Sartre, a renowned writer, playwright, professor, and philosopher (1905 - 1980), the father of the existentialist philosophical current, argues that man first exists and only then defines himself, and his entire being is the result of his actions.

When we think of philosophy, we immediately think of something dense, elaborate reflections filled with difficult-to-decipher symbols. However, Sartre has the ability to make us reflect on the philosophical questions of the nature of human beings just by telling a small and simple story.

The story that Sartre tells us

Pierre and Éve are both assassinated. Pierre, the leader of a group of conspirators, is killed by a comrade of his on the eve of the group's planned revolution. Lucien betrays the organization by collaborating with the despotic regime. Pierre symbolizes the struggle of man for equality and fraternity.

Éve is a very rich woman who is poisoned by her husband, who married her only for money and power. André is an ambitious and influential man of the regime who develops a strategy to eliminate the conspirators. Éve, a fragile woman, symbolizes the empathy that humans feel towards the victims of the ambitious, selfish, and malevolent man.

After death, Pierre and Éve meet in purgatory and discover why they were assassinated and by whom. They fall in love, and according to rule 140 of purgatory, two people who were made for each other and never met in life have the opportunity to return to life to meet. According to the rule, they have 24 hours to prove that they can love. If they succeed, they will return to human life.

When they return to life, Pierre looks for his comrades to inform them that there is a traitor among the group and that the men of the regime are preparing to annihilate them. Éve returns home to take revenge on André.

This book surprises with the involvement and fluency of the writing, where all the events stick to the essential to tell a banal story, but loaded with meanings (symbolic, emotional, personal, and universal) that emerge through the action of the events and not through introspection.

It surprises with the intensity of the plot that, on the one hand, the narrative divided into small parts hooks the reader who wants to know what comes next and gets completely immersed in the story, but on the other hand, because of the symbolism that each of these parts represents. The two people are given the opportunity to live and love, but instead, they return to the earth and perpetuate the same mistakes of the past, revenge, war, and death.

The facts are presented symbolize the opportunity that man has to reorient himself in a path whose values are based on love, fraternity, and comradeship, but in reality, it has resulted in failure throughout the millennia. War after war, betrayals after betrayals, man continues to prefer to die rather than live.

Diriler daima telaşlıdır.

They are constantly in a state of anxiety, always worried about the future and what might come.

Ölüler özgürdür.

The dead, on the other hand, are free from all the troubles and concerns of this world.

İş işten geçmiş, insan bitmiş bir oyunu tekrarlayamıyor.

Once a thing is over, a person cannot repeat a completed game.

It is a fact that we must accept and move on.

Ötede harap bir pistte genç bir çift birbirine sarılmış yeniden yaşamak umuduyla dansediyordu.

Over there, on a dilapidated piste, a young couple was dancing, wrapped in each other, with the hope of living again.

Their bodies moved in harmony, as if they were the only two people in the world.

It was a beautiful and touching scene, a reminder that even in the midst of chaos and destruction, there is still hope and love.

It gave me the distinct impression that the characters were rather muddled and somewhat peculiar in their portrayal of this story. In this work of Sartre's, almost everything seemed to have fallen short of my expectations. However, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I believe that Sartre is more at home with other pieces that have a philosophical bent and is perhaps a little more receptive to those. This particular work seems quite distant from the very typical Sartrean actions and themes that I have come to expect. It's as if he is exploring a different territory here, one that I am not entirely familiar with. But despite my initial misgivings, I am still intrigued enough to want to explore this work further and see if there are hidden depths and meanings that I have yet to uncover.

This book was recommended to me by my boyfriend. At first, I still wasn't expecting to like it. I found it rather funny that it was a play. However, as I delved into it, I was truly pleased with the way the ending unfolded. In my opinion, it was the best path the author could have taken.

What I take away the most from this work is the remarkable fact that Sartre approaches complex themes such as existentialism, free will, and the struggle against the powers that rule. He does so in a way that makes these themes seem simple, almost hidden behind the curtain of the play. This clever technique manages to keep us hooked throughout the entire course of events.

Overall, it was, in the end, a pleasant surprise. I am glad that I listened to my boyfriend's recommendation and gave this book a chance. It has opened my eyes to a new world of ideas and perspectives. I would highly recommend it to others who are interested in exploring these profound themes in an engaging and accessible way.

This story is more fun than one might have initially expected. It's an easy read that keeps you engaged from start to finish.

There are times when it comes across as a bit dumb, but that's part of its charm. The humor is definitely a highlight, making you laugh out loud at various points.

The insta-love trope is present, but there's a twist. They think they're in love, but then they realize that they didn't really love each other after all. It's an interesting turn of events that adds depth to the story.

Another strange aspect is that both characters managed to get killed twice by the same people. It's a rather unusual and unexpected plot point that keeps you on your toes.

However, there is some weird horny stuff in the story that might be a bit off-putting for some readers. Overall, though, it's an entertaining read with its own unique blend of elements.

**Title: Reading for French Class**

In French class, reading plays a crucial role. It helps students improve their language skills in multiple ways.

When students read French texts, they enhance their vocabulary. They come across new words and expressions, which they can then incorporate into their own speaking and writing.

Reading also exposes students to different sentence structures and grammar rules. By seeing how these are used in context, students can better understand and apply them.

Moreover, it allows students to gain insights into French culture and society. They can learn about the history, traditions, and values of the French people through the literature they read.

To make the most of reading in French class, students should choose texts that are appropriate for their level. They can start with simple stories or articles and gradually move on to more complex ones.

They should also read actively, highlighting new words, making notes, and asking questions. This will help them engage with the text and retain the information better.

In conclusion, reading is an essential part of learning French. It not only improves language skills but also broadens students' cultural horizons. So, let's embrace reading and enjoy the journey of learning French through literature.

I had completely forgotten how crisp and clean Sartre's French can be. It is truly remarkable.

Sartre makes his point not just once, but several times. Of course, he does this because he has a burning desire to tell us something rather than simply show us something. I suppose he is just in case we don't "get it" right away.

Love, indeed, seems to be easier after death. This is because while we are alive, there are so many things that get in the way. Even if we are fortunate enough to be given a second chance, we still have to make our choices and then live with the consequences.

It's a complex and thought-provoking concept that Sartre presents, making us reflect on the nature of love and life itself.

“If a couple who are created for each other, due to an error of the administration, have not been able to meet in their lives, they may desire to return to the earth to realize their unjustly deprived love and live their common lives, and in some cases, they may be allowed to do so.”

The father of existential philosophy, Sartre, tells the story of Pierre and Eve, who find each other's love after death, in this novel written in the style of a play script. Even if our couple, who belong to different classes and are late for each other, are given a second chance, they cannot escape the inevitable end.

This story explores the themes of love, fate, and the human condition. It makes us question whether love is truly powerful enough to overcome all obstacles, even death. Sartre's writing style adds a sense of drama and intensity to the narrative, making it a captivating read.

Overall, this novel offers a unique perspective on love and the choices we make in life. It challenges us to think about what we would do if we were given a second chance to pursue our true love.

I easily and deeply immersed myself in this book. It was a very good read, even though I didn't expect a story of this kind.

Throughout this plot, I was able to reflect on a great number of things, while at the same time enjoying myself and relishing a clear and rich text.

Through this story, for me, one thing seems clear: for humans, it seems that dignity is preferred to eternity.

This book took me on a journey of emotions and thoughts. The author's writing style was engaging and made it easy for me to get lost in the story. I found myself empathizing with the characters and their struggles.

The themes explored in the book, such as dignity and eternity, are universal and thought-provoking. They made me question my own values and beliefs.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a good read that will both entertain and make them think.

“Dies ist kein existenzialistisches Buch!” This statement by JP seems rather dismissive. However, one has to wonder if JP is truly being honest with himself. Maybe there are elements within the book that he is choosing to ignore or downplay. It could be that he has a preconceived notion of what an existentialist book should be like, and this particular work doesn't fit that mold in his eyes. But who's to say that his definition is the only correct one? The idea that he is “lying to himself” as the other person suggests might hold some merit. Perhaps JP is afraid to admit that there could be something existentialist about the book, for whatever reason. Maybe it challenges his beliefs or makes him uncomfortable. In any case, it's an interesting exchange that makes one question the nature of JP's claim and the truth behind it.

Why must the existential philosopher Sartre end it in this way?

Right, determinism. It is an already preordained plan, which left me in a certain kind of melancholy after realizing that both protagonists would part ways regardless.

And how ironic it is that they have such contrasting interests and such subtly opposed personalities, belonging to different social economic classes.

This is a classic, I guess.

It is a short read, but there are a myriad of things to ponder about again, and a whole bundle of existential dread. As always.

The story seems to unfold in a deterministic manner, as if everything is already set in stone. The inevitability of the protagonists' separation adds a touch of sadness to the narrative.

The differences in their interests, personalities, and social economic classes further highlight the complexity of human relationships.

Despite being a short work, it manages to引发 deep思考 and evoke a sense of existential dread, which is a common theme in Sartre's philosophy.

Overall, it is a thought-provoking and engaging piece that leaves a lasting impression on the reader.

Bijzonder verhaal van Sartre over twee mensen die na hun overlijden in het dodenrijk elkaar leren kennen en verliefd op elkaar worden. Ze denken dat ze eigenlijk voor elkaar waren voorbestemd, waardoor ze een tweede kans krijgen. Gedurende 24 uur mogen ze elkaar opzoeken en van elkaar gaan houden. Toch blijkt dat wanneer ze in het rijk der levenden aangekomen zijn, ze weer worden opgeslokt door hun dagelijkse dromen en bezigheden.

Sartre weet de zinloosheid der dingen op ontluisterende manier neer te zetten. In dit verhaal zit heel wat meer dan wat ik er aanvankelijk uit haal. Wat ik er tot nu toe uit pik is, is dat het leven vanuit het perspectief van de doden geen zin heeft. De doden willen niet worden geconfronteerd met het leven omdat het te pijnlijk, te zinloos en te ondraaglijk is. Daarnaast hebben de doden ook een gemis: het deel hebben aan het leven zelf en het genieten van de dingen die ermee gepaard gaan, zoals het hebben van een lichaam en relaties hebben met de levenden.

Echter, de levend geworden doden in het verhaal merken dat het leven zelf ook allerlei lasten en bekommernissen meebrengt, waarvan ze geen last hadden in het dodenrijk. Ze worden weer meegezogen door de stroming van het dagelijkse leven en verliezen het gevoel van vrijheid en verbondenheid dat ze hadden gevoeld in het dodenrijk.