In Jean Paul Sartre’s novel Nausea

In Jean Paul Sartres figment Nausea, the origin of Roquentins sickness is shown to be the essence by which things atomic number 18 named and which transactions as a faade oer the more genuine constitution of their populace. end-to-end his experience, Roquentin realizes that much of what is touted as important in life is re in completelyy non-essential. In locate, he finds that the deepest mysteries atomic number 18 hidden by a more frivolous veneer of plurality, to which battalion give names based on their attributes.These plural objects he finds himself disgusted with number one with the stone he held in his helping hand at his moment of epiph all(prenominal). This illness that is undergo by Roquentin is in direct line of credit to individuality, because at root he believes that all watch overs down to macrocosm. People and objects exist that is all that whoremonger and should be said or so them. All their other attributes ar exactly decoys blinding good deal to the real fair play about themselves and their world. Therefore, any individualism is a upright caper, and further claims made by persons concerning ideologies be simply efforts at distracting oneself from the confuse mystery of man.Roquentins sickness manifests itself as a response to the nominal nature of objects. This radical of naming objects (nouns) is one that distracts the brain from the fact that the object is at that place, in humankind, without any real explanation as to wherefore it exists. Roquentin says, Everywhere, now, there argon objects care this screwball of beer on the table there. When I mark off it, I feel like express Enough (Sartre, 8). In fact, this is the way his sickness reacts to all attributes of objects, including color, taste, and other features by which people describe them.The terror of an object as a blue book, for instance, explains away the existence of the object and prevents one from marveling at the fact that it exists at all. This kind of apprehension can occur most readily when a thing can be seen, and this explains wherefore Roquentins nausea occurs simply(prenominal) in the light. The light, according to the sourceing put aside by Roquentin, is where an objects existence becomes obscured. In the dark (or even in the mind of a subject who thinks of the object) the subconscious is likely to think of the thing except in ground of its being therethat is, being in existence. However, in the light, the senses are apt to pick up much(prenominal) things as shape, color, and text. These peripheral things are mere distractionsfrivolities that serve to concoct a reason for the things existence and to divert the mind from the weighty fact of the thing.In the same way, Roquentins nausea rises against personalities of his and preceding(a) eras, and this can be seen as a method of criticizing any magnetic dip toward individualism. This can be seen as he views certain paintings and portraits of perso nalities. It can also be seen in his turn ones stomachd reception to such persons as the Self-Taught Man and others, whose past lives he comes to dismiss as being non-existent like all things past. These people, he argues, have succumbed to an illusion of past glory and exploits, and from this have come to deny their own existence by promoting their essence.In contrast, Roquentin views such historical personalities as Robespierre, Lenin, and Cromwell all as one (Sartre, 69). This proceeds from the root word (noted earlier) that the attributes of a given thing act as a glare that prevents the go out of the more important fact of existence which lies beyond the glare. Following this reasoning, then anything or anyone that seeks to make a name for himself and denies his/her integrity with the inexplicable existence of the universe acts futilely.The scat that Roquentin constructs around the marquess Rollebon is described as conjecture rather than reality. In fact, the merely rea lity that Roquentin acknowledges is the present. This underlines the concept within the novel that debunks individualism, as Roquentins mining of the past to create the marquis can only create a false adjustment of the man. This is further demonstrated in the fact that the marquis life is recreated only by dint of retelling his actions or describing his features. Yet, these are both examples of the things that nauseate Roquentinthe very attributes that distract from the mystery of the marquis existence.In fact, Roquentin says of Rollebon, He is a bubble of obscure and desire, he is pale as decease in the glass, Rollebon is on the spur of the moment, (Sartre, 102). The significance of this is that, through Roquentins book, these attributes attempt to mask the fact that Rollebon is dead and therefore no longer in existence. It is existence that is important. Non-existence equals unimportance, regardless of ones attributes and exploits. Therefore, Roquentin ceases to continue make up Robellons history. This idea can be further generalized to all persons who someway become distinct from all others in existence (whether by naming at birth or subsequent celebrity) as this is all meaningless.The nausea experienced by Roquentin is also a reaction to homo beings tendency to generalize ideas and form them into ideologies. His reaction to Self-Taught Mans socialism highlights the action as a frivolous regard for brothers, sisters, fellow humans and mankind which in reality are names and attributes that simply mask a more equal existence that is common to all that are in the world. This existence unites man with puppet and with inanimate objects, and any attempt to distinguish or distinguish those things around which ideologies are formed is fruitless.Roquentin also refers to what he terms contingency. He writes, The essential thing is contingency. I mean that one cannot define existence as necessity (Sartre, 131). This hints at the idea that any particular rea son concocted by the human mind that points toward the need for a things existence is beside the point of existence, which is by no means essential. In Roquentins conception, therefore, such explanations are non-essential. The only thing that matters is that a thing exists at all, and not ideologies that explain why it exists.The nausea that is experienced by Roquentin exists as a result of his growing disgust with the nominalization of the akin world. He experiences a vertiginous reaction to the illumination of individual objects, which highlights the things attributes. Yet it is these attributes that most prevent the apprehension of their profound existence, as they offer an illusory reason for the things other inexplicable presence in the world.This represents a form of individualism that Roquentin believes is a faade, as all things (persons, objects, animals, etc.) are one in existence. This idea, which is the origin of Roquentins nausea, presents therefore an pipeline agains t individualism. It also presents a similar dividing line against ideology, as these so-called universal concepts are based on beliefs about (or on attributes of) particular thingsand these attributes in reality do not exist.Work CitedSartre, Jean Paul. Nausea. impudently York New Directions Publishing Corporation.