one of the unexpected aspects of the novel: the Francoise-Pierre partnership most resembles a 21st-century conception of an open marriage, in which both partners are committed to each other but allow extra-marital adventures. On the part of Pierre, they are mostly transitory and venal. That's why the entry of the Xaviere (Olga) character is so disruptive - it is not venal because she is Francoise's (SDB's) friend/protegee, and Xaviere plays on this. By contrast, Francoise's extra-partnership liaison is with Gerbert, a colleague of hers and friend of Pierre's, who is adamant he did not want a relationship that mirrored Pierre's 'affaires' but something more meaningful - as long as it it wasn't a commitment that tied him down, of course.
Was SDB in effect saying that women have higher standards than men, and capable of a higher degree of faithfulness? That certainly seems to be one of the novel's messages, as perceived by this woman reader anyway. Was she saying that women could be catty bitches? Yes - that's what Xaviere was. Was she saying women could be high minded? Yes ... but given a post-feminist reading of the novel, that's debatable because Francoise, in the end, was the most successful vengeful female of them all, partly because she chose to operate under the mantle of maturity and intellectual high-mindedness ... and, it has to be said, under the unacknowledge 'protection' of a man - Pierre. If anything, this is more a post-feminist than a feminist novel.
But it is more than that. Reading between the lines with the benefit of anachronistic feminist and sociological background, She Came to Stay has something to say about same-sex love and affection, motherhood, maturity, commitment and the French intellectual middle class mentality and morality. There are characters and scenes that are evocative of Guernica, Picasso, Lawrence Durrel and Zorba the Greek (the book, not so much the film) and, of course, La Rive Gauche.
But, in the end, I'm not actually sure what SBD wants to say about how people (existentially?) relate to one another. One of the reasons it isn't 'a good read' is that it really is too introspective, and in this respect it favours (naturally) Francoise. But while she is integral and coherent and consistent within herself, the other characters are either developed too late in the story or simply uni-dimensional - Xaviere is just too adolescent and hippie-like to be real.
Still, this is worth reading because I am certain that different readers will take a wide range of different impressions and conclusions from this single work of not-exactly-brilliant literature.
It does, nevertheless, need to be admitted from the start that Beauvoir is not remembered best for her novels and this one illustrates why: this is no literary classic. It is not a page turner, not a tour de force - at times I had to make myself pick it up to get on reading it.
She Came To Staty is interesting because it is an illustrative non-philosophical tract that (as Fullbrook & Fullbrook write in Sex and Philosophy, see my review) pre-dates some of Sartre's formal arguments. It is most easily enjoyable as a historical document of the way things were in France in the pre-War period, when SDB wrote the book. It is most compelling as an insight into SDB herself - in do doubt one of the most intriguing published minds of the 20th century and a formidable intellect.
Was she a feminist? Yes - if that means someone who, having been born at a time when women were supposed to get married and settle down, simply didn't, and did the attention-getting things she did. But she was more a woman of her time than this description would suggest. Francoise (the SDB character in the book) was always secondary to Pierre (the Sartre character). Francoise's attempts at independent 'being' were always relative to Pierre and his status.
He, on the other hand, was self-centred, rather arrogant, unempathetic, unsensuous - albeit devoted to Francoise. For many 21st century women, he might also come across as being a little too cerebral. The Francoise-Pierre relationship is almost platonic to the point that it wouldn't surprise modern readers that both parties looked for sensual pleasures elsewhere!
In fact, that was one of the unexpected aspects of the novel: the Francoise-Pierre partnership most resembles a 21st-century conception of an open marriage, in which both partners are committed to each other but allow extra-marital adventures. On the part of Pierre, they are mostly transitory and venal. That's why the entry of the Xaviere (Olga) character is so disruptive - it is not venal because she is Francoise's (SDB's) friend/protegee, and Xaviere plays on this. By contrast, Francoise's extra-partnership liaison is with Gerbert, a colleague of hers and friend of Pierre's, who is adamant he did not want a relationship that mirrored Pierre's 'affaires' but something more meaningful - as long as it it wasn't a commitment that tied him down, of course.
Was SDB in effect saying that women have higher standards than men, and capable of a higher degree of faithfulness? That certainly seems to be one of the novel's messages, as perceived by this woman reader anyway. Was she saying that women could be catty bitches? Yes - that's what Xaviere was. Was she saying women could be high minded? Yes ... but given a post-feminist reading of the novel, that's debatable because Francoise, in the end, was the most successful vengeful female of them all, partly because she chose to operate under the mantle of maturity and intellectual high-mindedness ... and, it has to be said, under the unacknowledge 'protection' of a man - Pierre. If anything, this is more a post-feminist than a feminist novel.
But it is more than that. Reading between the lines with the benefit of anachronistic feminist and sociological background, She Came to Stay has something to say about same-sex love and affection, motherhood, maturity, commitment and the French intellectual middle class mentality and morality. There are characters and scenes that are evocative of Guernica, Picasso, Lawrence Durrel and Zorba the Greek (the book, not so much the film) and, of course, La Rive Gauche.
But, in the end, I'm not actually sure what SBD wants to say about how people (existentially?) relate to one another. One of the reasons it isn't 'a good read' is that it really is too introspective, and in this respect it favours (naturally) Francoise. But while she is integral and coherent and consistent within herself, the other characters are either developed too late in the story or simply uni-dimensional - Xaviere is just too adolescent and hippie-like to be real.
Still, this is worth reading because I am certain that different readers will take a wide range of different impressions and conclusions from this single work of not-exactly-brilliant literature.
February 26, 2011
لم يعجبني الكتاب، أقول ذلك الآن بعد أن أنهيته، وطوال الـ 600 صفحة لم أكن قادرة على الانحياز له أو ضده! ورغم أنه كتاب طويل نسبياً، إلا أنه كان من الصعب علي أن اضعه جانبا وأن لا أواصل القراءة، فقد تمت صياغته بمهارة، وهو غني بالحوارات التي جعلت صفحاته الكثيرة تنساب بسلاسة إلى ذاكرتك القرائية، وعنصر التشويق الأغنى - من وجهة نظري - هو أنه سيرة مبطنة لتجربة خاضتها سيمون دوبوفوار مع جان بول سارتر!
يحكي الكتاب قصة زوجٍ يعيش حياة مثالية من السعادة ( فرنسواز / بيار )، سعادة متحققة ومكتملة لدرجة السأم، ويبدو أن التوق إلى تجربة الجديد جعلت هذا الثنائي يتوق إلى علاقة مع واحدة من طالبات ( فرنسواز ) واسمها ( كازافيير )، التي تدخل حياة الاثنين بصورة مدوية وتبدأ في الاستخفاف في طريقتهما في العيش المرتب والمنظم، وانتقادهما لكونها يعيشان حياة مثقفين لديهما الكثير من الواجبات والالتزامات تجاه الفن والجمال والمسرح والكتابة وغيرها .. انتقادات تبدو في باطنها سخيفة وطفولية إلى أبعد الحدود، لأن جل ما تريده كازافيير هو أن لا يفعل المرء شيئاً، وأن لا يسعى لأجل شيء، وأن لا يرهق نفسه في سبيل أي شيء، وهي تريد سعادة تنزل من السماء " كالمن " على حد قولها، وفي رغباتها تلك أيضاً حلم مبطن بأن يبقى الاثنين منشغلين بها ومكرسين لتلبية رغباتها.
الغريب في الأمر أن بيار / سارتر يبدأ في الإعجاب بوجهة نظر كازافيير هذه، ويرى بأن رؤية العالم من خلال عينيها تجرد العالم من زيفه وتحافظ على نقائه، وبأن الإنسان لا يكون نقيا وأصيلاً وحرا إلا إذا فعل ما يريد بالشكل الذي يريد مع من يريد بدون أي قيد أو شرط، وتبدأ من بعد ذلك انزلاقة بيار إلى علاقة غرامية غريبة مع كازافيير، بمعرفة ومباركة من فرنسواز! لأنها ترى بأن من العبث أن تفرض على الرجل الذي تحبه أي نوع من التضحيات في سبيلها حتى لو كان ذلك يعني حبه لامرأة أخرى، وترفض أن تفكر بأن بيار ممزق بين امرأتين، وهكذا يدخل كل من " فرنسواز / بيار / كازافيير " في علاقة ثلاثية ملتبسة وخانقة ومستحوذة، وأستطيع أن أضيف : مرضية!
ما كرهته في الرواية هو تلك الغيرة الذكورية الشديدة التي أبداها بيار عندما أظهرت " كازافيير " اهتمامها بأحد معارفه ( جيربر )، غيرة تتنافى مع كل الأريحية الكاذبة التي تظهرها فرنسواز إزاء علاقته بكازافيير، فهو قادر على حب الاثنتين، ولكنه يغار لو أن كازافيير اهتمت بغيره، مشاعر الغيرة إياها التي تجتهد فرنسواز في كل يوم لأجل إنكارها، المشاعر إياها التي بمجرد ما أظهرتها كازافيير تجاه فرنسواز ذكر بيار بأنها محل تقدير واحترام! حتى الآن لا أفهم ازدواجية المعايير هذه.
تمر هذه العلاقة الثلاثية الغريبة بين بيار وفرنسواز وكازافيير بأطوار وتتذبذب بين الانفصال والتراجع عن الانفصال، وبين الحب والصداقة والكره، حتى النهاية التي ينقلب فيها السحر على الساحر، اللحظة التي تكتشف فيها فرنسواز بأنها تغار فعلاً من كازافيير، وينتهي الأمر بشكل مأساوي وغير متوقع.
الرواية - للأسف - مليئة بأخطاء الصياغة والأخطاء الإملائية وكانت بحاجة إلى مزيد من المراجعة.
يحكي الكتاب قصة زوجٍ يعيش حياة مثالية من السعادة ( فرنسواز / بيار )، سعادة متحققة ومكتملة لدرجة السأم، ويبدو أن التوق إلى تجربة الجديد جعلت هذا الثنائي يتوق إلى علاقة مع واحدة من طالبات ( فرنسواز ) واسمها ( كازافيير )، التي تدخل حياة الاثنين بصورة مدوية وتبدأ في الاستخفاف في طريقتهما في العيش المرتب والمنظم، وانتقادهما لكونها يعيشان حياة مثقفين لديهما الكثير من الواجبات والالتزامات تجاه الفن والجمال والمسرح والكتابة وغيرها .. انتقادات تبدو في باطنها سخيفة وطفولية إلى أبعد الحدود، لأن جل ما تريده كازافيير هو أن لا يفعل المرء شيئاً، وأن لا يسعى لأجل شيء، وأن لا يرهق نفسه في سبيل أي شيء، وهي تريد سعادة تنزل من السماء " كالمن " على حد قولها، وفي رغباتها تلك أيضاً حلم مبطن بأن يبقى الاثنين منشغلين بها ومكرسين لتلبية رغباتها.
الغريب في الأمر أن بيار / سارتر يبدأ في الإعجاب بوجهة نظر كازافيير هذه، ويرى بأن رؤية العالم من خلال عينيها تجرد العالم من زيفه وتحافظ على نقائه، وبأن الإنسان لا يكون نقيا وأصيلاً وحرا إلا إذا فعل ما يريد بالشكل الذي يريد مع من يريد بدون أي قيد أو شرط، وتبدأ من بعد ذلك انزلاقة بيار إلى علاقة غرامية غريبة مع كازافيير، بمعرفة ومباركة من فرنسواز! لأنها ترى بأن من العبث أن تفرض على الرجل الذي تحبه أي نوع من التضحيات في سبيلها حتى لو كان ذلك يعني حبه لامرأة أخرى، وترفض أن تفكر بأن بيار ممزق بين امرأتين، وهكذا يدخل كل من " فرنسواز / بيار / كازافيير " في علاقة ثلاثية ملتبسة وخانقة ومستحوذة، وأستطيع أن أضيف : مرضية!
ما كرهته في الرواية هو تلك الغيرة الذكورية الشديدة التي أبداها بيار عندما أظهرت " كازافيير " اهتمامها بأحد معارفه ( جيربر )، غيرة تتنافى مع كل الأريحية الكاذبة التي تظهرها فرنسواز إزاء علاقته بكازافيير، فهو قادر على حب الاثنتين، ولكنه يغار لو أن كازافيير اهتمت بغيره، مشاعر الغيرة إياها التي تجتهد فرنسواز في كل يوم لأجل إنكارها، المشاعر إياها التي بمجرد ما أظهرتها كازافيير تجاه فرنسواز ذكر بيار بأنها محل تقدير واحترام! حتى الآن لا أفهم ازدواجية المعايير هذه.
تمر هذه العلاقة الثلاثية الغريبة بين بيار وفرنسواز وكازافيير بأطوار وتتذبذب بين الانفصال والتراجع عن الانفصال، وبين الحب والصداقة والكره، حتى النهاية التي ينقلب فيها السحر على الساحر، اللحظة التي تكتشف فيها فرنسواز بأنها تغار فعلاً من كازافيير، وينتهي الأمر بشكل مأساوي وغير متوقع.
الرواية - للأسف - مليئة بأخطاء الصياغة والأخطاء الإملائية وكانت بحاجة إلى مزيد من المراجعة.
March 25, 2012
Otherwise known as 'Never get on the wrong side of Simone de Beauvoir'
I first came across Simone de Beauvoir through looking at quotes from her most famous work, The Second Sex, an iconic re-constructionist feminist text. Her ideas really interested me, and so when I found out that she had written novels I was really intrigued. She Came to Stay is particularly interesting as it is based on the real life relationship between de Beauvoir and the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre with whom she had an (very French) open relationship. This novel is based on a particular moment when Olga and Wanda Kosakievicz burst in on the two’s lives.
I’m going to admit that I found this novel a little bit of a slog to get through, partly, I think because the plot wasn’t especially very pacey. In addition, I didn’t really warm to any of the characters. I think de Beauvoir’s obvious desire to exact revenge of the Koakievicz girls (down to the fact she dedicates the novel to Olga) really undermines the novel’s potential as Xaviere is portrayed throughout as being a little bit dumb, who expects everything to just be given to her and who is incredibly possessive and prone to jealousy. Pierre himself, apparently supposed to be some kind of really attractive guy, just came across and conceited and self-involved to me. I much preferred characters of the periphery, such as Elisabeth, Pierre’s sister and Gerbert, an actor in Pierre’s company with whom Francoise has a kind of intimate relationship, who is seemingly the only character vaguely bothered by the coming Second World War. De Beauvoir focuses most on Francoise, and her journey towards becoming a ‘free’ woman. She was a generally interesting character, although I felt that de Beauvoir did kind of overdo the continuous examples of her being trapped and then free.
I did love the descriptions of Paris, however, this novel really increased my desire to travel there and track down all these amazing cafes that (at least in the 1940s) were open seemingly 24/7; and her writing style was really quite good, reminiscent to me of Woolf or Plath’s journals. Whilst I’m not sure that The Mandarins, another novel based on de Beauvoir’s life, is going to particularly be high on my to-read list, I’m really considering sitting down and reading The Second Sex properly at some point in the future.
I first came across Simone de Beauvoir through looking at quotes from her most famous work, The Second Sex, an iconic re-constructionist feminist text. Her ideas really interested me, and so when I found out that she had written novels I was really intrigued. She Came to Stay is particularly interesting as it is based on the real life relationship between de Beauvoir and the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre with whom she had an (very French) open relationship. This novel is based on a particular moment when Olga and Wanda Kosakievicz burst in on the two’s lives.
I’m going to admit that I found this novel a little bit of a slog to get through, partly, I think because the plot wasn’t especially very pacey. In addition, I didn’t really warm to any of the characters. I think de Beauvoir’s obvious desire to exact revenge of the Koakievicz girls (down to the fact she dedicates the novel to Olga) really undermines the novel’s potential as Xaviere is portrayed throughout as being a little bit dumb, who expects everything to just be given to her and who is incredibly possessive and prone to jealousy. Pierre himself, apparently supposed to be some kind of really attractive guy, just came across and conceited and self-involved to me. I much preferred characters of the periphery, such as Elisabeth, Pierre’s sister and Gerbert, an actor in Pierre’s company with whom Francoise has a kind of intimate relationship, who is seemingly the only character vaguely bothered by the coming Second World War. De Beauvoir focuses most on Francoise, and her journey towards becoming a ‘free’ woman. She was a generally interesting character, although I felt that de Beauvoir did kind of overdo the continuous examples of her being trapped and then free.
I did love the descriptions of Paris, however, this novel really increased my desire to travel there and track down all these amazing cafes that (at least in the 1940s) were open seemingly 24/7; and her writing style was really quite good, reminiscent to me of Woolf or Plath’s journals. Whilst I’m not sure that The Mandarins, another novel based on de Beauvoir’s life, is going to particularly be high on my to-read list, I’m really considering sitting down and reading The Second Sex properly at some point in the future.
October 14, 2016
نگاه فمنیستی و اگزیستانسیالیسمی مثل بقیه آثار دوبووار مشهود است و او سعی دارد وابستگی عاطفی زن به مرد را به تصویر بکشد.
دوبووار به آزادی معتقد است اما در میهمان این امر را می رساند که گاها انسان ها سر تسلیم به جبر محیط فرود می آورند و اینکه جوامع و همچنین خود زنان برای پذیرش آزادی فردی خود آماده نیستند و این آزادی فقط در قالب حرف نه عمل نمود می یابد.
زنان در شرایطی که داشته هایشان را در خطر می بینند در مقابل هم می ایستند و حس حسادت و کینه آنان را وادار به خشونت که خود واکنشی مردانه است؛می کند.
دوبووار به آزادی معتقد است اما در میهمان این امر را می رساند که گاها انسان ها سر تسلیم به جبر محیط فرود می آورند و اینکه جوامع و همچنین خود زنان برای پذیرش آزادی فردی خود آماده نیستند و این آزادی فقط در قالب حرف نه عمل نمود می یابد.
زنان در شرایطی که داشته هایشان را در خطر می بینند در مقابل هم می ایستند و حس حسادت و کینه آنان را وادار به خشونت که خود واکنشی مردانه است؛می کند.
April 5, 2022
more like she came to be annoying
November 18, 2023
hatsaaaaa zesde(?) De Beauvoir dit jaar #sadgirlautumn
December 30, 2015
Based on the reviews I had read on 카지노싸이트 prior to starting the novel, I thought She Came to Stay would be a long arduous journey between me and Simone that I would't really enjoy, but that ended up not being the case. It was a quick read, mostly dialogue and not at all difficult. I would not suggest this book to someone who wasn't interested in Sartre and de Beauvoir's work already. It is an easy read but dry and without a strong narrative arc. What makes the novel worthwhile is that so many of Sartre and de Beauvoir's philosophical concerns are explored within the novel, but set pragmatically in their mostly true love triangle, rather than in abstract metaphors. There is a scene in which Sartre watches a lover through a keyhole that is a direct echo of Sartre's writings on shame, for a Sartre enthusiasts this is a gem of a connection and one of many in the novel. I found the book accessible and worth my while because it is yet another piece in the development of the philosophical whole of Sartre and de Beauvoir. There are many faults in the novel's story, and anyone looking for an objectively interesting story has come to the wrong book. Simply put: read if you are a French 40's and 50's existentialist nerd, but if you are a beginner try Camus.
June 2, 2024
So elegantly pretty, a little long and boring but the prose was stunning
November 26, 2015
اعتراف می کنم که از این کتاب سر در نیاوردم. شاید کتاب مشکل ترجمه نامناسب داشت . اما بر خلاف دیگر آثار سیموون دوبووار که بسیار روان و دلنشین هست، در فهم این کتاب مشکل داشتم
وقتی دوبووار را به عنوان فیلسوفی فمینیست در نظر می گیرم در فهم این کتاب دچار مشکل می شوم و جالب اینجاست که خود نویسنده این اثرش را به عنوان "خود زندگی نامه" یا اتوبیوگرافی نامیده است
شاید برای فهمیدن این کتاب هنوز سوادمن خیلی کم هست، شاید سالها بعد فهمیدمش و شاید هرگز
وقتی دوبووار را به عنوان فیلسوفی فمینیست در نظر می گیرم در فهم این کتاب دچار مشکل می شوم و جالب اینجاست که خود نویسنده این اثرش را به عنوان "خود زندگی نامه" یا اتوبیوگرافی نامیده است
شاید برای فهمیدن این کتاب هنوز سوادمن خیلی کم هست، شاید سالها بعد فهمیدمش و شاید هرگز
July 14, 2016
إثرقراءتي لروايتين متتاليتين لسيمون دوبوفوار، قبل "المدعوة"،
"دماء الآخرين "، أصبح بإمكاني التأكيد أنها لم تتقن قط فنّ الرواية، وأن أسلوبها السردي مليء بتفاصيل وحوارات لا تفيد حيثيات الأحداث كثيرًا. لا أخفي أنني شعرت بالملل أمام الكثير من المقاطع. لكن إصراري على إتمامها وفضولي لمعرفة النهاية التي سبق وتحدّثت عنها بمذكراتها دفعاني لإنهائها. سيمون دوبوفوار برعت في كتابة المذكرات، وبرعت في كتابة الأفكار الفلسفية والمقالات، لكنها لم تبرع وتبدع كروائية على الإطلاق. لم أقرأ بعد روايتها الحائزة على جائزة الغونكور " المثقفون"، ربما إن قرأتها سأغير رأي أو أجد تطورًا كتابيًا يجدر بي التوقف عنده.
رواية "المدعوة" تطرح قضية "الأخرى" أو "الثانية" التي يرتبط بها الرجل على حساب "الأولى" التي في الغالب هي الزوجة، قصة شائعة لدى المجتمعات الشرقية حيث تعدد الزوجات أمر ممكن الحصول والتطبيق. المرأة الشرقية قد تقبل على مضض هذا الارتباط بالأخرى وتتحمله بغيرة مكبوتة تنخر كرامتها وتهز كيانها. لكن ما لا يمكن تصوره أن تحصل هذه الحالة في الغرب ومع من؟ مع قائدة الحركة الأدبية النسوية في فرنسا؟ بالتأكيد الأمر سيخضع للتشكيك وسيكون عرضة للمغالطة بمجرد طرحه. لكنه أمر حصل فعليًا مع الكاتبة الفرنسية سيمون دوبوفوار التي تقبلت بألم شديد وجود أولغا كأخرى أو ثانية في حياة سارتر. هذه "الضرة" كانت طالبة فاشلة في المدرسة التي كانت تعمل فيها كمدرسة، فاحتضنتها وحاولت مساعدتها عبر إشراك رفيق دربها جان بول سارتر في ذلك. فما كان من هذا الأخير إلا أن وقع في غرام الطالبة الأنانية متقلبة المزاج والعقل والفارغة من أي اهتمام حياتي أو فكري. تحملت سيمون ذلك ورضيت به، ومواساتها كانت أنهم اتفقوا على إعطاء هذه العلاقة صفة "التريو" أو "الثلاثي". وهي الصفة التي اعتدنا في مجتمعاتنا العربية تسميتها "هي وضرّتها". كنت سابقًا وقبل اطلاعي على حيثيات هذه العلاقة أشك بخلل ما في سلوك سيمون دوبوفوار لقبولها ذلك. وهو أمر لا ألام عليه فكثيرون أشاعوا عنها هذا الأمر. لكن حين قرأت مذكراتها ومن بعدها رواياتها أدركت حجم الألم الذي عانت منه وحجم الحب الذي كانت تكنه لجان بول سارتر لدرجة جعلتها تتحمل هذا الوضع وتتعايش مع فكرة "التريو" أو "الثلاثي" كي لا تفقده من حياتها. وهو بدون شك حال كثيرات في واقعنا. كان يشكو لها معاناته في حب الأخرى وهي تستمع وتنصت وتحاول جاهدة مساعدته للتخفيف من وطأة ما يمر به عبر تقريبهما من بعض. وعندما احتدمت الأمور معها ارتبطت برجل آخر، كمحاولة منها للهروب أو ربما للإنتقام منه وإثارة غيرته عليها، لكنه عوض نبذها أو اتخاذه قرار الوفاء المطلق لها تفهمها وترك لها حرية أن تعيش حياتها كما ترغب دون أن تبتعد عن حياته وأسفاره ومشاريعه الثقافية التي جمعت بينهما. علاقة غريبة خالية من أي التزام وبالوقت نفسه متلازمة. إنها قصة حب جان بول سارتر وسيمون دوبوفوار التي قرأتها مرتين، مرة على شكل مذكرات ومرة في قالب روائي. بين كتاب مذكرات "قوة العمر" ورواية "المدعوة" لم أجد فرقًا في السرد. الكاتبة أسهبت بالتفاصيل في كلا العملين لكنها أضافت في "المدعوة" حوارات مملة لم تعرف كيف توظفها بقالب روائي يشكك القارىء من إمكانية أن يكون ما تسرده يشبه أناسًا آخرين غيرها وغير سارتر وأولغا. هي اكتفت بتغيير الأسماء ونقلت الشخصيات بدقة مفرطة، حتى غليون سارتر لم يسلم من قلمها.
"المدعوة" هو أول عمل أدبي لسيمون دوبوفوار، اعتقدت قبل قراءته أنها أرادت أن تثبت نفسها من خلاله على الساحة الأدبية، لأكتشف بعد قراءته أنها أرادت من خلاله أيضًا أن تثبت نفسها كامرأة. أرادت الانتقام من أولغا عبر تصوير شخصيتها المتقلبة الانتهازية التي تتلاعب بالآخرين مستغلة شبابها وجمالها. أرادت إبراز عقد نقص أولغا وغيرتها منها، هي الإنسانة الناجحة والمثقفة التي تعطف على طالبة فاشلة. في هذه الرواية أظهرت كل المرارة التي اختزنها قلبها، أثارت نقاط ضعفها، استسلامها، وكلها أمور سلبية لا يمكن توقعها من امرأة كرست حياتها في سبيل تقوية نساء جيلها وحثهن للسعي لمزيد من الإستقلالية. لم تلم سارتر في علاقته العاطفية، كان دائمًا ذلك الإنسان الواضح والصريح الذي لم يفقد احترامه أو هيبته. لكن في النهاية كان لا بد لها أن تتخذ قرارًا ما يقضي على عذابها ويعيد لها كرامتها المنتزعة، فراحت تردد عبارة "هي أو أنا"، وانتهى بها الأمر لتفضّل "الأنا" على كل الاحتمالات فتخلصت من أولغا في الرواية عبر تدبير جريمة قتل كاملة تخرج منها منتصرة. بينما في الواقع بقيت تتحمل وجود أولغا في حياتها لسنوات طويلة حتى طرأت تغييرات في الظروف أزاحتها من دربها.أما مواساتها الوحيدة طيلة هذه السنوات أنها انتقمت منها وقتلتها في خيالها وعلى الورق.
سبق لي أن تطرقت لهذه الرواية في حديثي عن الكتابة النسوية، لكن تطرقي لها اليوم هو من الناحية النفسية لمعاناة المرأة التي تكتشف انها ليست الملكة في قلب من تحب ومن وهبته حياتها وسنين عمرها. وهذا العمل الروائي رغم عدم احترافيته الكتابية طرح أكثر من سؤال حول مواضيع عديدة، أبرزها التناقض بين الشخصية القيادية وحياتها الواقعية، أهمية دور الكتابة في التنفيس عن المصاعب المحتقنة، وغيرة المرأة على من تحب.
الغيرة قد تتفاوت من امرأة لأخرى، هناك من تستسلم لواقعها وتتقبله، وهناك من تثور عليه وتنتقم بطريقة مؤذية، بينما المرأة القوية هي التي تترفع وتلوذ بكرامتها نحو آفاق تحلق بها عاليًا وتقودها لاستقلالية تصون لها ذاتها وتوصلها للنجاح عبرتحقيق الذات. إلى أي حد بإمكان أي امرأة أن تتحمل اعتصار قلبها بين ضلوعها من الغيرة؟ ومتى وفي أي حالة سيصل بها الأمر لتتخذ قرارًا حاسمًا مطلقة عبارة "هي أو أنا"؟.
"دماء الآخرين "، أصبح بإمكاني التأكيد أنها لم تتقن قط فنّ الرواية، وأن أسلوبها السردي مليء بتفاصيل وحوارات لا تفيد حيثيات الأحداث كثيرًا. لا أخفي أنني شعرت بالملل أمام الكثير من المقاطع. لكن إصراري على إتمامها وفضولي لمعرفة النهاية التي سبق وتحدّثت عنها بمذكراتها دفعاني لإنهائها. سيمون دوبوفوار برعت في كتابة المذكرات، وبرعت في كتابة الأفكار الفلسفية والمقالات، لكنها لم تبرع وتبدع كروائية على الإطلاق. لم أقرأ بعد روايتها الحائزة على جائزة الغونكور " المثقفون"، ربما إن قرأتها سأغير رأي أو أجد تطورًا كتابيًا يجدر بي التوقف عنده.
رواية "المدعوة" تطرح قضية "الأخرى" أو "الثانية" التي يرتبط بها الرجل على حساب "الأولى" التي في الغالب هي الزوجة، قصة شائعة لدى المجتمعات الشرقية حيث تعدد الزوجات أمر ممكن الحصول والتطبيق. المرأة الشرقية قد تقبل على مضض هذا الارتباط بالأخرى وتتحمله بغيرة مكبوتة تنخر كرامتها وتهز كيانها. لكن ما لا يمكن تصوره أن تحصل هذه الحالة في الغرب ومع من؟ مع قائدة الحركة الأدبية النسوية في فرنسا؟ بالتأكيد الأمر سيخضع للتشكيك وسيكون عرضة للمغالطة بمجرد طرحه. لكنه أمر حصل فعليًا مع الكاتبة الفرنسية سيمون دوبوفوار التي تقبلت بألم شديد وجود أولغا كأخرى أو ثانية في حياة سارتر. هذه "الضرة" كانت طالبة فاشلة في المدرسة التي كانت تعمل فيها كمدرسة، فاحتضنتها وحاولت مساعدتها عبر إشراك رفيق دربها جان بول سارتر في ذلك. فما كان من هذا الأخير إلا أن وقع في غرام الطالبة الأنانية متقلبة المزاج والعقل والفارغة من أي اهتمام حياتي أو فكري. تحملت سيمون ذلك ورضيت به، ومواساتها كانت أنهم اتفقوا على إعطاء هذه العلاقة صفة "التريو" أو "الثلاثي". وهي الصفة التي اعتدنا في مجتمعاتنا العربية تسميتها "هي وضرّتها". كنت سابقًا وقبل اطلاعي على حيثيات هذه العلاقة أشك بخلل ما في سلوك سيمون دوبوفوار لقبولها ذلك. وهو أمر لا ألام عليه فكثيرون أشاعوا عنها هذا الأمر. لكن حين قرأت مذكراتها ومن بعدها رواياتها أدركت حجم الألم الذي عانت منه وحجم الحب الذي كانت تكنه لجان بول سارتر لدرجة جعلتها تتحمل هذا الوضع وتتعايش مع فكرة "التريو" أو "الثلاثي" كي لا تفقده من حياتها. وهو بدون شك حال كثيرات في واقعنا. كان يشكو لها معاناته في حب الأخرى وهي تستمع وتنصت وتحاول جاهدة مساعدته للتخفيف من وطأة ما يمر به عبر تقريبهما من بعض. وعندما احتدمت الأمور معها ارتبطت برجل آخر، كمحاولة منها للهروب أو ربما للإنتقام منه وإثارة غيرته عليها، لكنه عوض نبذها أو اتخاذه قرار الوفاء المطلق لها تفهمها وترك لها حرية أن تعيش حياتها كما ترغب دون أن تبتعد عن حياته وأسفاره ومشاريعه الثقافية التي جمعت بينهما. علاقة غريبة خالية من أي التزام وبالوقت نفسه متلازمة. إنها قصة حب جان بول سارتر وسيمون دوبوفوار التي قرأتها مرتين، مرة على شكل مذكرات ومرة في قالب روائي. بين كتاب مذكرات "قوة العمر" ورواية "المدعوة" لم أجد فرقًا في السرد. الكاتبة أسهبت بالتفاصيل في كلا العملين لكنها أضافت في "المدعوة" حوارات مملة لم تعرف كيف توظفها بقالب روائي يشكك القارىء من إمكانية أن يكون ما تسرده يشبه أناسًا آخرين غيرها وغير سارتر وأولغا. هي اكتفت بتغيير الأسماء ونقلت الشخصيات بدقة مفرطة، حتى غليون سارتر لم يسلم من قلمها.
"المدعوة" هو أول عمل أدبي لسيمون دوبوفوار، اعتقدت قبل قراءته أنها أرادت أن تثبت نفسها من خلاله على الساحة الأدبية، لأكتشف بعد قراءته أنها أرادت من خلاله أيضًا أن تثبت نفسها كامرأة. أرادت الانتقام من أولغا عبر تصوير شخصيتها المتقلبة الانتهازية التي تتلاعب بالآخرين مستغلة شبابها وجمالها. أرادت إبراز عقد نقص أولغا وغيرتها منها، هي الإنسانة الناجحة والمثقفة التي تعطف على طالبة فاشلة. في هذه الرواية أظهرت كل المرارة التي اختزنها قلبها، أثارت نقاط ضعفها، استسلامها، وكلها أمور سلبية لا يمكن توقعها من امرأة كرست حياتها في سبيل تقوية نساء جيلها وحثهن للسعي لمزيد من الإستقلالية. لم تلم سارتر في علاقته العاطفية، كان دائمًا ذلك الإنسان الواضح والصريح الذي لم يفقد احترامه أو هيبته. لكن في النهاية كان لا بد لها أن تتخذ قرارًا ما يقضي على عذابها ويعيد لها كرامتها المنتزعة، فراحت تردد عبارة "هي أو أنا"، وانتهى بها الأمر لتفضّل "الأنا" على كل الاحتمالات فتخلصت من أولغا في الرواية عبر تدبير جريمة قتل كاملة تخرج منها منتصرة. بينما في الواقع بقيت تتحمل وجود أولغا في حياتها لسنوات طويلة حتى طرأت تغييرات في الظروف أزاحتها من دربها.أما مواساتها الوحيدة طيلة هذه السنوات أنها انتقمت منها وقتلتها في خيالها وعلى الورق.
سبق لي أن تطرقت لهذه الرواية في حديثي عن الكتابة النسوية، لكن تطرقي لها اليوم هو من الناحية النفسية لمعاناة المرأة التي تكتشف انها ليست الملكة في قلب من تحب ومن وهبته حياتها وسنين عمرها. وهذا العمل الروائي رغم عدم احترافيته الكتابية طرح أكثر من سؤال حول مواضيع عديدة، أبرزها التناقض بين الشخصية القيادية وحياتها الواقعية، أهمية دور الكتابة في التنفيس عن المصاعب المحتقنة، وغيرة المرأة على من تحب.
الغيرة قد تتفاوت من امرأة لأخرى، هناك من تستسلم لواقعها وتتقبله، وهناك من تثور عليه وتنتقم بطريقة مؤذية، بينما المرأة القوية هي التي تترفع وتلوذ بكرامتها نحو آفاق تحلق بها عاليًا وتقودها لاستقلالية تصون لها ذاتها وتوصلها للنجاح عبرتحقيق الذات. إلى أي حد بإمكان أي امرأة أن تتحمل اعتصار قلبها بين ضلوعها من الغيرة؟ ومتى وفي أي حالة سيصل بها الأمر لتتخذ قرارًا حاسمًا مطلقة عبارة "هي أو أنا"؟.
June 25, 2016
I adore Simone de Beauvoir's writing, and this is probably one of her most passionate and accessible books. Based on a real-life love triangle between her, Sartre and one of his young lovers, this takes a cool look at love, and dissects jealousy with scalpel-like precision.
Set in smoky, glamorous, pre-war Paris amongst young intellectuals, this probes the distance between the theoretical politics of sexual relationships and the lived reality - in theory love is liberated from bourgeois jealousy and pettiness, but the reality for the women in this book is quite different.
Supremely intelligent, self-deprecating, and darkly ironic, this is de Beauvoir confronting the uncomfortable intricacies of her relationship with both Sartre and herself.
Set in smoky, glamorous, pre-war Paris amongst young intellectuals, this probes the distance between the theoretical politics of sexual relationships and the lived reality - in theory love is liberated from bourgeois jealousy and pettiness, but the reality for the women in this book is quite different.
Supremely intelligent, self-deprecating, and darkly ironic, this is de Beauvoir confronting the uncomfortable intricacies of her relationship with both Sartre and herself.
February 24, 2018
Every time I read Simone de Beauvoir afterwards I feel like a completely different person. She Came to Stay is another fantastic novel, and actually through writing this first novel Simone de Beauvoir found her voice and produced an exceptional body of work.
April 20, 2025
Simone de Beauvoir schrijft geen pageturners. Ik heb heel lang gedaan over dit boek, omdat ik aan het begin moest wennen aan de schrijfstijl en de onderhuidse communicatie. Later woonde ik in het boek en wilde ik niet zo graag weg.
De personages in dit boek worden via dialogen en handelingen ontzettend mooi uitgewerkt. Iedereen wil liefde en erkenning en als ze dat krijgen zijn ze op hun mooist. Maar als ze die liefde niet krijgen of niet helemaal, wordt iedereen op hun eigen manier ontzettend gemeen.
In deze roman worden erg complexe liefdes- en vriendschapsrelaties onderzocht, iedereen is verliefd en iedereen is jaloers. Het boek gaat voornamelijk over Françoise, die samen met haar man in een driehoeksrelatie terecht komt als een jong meisje in Parijs komt wonen.
Dit boek is heel goed geschreven en er is een ontzettend fijne sfeer, er is erg veel dramatiek en goeie dialogen.
De personages in dit boek worden via dialogen en handelingen ontzettend mooi uitgewerkt. Iedereen wil liefde en erkenning en als ze dat krijgen zijn ze op hun mooist. Maar als ze die liefde niet krijgen of niet helemaal, wordt iedereen op hun eigen manier ontzettend gemeen.
In deze roman worden erg complexe liefdes- en vriendschapsrelaties onderzocht, iedereen is verliefd en iedereen is jaloers. Het boek gaat voornamelijk over Françoise, die samen met haar man in een driehoeksrelatie terecht komt als een jong meisje in Parijs komt wonen.
Dit boek is heel goed geschreven en er is een ontzettend fijne sfeer, er is erg veel dramatiek en goeie dialogen.
October 24, 2017
Primera novela de Simone. Cuesta un poco entrar en ella hasta que logra ubicarse a los personajes, a las complejas relaciones entre ellos e, incluso, a esa inquietante frivolidad en sus relaciones habida cuenta que están en los meses previos al estallido de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Sin embargo, Simone, con un estilo narrativo lento pero fluido, logra hacernos danzar con los personajes: tan complejos, tan de carne y hueso, tan claroscuros. Françoise y su vengativa abnegación; Pierre o el hombre que cree dominar y que es dominado; Xaviére o su feminidad sacrificada; Gerbert o el peón del tablero de ajedrez. Fantástica Simone.
April 8, 2011
Strong and almost striking at times.
Beauvoir makes you love and hate all her main characters in this powerfully written book.
Beauvoir makes you love and hate all her main characters in this powerfully written book.
June 4, 2025
Хубава, но трудна книга, трудна за четене в непрекъснатото предъвкване и анализиране на чувствата. В този роман няма да намерите много действие, това е роман за любовта, ревността, себичността, саможертвата, високите и низките страсти в един любовен триъгълник-четириъгълник. И може би най-важният въпрос: да се чувстваме ли виновни, когато избираме себе си и не се жертваме за другите?
Иначе би било банално и досадно, но изпод перото на Бовоар, всичко придобива един изтънчен привкус. Въпреки това на моменти ми идваше в повече непрекъснатото предъвкване на чувствата, терзанията на героите и т.н. Мисля също, че от съвременната гледна точка на повечето хора ни е трудно да си представим, да осмислим и разберем как може няколко човека да съжителстват в любовна тройка, четворка, това да е ясно за тях, да не се крият, а да приемат за нормално това, че любимият мъж /жена обича и има сексуална връзка с друг човек, който е и наш приятел....
Мотото на романа може да се обобщи в следната реплика на един от героите: "Да, хубаво е между двама души да има обич, но същевременно те да си остават свободни. "
Иначе би било банално и досадно, но изпод перото на Бовоар, всичко придобива един изтънчен привкус. Въпреки това на моменти ми идваше в повече непрекъснатото предъвкване на чувствата, терзанията на героите и т.н. Мисля също, че от съвременната гледна точка на повечето хора ни е трудно да си представим, да осмислим и разберем как може няколко човека да съжителстват в любовна тройка, четворка, това да е ясно за тях, да не се крият, а да приемат за нормално това, че любимият мъж /жена обича и има сексуална връзка с друг човек, който е и наш приятел....
Мотото на романа може да се обобщи в следната реплика на един от героите: "Да, хубаво е между двама души да има обич, но същевременно те да си остават свободни. "
July 19, 2023
Simone de Beauvoir ha scritto, oltre a famosi diari e agli importanti saggi, anche alcuni romanzi belli: il migliore è senz’altro I mandarini, ma consiglierei anche Una donna spezzata e Le belle immagini. Questo, invece, è il suo primo romanzo e a me è parso veramente brutto. Una torbida vicenda in cui una coppia ‘aperta’ di intellettuali trentenni si lascia catturare e poi ossessionare fino alla paranoia da una ragazzina egocentrica, capricciosa, disturbata, francamente insopportabile, tanto da invitarla a far parte della coppia che si trasforma dunque in trio. Nel trio tutti amano tutti, ma ben presto si creano legami possessivi e meccanismi morbosi, che si fanno via via sempre più angosciosi. Fin dal principio l’idea appare aberrante (se dalla notte dei tempi faticano a funzionare le coppie, figuriamoci le triplette) ma i tre protagonisti, lungi dal prendere la cosa con leggerezza e disinvoltura in nome della tanto sbandierata libertà, si comportano in modo assurdamente melodrammatico: il romanzo non è che un’interminabile serie di discussioni (sempre di notte, sempre ai tavolini di un locale, sempre accompagnati da molti bicchieri e molte sigarette) su come uno dei tre abbia osato sottrarsi a un appuntamento o spendere qualche tempo con una quarta persona. Gelosie, pianti, scenate, rotture, riconciliazioni, meschinità, sbronze, insonnie, autolesionismi, spionaggi, deliri, tentativi di suicidio: si cade sempre più in basso, e tanti saluti alla dignità. Fino all’ultima pagina, quando uno dei tre decide finalmente di agire per liberarsi dall'incubo: ma anche stavolta, esagera e di molto.
Per carità, lasciate perdere.
Per carità, lasciate perdere.
September 16, 2022
People say that de Beauvoir wrote this novel as an act of revenge upon the woman who came between her and Sartre. I think it’s more than that. I see it as a story about de Beauvoir's journey to asserting herself freely: the point where she acted “as alone as in death”. She tells the world that she chose herself, consequences be dammed, because she could only know her reality (this btw is solipsism - de Beauvoir wrote a philosophical novel on the subject of a failed romantic trio and I think that’s very cool).
Okay. So, before *she* came to stay, Françoise and Pierre (based on Simone & Jean-Paul) were simply one. They thought of each other not as an “I” or a “you”, but, lovingly (and toxically) as a “we”. They belonged to each other and the world belonged to them. And by “the world” I mean the attractive actors who worked for them and who they wanted to possess. Françoise & Pierre were one and they were free. Françoise freely decided that there was no room in her life for another lover. But, she wasn’t against having intimate friendships when she could see some continuity of the friendship. Pierre freely chose to have frivolous affairs that could be easily terminated. He only enjoyed the early stages. According to him, no harm was done, since, “none of these dear little creatures has ever been really in love with me”. But, by ignoring power imbalances in dating people they hired, Pierre and Françoise were not exactly models of ethical non-monogamy.
Needless to say, they were not ready for Xavière. No one is ready for Xavière. Graceful, ruthless and treacherous as a cat, she offered them the temptation of a rich experience. She came with demands, smiles, pouts, and deliciously unexpected reactions. She had a scent of risk and mystery. The couple dreamed of an exciting trio. They hoped to break Xavière s obstinate will. They wanted to lead a yielding Xavière through life and make her happy. But, this rare treasure resisted the two strong, generous, and patronizing intellectuals. Françoise, exasperated, decided that Xavière was an insignificant spoiled child, while Pierre, intrigued, saw a precious black pearl that he wanted to own. Loyal only to herself, “Xavière, from head to foot, was nothing but a living assertion of herself.” Pierre saw the value in that. Françoise saw the danger. Because of Xavière, they no longer acted as one. Xavière existed between them. She breached their serenity.
Françoise, alone, “felt rising within her, with a kind of joy, something black and bitter that she did not yet know and which was almost a deliverance: powerful, free, finally bursting unhindered into bloom. It was hate.” Did she finally assert herself as separate from Pierre? Yes, she did. And it was monstrous. The book is passive-aggressively dedicated to the woman who awoke de Beauvoir’s hatred and will for freedom.
Okay. So, before *she* came to stay, Françoise and Pierre (based on Simone & Jean-Paul) were simply one. They thought of each other not as an “I” or a “you”, but, lovingly (and toxically) as a “we”. They belonged to each other and the world belonged to them. And by “the world” I mean the attractive actors who worked for them and who they wanted to possess. Françoise & Pierre were one and they were free. Françoise freely decided that there was no room in her life for another lover. But, she wasn’t against having intimate friendships when she could see some continuity of the friendship. Pierre freely chose to have frivolous affairs that could be easily terminated. He only enjoyed the early stages. According to him, no harm was done, since, “none of these dear little creatures has ever been really in love with me”. But, by ignoring power imbalances in dating people they hired, Pierre and Françoise were not exactly models of ethical non-monogamy.
Needless to say, they were not ready for Xavière. No one is ready for Xavière. Graceful, ruthless and treacherous as a cat, she offered them the temptation of a rich experience. She came with demands, smiles, pouts, and deliciously unexpected reactions. She had a scent of risk and mystery. The couple dreamed of an exciting trio. They hoped to break Xavière s obstinate will. They wanted to lead a yielding Xavière through life and make her happy. But, this rare treasure resisted the two strong, generous, and patronizing intellectuals. Françoise, exasperated, decided that Xavière was an insignificant spoiled child, while Pierre, intrigued, saw a precious black pearl that he wanted to own. Loyal only to herself, “Xavière, from head to foot, was nothing but a living assertion of herself.” Pierre saw the value in that. Françoise saw the danger. Because of Xavière, they no longer acted as one. Xavière existed between them. She breached their serenity.
Françoise, alone, “felt rising within her, with a kind of joy, something black and bitter that she did not yet know and which was almost a deliverance: powerful, free, finally bursting unhindered into bloom. It was hate.” Did she finally assert herself as separate from Pierre? Yes, she did. And it was monstrous. The book is passive-aggressively dedicated to the woman who awoke de Beauvoir’s hatred and will for freedom.
January 11, 2012
هذه الرواية تحكي دو بوفوار جزء من سيرتها الذاتية وأساسها علاقة الصداقة والحب التي جمعتها مع الفيلسوف جان بول سارتر وكما جرى في الواقع عقدت فرانسواز وبيار عقدا يناسب أفكارهما الوجودية وينادي بالحرية والإخلاص في آن واحد , اتفقا الإثنان على ان يسمح الواحد منهما للآخر بإقامة علاقات عاطفية على شرط أن تكون علاقتهما هي الأساسية دون أن يسمحا للواعج الغيرة أو رغبات التملك أن تسيطر عليهما وحيث أن فرانسواز التي كانت تمثل شخصية دو بوفوار متيمة ببيار فقد دفعت ثمن هذا الإتفاق طوال صفحات الرواية كانت فرانسواز تقدم التضحية تلو الأخرى لكي يحظى صديقها وحبيبها بيار بالسعادة فكانت تحضر الكثير من المواعيد الغرامية واللقاءات الحميمية التي جمعت بين بيار وتلميذتها كازفيير وذلك دون أي حساب لوجودها تقول دو بوفوار على لسان فرانسواز ( تساءلت والضيق يغمرها ماذا كانت تفعل وسط هذه الخلوة الغرامية , أين هو مكانها بالضبط
ليس في مكان آخر بالتأكيد
شعرت في هذه اللحظة أنها ممحوة من العالم ! )
لم يكن بيار يفّوت ما كان يفعله مع تلميذتها فقد كان يفصح لها عن مشاعره
عن كل الحوارات الدائرة بينهما بل أيضا عن القبلات والملامسات ..إلخ
احترقت فرانسواز بالغيرة احترقت باللامبالاة واجترت آلامها وحدها دون أن تنبس بحرف هذه التجربة العلاقة الثلاثية لا يمكن أن تتواءم مع طبيعة المرأة التي تشتعل غيرة
فيما لو اقتربت أي أنثى من حبيبها فماذا لو كانت صديقة ومعجبة وتلميذة !
لازمتها الكآبة الإحساس بالعدم وكأنها ليست موجودة وعلى الرغم من الحنان الذي يغدقه عليها بيار لكن رافقها الشعور بالهزيمة حتى انتهت إلى قرارها النهائي المفاجىء وأخال أن دو بوفوار تمنت كثيرا أن تقوم بهذا الحل الذي لم تستطع تنفيذه في الواقع !ا
سيرة أنثى قتلها الحب أو قتلته لا أدري !
الرواية رائعة وأخال أن الترجمة لو كانت بيد مترجم آخر لظهرت بشكل أفضل
ليس في مكان آخر بالتأكيد
شعرت في هذه اللحظة أنها ممحوة من العالم ! )
لم يكن بيار يفّوت ما كان يفعله مع تلميذتها فقد كان يفصح لها عن مشاعره
عن كل الحوارات الدائرة بينهما بل أيضا عن القبلات والملامسات ..إلخ
احترقت فرانسواز بالغيرة احترقت باللامبالاة واجترت آلامها وحدها دون أن تنبس بحرف هذه التجربة العلاقة الثلاثية لا يمكن أن تتواءم مع طبيعة المرأة التي تشتعل غيرة
فيما لو اقتربت أي أنثى من حبيبها فماذا لو كانت صديقة ومعجبة وتلميذة !
لازمتها الكآبة الإحساس بالعدم وكأنها ليست موجودة وعلى الرغم من الحنان الذي يغدقه عليها بيار لكن رافقها الشعور بالهزيمة حتى انتهت إلى قرارها النهائي المفاجىء وأخال أن دو بوفوار تمنت كثيرا أن تقوم بهذا الحل الذي لم تستطع تنفيذه في الواقع !ا
سيرة أنثى قتلها الحب أو قتلته لا أدري !
الرواية رائعة وأخال أن الترجمة لو كانت بيد مترجم آخر لظهرت بشكل أفضل
December 6, 2023
Nje nga librat me te mire qe kam lexuar se fundmi. De Beauvoir duhet te lexohet me patjeter sidomos nga ata qe kane shume pikepyetje ekzistenciale.
Ngjarja, apo historia e thurur ne liber nuk eshte aq terheqese vecanerisht ne fillim. Nuk kuptohet se si mpleksen rrethanat ne menyre te atille qe Ksaviera i bashkohet ciftit te pandashem Fransuaze e Pier. Nuk ka ndonje arsye te mirefillte pse keta njerez krijojne ate te famshmen trio dhe nuk ka ndonje shpjegim per sjelljet e tyre ne raport me njeri-tjetrin.
E vetmja qe duket se mban barren e rende te trios eshte Fransuaza. E vetmja qe duket se perfiton nga trioja eshte Ksaviera dhe i vetmi qe kerkon te ruaje baraspeshen eshte Pieri. Gjate leximit rolet coroditen, personazhet vete coroditen e po ashtu edhe rolet e tyre te bejne te hutohesh shume shpesh, aq shpesh sa te behet te ndalosh leximin. Perseri e perseri, me mund e kap dhe njehere fillin dhe kerkon te kuptosh se kur do u mbushet mendja tre personazheve te luajne me letra te hapura dhe kur do reshtin se frymezuari njeri-tjetrin per t'u hequr ndryshe, shtirur.
Aq kotesi ka ne jeten e Fransuazes dhe Pierit, aq pakuptimesi, saqe nuk mjaftojne aktrimet ne teater, por duan drame edhe ne jeten e perditshme. Fransuaza kerkon te ekzistoje nepermjet Ksavieres dhe anasjellas, e ne perfundim nuk arrin dot te jetoje me pasqyrimin e ndergjegjes se saj, gje qe e con ate ne nje veprim krejt te papritur. I dhashe pese yje librit pasi jo se me ka lene pa fryme apo "amazed", por me ka dhene shume pergjigje ne lidhje me arsyet qe cojne njerezit ne sjellje e vendime te caktuara.
Ngjarja, apo historia e thurur ne liber nuk eshte aq terheqese vecanerisht ne fillim. Nuk kuptohet se si mpleksen rrethanat ne menyre te atille qe Ksaviera i bashkohet ciftit te pandashem Fransuaze e Pier. Nuk ka ndonje arsye te mirefillte pse keta njerez krijojne ate te famshmen trio dhe nuk ka ndonje shpjegim per sjelljet e tyre ne raport me njeri-tjetrin.
E vetmja qe duket se mban barren e rende te trios eshte Fransuaza. E vetmja qe duket se perfiton nga trioja eshte Ksaviera dhe i vetmi qe kerkon te ruaje baraspeshen eshte Pieri. Gjate leximit rolet coroditen, personazhet vete coroditen e po ashtu edhe rolet e tyre te bejne te hutohesh shume shpesh, aq shpesh sa te behet te ndalosh leximin. Perseri e perseri, me mund e kap dhe njehere fillin dhe kerkon te kuptosh se kur do u mbushet mendja tre personazheve te luajne me letra te hapura dhe kur do reshtin se frymezuari njeri-tjetrin per t'u hequr ndryshe, shtirur.
Aq kotesi ka ne jeten e Fransuazes dhe Pierit, aq pakuptimesi, saqe nuk mjaftojne aktrimet ne teater, por duan drame edhe ne jeten e perditshme. Fransuaza kerkon te ekzistoje nepermjet Ksavieres dhe anasjellas, e ne perfundim nuk arrin dot te jetoje me pasqyrimin e ndergjegjes se saj, gje qe e con ate ne nje veprim krejt te papritur. I dhashe pese yje librit pasi jo se me ka lene pa fryme apo "amazed", por me ka dhene shume pergjigje ne lidhje me arsyet qe cojne njerezit ne sjellje e vendime te caktuara.
January 13, 2021
“L’invitata” di Simone de Beauvoir è un libro disturbante; un libro verso il quale i pensieri si dirigono spontaneamente, anche quando non sei coinvolto nella lettura. È un libro che, sin dalle prime pagine, si prepara a scavare dentro la tua anima un vuoto insondabile, a lasciarti con una serie infinita e interminabile di interrogativi.
Pensieri, dubbi e domande vengono incoronati dalla scrittrice francese da un’ansia sorda e stancante che – sin dall’inizio -ti spinge a una corsa disperata e forsennata verso la fine, mentre la corona di fiori appassiti si sfalda sotto i nostri occhi, perchè anche ciò che sembra bello nasconde in sè la condanna della marcescenza.
Continua qui:
Pensieri, dubbi e domande vengono incoronati dalla scrittrice francese da un’ansia sorda e stancante che – sin dall’inizio -ti spinge a una corsa disperata e forsennata verso la fine, mentre la corona di fiori appassiti si sfalda sotto i nostri occhi, perchè anche ciò che sembra bello nasconde in sè la condanna della marcescenza.
Continua qui:
Currently reading
April 25, 2008I have always, ALWAYS been obsessed with the love triangle of Jean-Paul Satre, Simone de Beauvoir, Michel Foucault since my cherished time in England when I learned a whole cultural theory of philosophy not taught in the American educational system. I then became an avid obssessive student of post-modern dialectic. Although I have read the Second Sex, it is her lovers and relationships with the men in her real life which fascinate me. This novel is supposed to be the story of her obsession and destructive love with Satre...
Read
July 23, 2024only one of the characters is 17 but all of them behave like it
Displaying 1 - 30 of 436 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.