Skip to main content

Love and Hell


Russian Dostoevsky and French Jean-Paul Sartre are both great writers. The latter is more of a philosopher than a novelist, I’d say. Both have left indelible marks in the world of literature. But both have diametrically opposite attitudes towards human society. Sartre apparently hated people (except beautiful women). Hell is other people, he said. Dostoevsky, on the other hand, upheld love as the greatest virtue. Hell, for Dostoevsky, is the suffering caused by a person’s inability to love. 

Jean-Paul Sartre

Sartre thought of love as conflict. People in love try to control each other, he said. Lovers get trapped in vicious circles of sadomasochistic power games which are meant primarily for keeping the other from leaving you. Love is vulnerable precisely because the other person is free to leave you. Love cannot be forcibly extracted from anyone. But many people do just that: extract it. That’s why love becomes power games.

Dostoevsky would look upon Sartre with commiseration. But he was dead a quarter of a century before Sartre was born. Sartre was a man of the brain while Dostoevsky was a man of the heart. Sartre cerebrated, Dostoevsky celebrated life. I have found myself caught between the two. No wonder, I describe my blog as Cerebrate and Celebrate. [See the header.]

I want the personal freedom that Sartre offers to each one of us. I don’t like human societies much. I stay away. I stay aloof. Except in the classrooms where I teach. I have experienced hells while I tried to be a close part of human societies. I have nodded my head ferociously a million times in agreement with Sartre’s statement about hell being other people. 

Dostoevsky

Yet, Dostoevsky appeals more to me. What is life without love? If you choose to love, you choose to suffer too. Dostoevsky knew that. One of his unforgettable characters, Raskolnikov of Crime and Punishment, put his brain above his heart and thought he would be a superior human being because of that. But he failed miserably in being even a human being, let alone a superior one. He was counselled by another character (who was driven to prostitution by poverty) to accept his crime, his guilt, his sin, and acknowledge his responsibility for all of mankind’s morality. You are responsible not only for your personal morality but that of the entire species. Your redemption lies in your ability to love others.

Of late, I often experience a strange urge to kneel down with my forehead on the earth and say ‘I am sorry.’ Sorry for not taking the responsibility for the evils of my species. I feel drawn to Dostoevsky now just as I felt drawn to Sartre earlier. I long to redeem myself.

PS. Written for Indispire Edition 440: Sartre said hell was other people. Dostoyevsky thought hell was the suffering caused by one's inability to love. Who are you more inclined towards? #Hell

Comments

  1. I often think of Sartre's quote 'Hell is other people' because I feel it's quite true. But I don't agree with the rest of it...that love is all about power games. I don't think power has a role to play in love. As for Dostoevsky's idea that love is a virtue, I'm not sure about that. But yes, I would agree that love brings misery all right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I often look back at my own experience while judging this sort of theories. There is a certain degree of manipulation in relationships, I'd say. It's not for power perhaps but out of one's insecurity feelings...

      Love is a virtue for me. A tough one too.

      Delete
  2. Both are not mutually exclusive.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hari OM
    ...which demonstrates that we have all aspects to us and we may have to go through each phase to appreciate the other. The important lesson, ultimately, is to accept and grow, to expand ourselves as human beings. Love only brings misery if we assign a sense of ownership to it - which is then not love at all, but possession. That is Sartre's stance. Dostoesvsky, though, takes a rather more egalitarian and, perhaps, universal view of things. YAM xx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dostoevsky was a greater human being, I think, of the two. And a superior novelist too. So perhaps he stands taller.

      Delete
  4. A well chosen theme. Social influence do have a strong hold in everyone of our lives mostly unknowingly. But, that doesn't stop us to live our lives in cages all cut out from other beings. We need to learn how to balance between the two.
    No doubt, I always favor love because much of our evils within us can be nullified if we hold the staff of love. Love in fact gives us freedom to do anything and take responsibility of what we do. On the other hand there is something called manipulation used in name of love..this is toxic. We should be able to identify this and leave. A worthy thoughtful post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Love is an experiment until one gets to know its depths. Power games happen because most people take a long while to learn its essential lessons. Some never learn too.

      Delete
  5. I think Sartre's view is born out of a weird laziness: You don't want to deal with the realities of people and so you choose to opt out. But its like a cat chasing its tail; Unless you lean in and try, it will never work out. On the other hand, loving anything in this world is the path to a better you. The "suffering" is like little mounds of obstacles: challenges to our ego, conditioning and desires. They are speedbreakers on the road. When we realise the depth of love, we realise, love is in fact freedom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's almost a mystical view. Yes, Sartre probably wouldn't wish undertake the trouble of enduring mediocre mortals merely because he didn't know how to love them.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Aberration of Kali Yuga

Are we Indians now living in an aberrant period of history? A period that is far worse than the puranic Kali Yuga? A period in which gods decide to run away in fear of men? That’s a very provocative question, isn’t it, especially in a time when people are being arrested for raising much more innocuous questions than that? But I raise my hands in surrender because I’m not raising this question; the Malayalam movie that Maggie and I watched is. Before I go to the provocations of the movie, I am compelled to clarify a spelling problem with the title of the movie. The title is Bhramayugam [ ഭ്രമയുഗം] in Malayalam. But the movie’s records and ads write it as Bramayugam [ ബ്രമയുഗം ] which would mean the yuga of Brama. Since Brama doesn’t mean anything in Malayalam, people like me will be tempted to understand it as the yuga of Brahma . In fact, that is how I understood it until Maggie corrected me before we set off to watch the movie by drawing my attention to the Malayalam spelling

Karma in Gita

I bought a copy of annotated Bhagavad Gita a few months back with the intention of understanding the scripture better since I’m living in a country that has become a Hindu theocracy in all but the Constitution. After reading the first part [chapters 1 to 6] which is about Karma, I gave up. Shelving a book [literally and metaphorically] is not entirely strange to me. If a book fails to appeal to me after a reasonable number of pages, I abandon it. The Gita failed to make sense to me just like any other scripture. That’s not surprising since I’m not a religious kind of a person. I go by reason. I accept poetry which is not quite rational. Art is meaningful for me though I can’t detect any logic in it. Even mysticism is acceptable. But the kind of stuff that Krishna was telling Arjuna didn’t make any sense at all. To me. Just a sample. When Arjuna says he doesn’t want to fight the war because he can’t kill his own kith and kin, Krishna’s answer is: Fight. If you are killed, you win he

Kabir the Guru - 1

Kabirvad Kabirvad is a banyan tree in Gujarat. It is named after Kabir, the mystic poet and saint of the 15 th century. There is a legend behind the tree. Two brothers are in search of a guru. They have an intuitive feeling that the guru will appear when they are ready for it. They plant a dry banyan root at a central spot in their courtyard. Whenever a sadhu passes by, they wash his feet at this particular spot. Their conviction is that the root will sprout into a sapling when their guru appears. Years pass and there’s no sign of any sapling. No less than four decades later, the sapling rises. The man who had come the previous day was a beggarly figure whom the brothers didn’t treat particularly well though they gave him some water to drink out of courtesy. But the sapling rose, after 40 years! So the brothers went in search of that beggarly figure. Kabir, the great 15 th century mystic poet, had been their guest. The legend says that the brothers became Kabir’s disciples. The b

Raising Stars

Bringing up children is both an art and a science. The parents must have certain skills as well as qualities and value systems if the children are to grow up into good human beings. How do the Bollywood stars bring up their children? That is an interesting subject which probably no one studied seriously until Rashmi Uchil did. The result of her study is the book titled Raising Stars: The challenges and joys of being a Bollywood parent . The book brings us the examples of no less than 26 Bollywood personalities on how they brought up their children in spite of their hectic schedules and other demands of the profession. In each chapter, the author highlights one particular virtue or skill or quality from each of these stars to teach us about the importance of that aspect in bringing up children. Managing anger, for example, is the topic of the first chapter where Mahima Chowdhary is our example. We move on to gender equality, confidence, discipline, etc, and end with spirituality whi

Kabir the Guru – 2

Read Part 1 of thi s here . K abir lived in the 15 th century. But his poems and songs are still valued. Being illiterate, he didn’t write them. They were passed on orally until they were collected by certain enthusiasts into books. Vipul Rikhi’s book, Drunk on Love: The Life, Vision and Songs of Kabir , not only brings the songs and poems together in one volume but also seeks to impart the very spirit of Kabir to the reader. Kabir is not just a name, the book informs us somewhere in the beginning. Kabir is a tradition. He is a legend, a philosophy, poetry and music. I would add that Kabir was a mystic. Most of his songs have something to do with spirituality. They strive to convey the deep meaning of reality. They also question the ordinary person’s practice of religion. They criticise the religious leaders such as pandits and mullahs. Though a Muslim, Kabir was immensely taken up by Ram, the Hindu god, for reasons known only to him perhaps. Most of the songs are about the gr