Eddie's Bookclub Thoughts

How Dune took everything from The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind

The goal of this presentation is to denounce the blatant theft that Frank Herbert committed on Bethesda, by taking everything from one of their game. (Godd Howard is weeping). Frank had the gal to rip of half the lore of The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind a whole 37 years before it was released. I hope that with enough visual and contextual evidence, this case will compel you to boycott any Dune related products, and tarnish the name of Frank Herbert forever.

Video of the intros – believe it or not those are two different videos from two different pieces of media

The People: Fremens and Ashlanders

Let's first look at some relevant world inhabitants of both universes:

Ashlanders

A religious sect of the Aldmers following St Veloth separated from their peers, left their homes in an exodus to a promised land. Now calling themselves Chimers, they travelled to a new hostile land, Resdayn (today's Morrowind) and slowly adapted and thrived in this new harsh environment. They were also free to practice their cult in the open. The Chimers eventually became the Dunmers, and organised themselves into great Houses. Except one people of the Dunmers, the Ashlanders. They were confined to the wilderness and harsh climate of Vvardenfell and organised themselves in clans, with at their head an Ashkhan, and a Wise Woman on the spiritual side. The Ashlanders are very proud, and challenges (often duels) are a common and important part of the culture. They can be called for all matters, from sport to honour. Religion is a big part of ashlander culture, they venerate their own deities, and there is a cult who awaits for a certain prophecy to be fulfilled — for the Nerevarine to arrive. The overall culture of Ashlanders is heavily inspired by irl arabic cultures, but they are also incredibly xenophobic.

Fremen

The Fremens are thought to have come to Arrakis from another planet. A religious sect of that planet, the Zensunni, took part in a hajra — “a migration to find a place to live as well as a holy journey [...]”* — which brought them to Arrakis where they settled. After settling, they thrived in this new hostile land, called themselves Fremens and recognised themselves as a people rather than a religion. They then organised themselves into Sietchs. They are guided by the head of the Sietch, the naib, and a Reverend Mother — a spiritual and religious figure. The Fremen are a very proud people, and ritual challenges often take place and are an important part of their culture. Religions is a strong part of the Fremen culture, they venerate the Shai-Hulud, and a majority believes in a prophecy about coming messiah. Fremen culture is heavily inspired by irl arabic cultures and the islamic faith, but they are also incredibly xenophobic.

In common

So we have two religious sects, leaving they homeworld/continent, on a religious journey to find a promised land. Both people had to adapt to a very harsh land, which lead to the development of a ruthless culture. They are both pariah of the civilised world and organised themselves in clans. At the head of their respective clans is a leader which is the strongest of the tribe, and a woman serving as a religious leader. Duels are common place, and a certain part of both people await the prophesied messiah. Both cultures are heavily inspired by irl arabic cultures. Conclusion: Fremen==Ashlanders

Video of the duels – see the similarities, which one is from Dune and which is from Morrowind, it is impossible to tell

The Setting: Arrakis and Morrowind

We will now look at the land and setting present in each universe:

Morrowind and VVardenfell

Morrowind is a region of Tamriel, which is comprised of the mainland, with a more temperate climate, and Vvardenfell, an island with at its centre a volcano. Although at first hospitable, after the first eruption of it's central Volcano — an event called the Sun's Death — Vvardenfell became extremely inhospitable. It is now characterised by arid wastes, rocky highlands and incessant ash storms. The deserts of ash are called the ashlands, and although some permanent settlements exist, the only people brave enough to live there unsettled are the ashlanders. The people who could, left for the mainland but the Great Houses still have a presence on the island. The Great Houses form the Grand Council and oversee every aspect of politics, trade and commerce in Morrowind. There are many political plots in motions at any given times for such and such House to take power, and they are all vying for power in the background. Open warfare between the Houses was banned by the Tribunal — the official religious institution of the Dunmers — and the Houses now rely on secret plots and the Morag Tong. The Morag Tong is a guild of assassins with a strict code, that will carry out political assassination for the Great Houses. This way the Great Houses can still further their plots, while maintaining a semblance of balance and stability. Ultimately, Morrowind was absorbed into the Empire, after the diplomatic negotiations with the Great Houses and the Tribunal. The Cyrodiilic Empire, the Third Empire, successfully conquered all of Tamriel — the main continent of the planet, Nirn. Not all Great Houses welcome the Empire, and the Ashlanders are particularly hostile to it. But as long as the Empire is allowed to extract resources from Morrowind, they tolerate the dissidents.

The Imperium and Arrakis

Arrakis — Dune — Desert Planet. Arrakis is a planet part of the Imperium. In the books we are introduced to the two main area distinctions on the planet; the cities and the desert. While life in the cities is not great, the desert life is even harsher, as on top of the arid wasteland and sometimes rocky terrain, you have to look out for worms. If that wasn't enough, there are also sandstorms which can be quite deadly. No one from the Imperium but the natives live on Arrakis by choice, yet the Imperium still has a strong presence on the planet, due to an inestimable resource it has: spice. A Great House, the Harkonnens — then the Atreides — then the Harkonnens again, is overseeing every single aspect of politics, trade and commerce on Arrakis. The Imperium and its functioning is not described in great detail in the book, but we can infer an almost antagonistic relationship with some of the Great Houses and the Emperor. The Fremens are particularly hostile to the Imperium and the Harkonnens which rules on its behalf. After the events of the first book, the Imperium uses the Muad'Dib religion to rule over the land, with the government and religion being heavily intertwined.

In common

Both lands are part of a bigger Empire after annexation. Both have Imperial colons on the territory, with more or less power depending on the specific territory. Both harbour natives and non-native populations, with the native being harden by a harsh climate as well as colonial occupation and repressions. Expectedly, the natives are hostile toward the colonial empire. This colonial empire uses Great Houses to rule over the land, but the relationship is more complicated than a simple alliance, and every Great House is different. Both lands are roughly separated in two regions; (sorta) hospitable were some natives are not welcomed, and unhospitable where some natives have taken over. This second region presents very harsh climate conditions, with storms of the small particle variety. Both lands (after some point) have government and religion heavily intertwined.

Video of the storms – which one is Dune, which one is Morrowind, again, impossible to tell

The Prophecies

Nerevarine Prophecy

The Nerevarine prophecy states the return of Nerevar, and save the descendent of the Chimers, the Dunmers, cast down the Tribunal as false Gods and drive the Empire out of Morrowind.

The reincarnation of Nerevar, the Nerevarine, will be an outsider born of uncertain parent, on a certain day. They will initially come from and be affiliated with the Empire, which exploits Morrowind in its imperialist colonialist endeavour. The Nerevarine will unite the Great Houses, and the Ashlander tribes of Morrowind under one banner. The Nerevarine will also be immune to Blight, or the Corprus disease, a plague from Morrowind. The Nerevarine will commune with Azura (a Goddess in the Elder Scrolls) and she will chose them. The Nerevarine will defeat the great Evil from the House unmourned.

Our character in Morrowind is initially chosen by the Empire to further its political goals, by pretending to be the Nerevarine. Our character, a former prisoner, was chosen because he fulfils the initial requirements of the prophecy: Born on a certain day to uncertain parents. We claim to be a prophet by using the local prophecy of the Ashlanders, despite not really knowing if the prophecy is real. We are not the first ones to have claimed to be the Nerevarine, and there are a few trials that we are asked to perform to verify our status. This includes one requiring performing an action that would kill anyone but the chosen one. After communing with Azura, we have the evidence needed to unite the tribes and Great Houses under the common enemy, Dagoth Ur. It is to note that it is never made clear whether the prophecy is real, or whether Azura was just using us to get to her mean. It is Azura after all who created the prophecy. In any case, we “fulfil” the prophecy, but not in the way the natives of Morrowind expected, and after the fact, the Empire is still in Morrowind, if a bit changed.

Muad'Dib/Lisan al Gaib

The prophecy of the Lisan Al Gaib is not explicitly narrated in the books, but a few components are given to us through dialogues.

• The Lisan Al Gaib will be an outsider
• He will be born of a Bene Gesserit mother
• He shall know the [Fremen] ways as though born to them
• He will be a messiah and unite the Fremen, defeating their oppressor
• Random vague tidbits (will quote the holy words...)

This prophecy was however implanted by the Bene Gesserit as part of the Missionna Protectiva, and is not something that came about organically on Dune. Paul fills the first parts of the prophecy as he is not native to Arrakis, and his mother is a Bene Gesserit. He also displays some knowledge of some of the Fremen ways, but it could be by sheer luck. The prophecy is by design very murky, and some Fremen are very eager to recognise Paul as the Lisan Al Gaib. After some initial pushback, Paul fully embraces his role in the prophecy and unites the Fremen tribes. He then sets his sight on the driving the oppressor out of Arrakis. Paul ultimately fulfills the prophecy, but the Imperium however remains on the planet, but is significantly changed. Paul unites the Great Houses, under the banner of the Jihad to assert his power as emperor.

In common

So we have a stranger to entering and eastern inspired land. This stranger is initially affiliated with an empire that exploits this land. A local prophecy that the stranger is aware of describes them being a messiah and saving the locals from that empire. The stranger uses that prophecy to their advantage and claims to be a prophet. The stranger unites the native people and the Great Houses against a common enemy. The stranger ultimately fulfills the prophecy, but not in the way it was intended, and the Empire remains.

What happens in both stories

Morrowind World and Main Quest

At the very beginning of our adventure, the Emperor chooses us to be shipped to Vvardenfell. If at first affiliated with the emperor, and by extension the Tribunal, we are to become an enemies of the latter by intermingling with the Ashlanders. The tribunal had been oppressing the Ashlanders using it's elite soldiers the Ordinator long before our arrival. Although we were aware of the prophecy before hand, and that we were at the center of it, the locals further our understanding of it, and we have to prove to them that we are indeed the Nerevarine. The tribunal is actively hostile towards us, and we cannot take refuge in the civilised regions they control. We ultimately use the prophecy to our advantage and start uniting the different Ashlanders tribes against a common enemy.

Dune

The Atreides, including Paul, are commanded by the Emperor to rule over Arrakis. Smelling a trap from the Harkonnens, the Atreides start forming relationships with the locals of Arrakis, the Fremens. The Fremens had been oppressed by the Harkonnens since before the Atreides set foot on Arrakis, and have a deep hatred of them. The Emperor betrays the Atreides and with the Sardaukars, its elite shock troops, begin decimating Atreides and Fremens alike. Paul, which is aware of the prophecy, takes refuge with the Fremens, and has to prove that he is indeed the messiah from the prophecy. He takes advantage of the powers the prophecy grants him and unites the different Sietches against a common enemy.

Miscellaneous

Ordinators and Sardaukar

Just want to reinforce the similarities between the Sardaukars and the Ordinators. While the Sardaukars are the elite units of the Emperor, whose existence justifies its dominion over the Great Houses, The Ordinators are the elite unit of the Tribunal, now allied with the Empire, which grant a definite legitimacy to the Tribunal, especially after their loss of power. While the Ordinators' role encompasses more responsibilities, the Sardaukars also have many roles, from guarding the emperor, to dealing with clandestine operations. While the Sardaukars originate for Salusa Secondus, almost all Ordinators come from House Indoril.

Thu'um and the Voice

The Voice in Dune is a Bene Gesserit technique that allows the user to project their voices in a way that forces people to obey a command, i.e. bends their will. Sorta similarly in The Elder Scrolls, the voice — or thuum — allows user to project words of power using their vocal chords, but with more varied and reality bending effect. Just like the Voice, the Thuum is not gatekept by mystical/biological properties, and regular humans can learn to use it, although it take more time.

Water of Life\Kwisazt Hiderach — Ring of Moon and Star

As you all know, in Dune, Paul has to drink the Water of Life and survive to prove that he is the Kwisatz Haderach — as only the Kwisatz Haderach would survive this trial. Similarly, in Morrowind, the main protagonist has to don the Moon and Star Ring to prove that he is indeed the prophesised Nerevarine — as the ring would kill anyone who is not the Nerevarine.

Ending of the prophet's story

At the end of Dune Messiah, Paul goes to the desert and his fate is a bit uncertain (although death is the most likely one). We learn in the Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, set a few years after Morrowind, that the Nerevarine's fate is also unknown. He went on an expedition to Akavir, a foreign, mysterious and dangerous land. Since he never returned, his fate is also most likely death.

Tribunal/Alia

SPOILERS FOR CHILDREN OF DUNE

There is a striking similarity between the decline of the Tribunal and the decline of the Muad'Dib religion following the loss of Paul.

In Dune, before going off to the desert, Paul puts Alia in charge. Alia doubles down on the involvement of religion in government, and also goes mad because of the intrusion of the Barron into her head. There are frictions between the maybe more legitimate faction of fremen led by Leto II. Alia is ultimately stopped by the hero, here Leto II.

In Morrowind, before the events of the game, Nerevar “goes MIA” (is murdered by the Tribunal) and they put themselves in charge of the country. They double down on the involvement of religion into government and after Dagoth Uhr cuts off their access to divine power. The three members of the Tribunal either become dead, recluse, or mad. In particular, Almalexia which resides in the capital of Morrowind goes mad and uses religion to her sick goals, while tension grows between her and the King's forces (arguably a more legitimate faction). Almalexia is ultimately stopped by the Nerevarine.

Gaps in the Comparison

Obviously Mr. Herbert didn't copy The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind too hard, as it would have been obvious. There are many elements of Morrowind that are not found in Dune, but it is most interesting to look at which major elements appear in Dune, but not in Morrowind.

Video of the worm – marvel at the size of the worms in Morrowind

Shaia Hulud

There is no real parallel to the Sand Worms in Morrowind, props to Frank for inventing something original, instead of lifting everything from Morrowind. The worms are an integral part of Arrakis, and the Fremen life, but also of great importance to the rest of the Universe as their are an integral part of the cycle of spice. There is nothing comparable, in Morrowind. If we wanted to really stretch things, we could say that the kwarma. Kwarma go through multiples stages of life, like the Shaia Hulud, and even start in worm phase (Kwarma Forager). The products of the kwarmas (eggs, cuttle, scrib jelly and jerky) are very important to Vvardenfell and the main export of Morrowind. However, it is direct by product of the kwarma's that is the main resource, and it is absolutely not vital to any other country or group of Tamriel. Kwarma's are relatively harmless, and do not live in the sand, or even in desert regions. It is also not a means of transportation, for this we would have to turn to another bug-like creature, the Stilt Strider.

Melange/Spice

Since there are no worms to perpetuate the spice cycle in Morrowind, there is no spice there. There are also no analogous substances in the Elder Scrolls universe. The only thing that could almost get close to the spice is moon sugar. It is then refined to make skooma, a drug. This drug doesn't give you prescience, you just get Fortified Strength and Speed as well as Drain Intelligence and Agility. Long term use also decreases literacy and vocabulary (like tiktok). Also, the Empire is not in Morrowind for moon sugar, as it's main exporter in another province of Tamriel; Elsweyr.

Conclusion

Are you convinced? What more must I do to get you to believe me. Do you think I'm a mad man? You do don't you. It matters not. Come Nerevar, friend or traitor, come. Come and look upon the Heart and Akulakahn, and bring Wraithguard, I have need of it. Come to the Heart chamber, I wait for you there, where we last met, countless ages ago. Come to me through fire and war, I welcome you! Welcome Moon-and-Star, I have prepared a place for you! Come, bring Wraithguard to the Heart chamber, together, let us free the cursed false gods! Welcome Nerevar, together we shall speak for the law and the land and drive the mongrel dogs of the Empire from Morrowind! Is this how you honor the 6th house and the tribe unmourned? Come to me openly, and not by stealth. Dagoth Ur welcomes you Nerevar, my old friend... but to this place where destiny is made, why have you come unprepared? Welcome, Moon-and-Star, to this place where YOUR destiny is made. What a fool you are, I'm a god! How can you kill a god? What a grand and intoxicating innocence! How could you be so naive? There is no escape, no recall or intervention can work in this place! Come! Lay down your weapons! It is not too late for my mercy...

Sources:

The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind — Bethesda

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion — Bethesda

The Unofficial Elder Scrolls Page (UESP) — many people

Was Morrowind inspired by Dune — r/teslore

Morrowind and Dune — r/Morrowind

I'm feeling a lot of similarities between Morrowind's lore and “Dune” — r/teslore

Questions about Kwama — r/teslore

Dune — Frank Herbert

Dune Messiah — Frank Herbert

The Dune encyclopedia — Dr. Willis E. McNelly

Dune Wiki — many people

Disclaimer

Just like what the Bene Gesserit did with the Lisan Al Gaib Prophecy, I have kept everything very vague here, so that I can emphasise the similarities between both works, and push the narrative. Although what is written is true, the words are stretched to their furthest extend and their accuracy might be diminished. Both works amount to much, much, more than what was written here, as they had to be reduced to their barest bones to fit inside each other.

Also Dune came out before Morrowind.

In this demonstration, I will definitely prove that “Free Falling” is about the 1897 novel titled Dracula, and that [redacted].

Lyrics

• She's a good girl loves her mama Loves Jesus and America too [”she” is obviously referencing Lucy Westenra who has a close relationship with her mother. Lucy is also a devout christian like most people at the time, and enough of a friend with a texan (Quincy) for him to ask for her hand, therefore she must love America if only by proxy]

• She's a good girl, crazy 'bout Elvis [Obviously referencing St Elvis, the pre-patron Saint of Ireland — she probably has some irish origins]

• Loves horses and her boyfriend too [Lucy has been depicted as being an animal lover and she also loved Arthur Holmwood, her fiancé/boyfriend]

• It's a long day, living in Reseda [The count is trying to throw us off, but his child brain is no match for my man brain, and I have two believable theories; 1. Reseda is a famous plant native to Europe and the Carpathians 2. This is a reference to the book Vampire Mademoiselle Reseda, a bit more obscure reference, but that book came out in 1891; it must still have been fresh in the count's memory]

• There's a free way, running through the yard [Being a bit cryptic here, but nothing too ambiguous. The free way must refer to a way that is free, way as in manner. And the yard is obviously the graveyard/Chapel from the Castle where the count and his mistresses rest. So here he is simply saying he languishes the times when he was — in a carefree way — strolling through his castle. I will explain the timeline when we look at the refrain.]

• I'm a bad boy, 'cause I don't even miss her I'm a bad boy, for breaking her heart [If you have read the novel, the count is indeed a bad boy. And everything indicates that he did not miss Lucy; after he turned her he did not preoccupy himself with her. Furthermore, turning Lucy into a vampire most likely broke her heart — she had to be stabbed in the heart as a result. Here the count may be showing some remorse; it will be explained soon.]

• And I'm free, I'm free fallin' Yeah I'm free, free fallin' [All will be explained here. This free fall happened when the crate that the count was in was thrown off the carriage, right before he was slayed. He is in a free fall and he is reflecting on his past actions, showing remorse, which are in the verses of the song.]

• All the vampires, walkin' through the valley Move west down Ventura boulevard [This is referencing his wives, who went down the valley to meet Van Helsing and Mina. The second part moving west is an obvious reference to the sun setting, and Ventura with a capital V can only be a from the old italian meaning of fate/destiny. Putting both together we have the remarkably poetic metaphor telling that his wives “set down the boulevard of fate/destiny” a euphemism for their deaths. Here he is clearly saying that he regrets the passing of his wives.]

• And all the bad boys are standing in the shadows And the good girls are home with broken hearts [This solidifies my theory, he himself is standing (or lying depending on the frame of reference) in the shadows of his box, falling, while his wives are at home — in the chapel of the castle — with wooden stakes through their hearts — quite literally broken hearts. You've had my thoughts on the chorus, so let's move on to the last verse.]

• I wanna glide down over Mulholland I wanna write her name in the sky [Here the first part is about the count in his box gliding down the numerous rivers leading to his Castle. Why he refers to it as Mulholland is a mystery; the specifics of his inner workings escape me. Maybe a private joke. The second part is probably a delusion of the count; he expects to repent from his crimes against Lucy by writing her name from the heavens; he will go straight to hell.]

• I'm gonna free fall out into nothin' Gonna leave this world for a while [This is plain obvious, after his free fall, he is to be slayed and turn into dust; into nothin'. The second sentence is either a euphemism for being gone for good, or prophesizing that that was not the end for the count, and he is still alive...]

Instrumentals

This part will be quick, if the count is still alive, then I might be in great danger writing this article. I cannot believe what I might have uncovered. I need to settle down... Let's first look at the chord progression:

As you can see from this high-quality pic, there are only three chords in this song. D, D4 and A. D is just D. D4 is a misnomer it is either D_sus4 or D_add11, in any case, we can group it in the D family of chords using the solmization system and have it be R_e. A is just A. Putting everything together we get D-R_e-A. Impossible! That's the guitar part, the bass part roughly follows it but a whole step down, in C, but with one less chord change. This becomes C, follower by and inverted C_sus4add6. As D4, we'll group C_sus4add6 in the C chord family and call it Do or Ut. In the beginning, the guitar plays without the bass, and after a rest the bass joins, we shall put the guitar part first. We then have D-Re-A-C-Ut. Then the bass repeats. But writing that first bass part in another manner — composed of F-G-A^# — for instance with A^# as the tonal center, we get A^#_sus6, we'll group it in the A chord family (A^# belongs in the family) and call it La, again using the solmization system. Again since the bass part repeats before the guitar part we'll just put it at the end of what we already have and get: D-R_e-A-C-U_t-La. I cannot believe it... I need to leave this place and hide from him, if he still is...

---

Disclaimer: In an effort to combat misinformation, I must come clean: The first bass chord, which is of course arpeggiated, is not a simple C major chord, but a C_{sus4omit1dominant}. I had to simplify it to C because it would not have spelled Dracula otherwise. All the other chords are technically correct though, but are usually (read: always) written as part of another scale for simplicity, so emphasis on technically correct.

I am always looking for an excuse to turn work I did into work I won't have to do, like coming up with an article for the printhouse. A more altruistic reason for this article, and the ones that will follow on this blog, is that people who couldn't make it to one Bookclub session will have the opportunity to read about my contribution to it. For the first Bookclub I took part in, I read one of the more accessible books in french contemporary philosophy: L'existentialisme est un humanisme – Existentialism is humanistic. This is the transcription of a presentation that the author, Sartre, gave on his previous work, L'Être et le Néant – The Being and Nothingness, in which he explains his own doctrine, existentialism in great, great detail. The book we will look at today is only the broad strokes of his doctrine, and is aimed at replying to the critiques that were made against it.

What is Sartrian existentialism?

His doctrine can be summarised by the following sentence: Existence precedes essence. He says that this holds true for the human and is the reason why we are cursed with absolute freedom. To explain it, he explains the antithesis – Essence precedes existence – that he says holds true for the rest of things. He gives the example of a letter opener: before creating it the artisan already knows what a letter opener is: its function, form, qualities; in other words its essence. Therefore for the letter opener, and other objects in general, essence precedes their existence. Not for the human; for Sartre, there is no preconceived notion of the human being before it is born, its function and qualities are not predetermined. So we have absolute freedom; we are free to construct our own individual essence.

Critique of existentialism: On freedom

One critique of Sartrian existentialism is that there are many factors that limit our freedom; Sartre calls this bad faith. By freedom, Sartre means the ability to act. Therefore, by absolute freedom, Sartre means that ultimately the human is free to choose his own actions and has total responsibility for them. He rebukes a couple of “bad faith” arguments. “Passions contrive our behaviour”; for Sartre that is untrue, we are still the master of our passions, they do not absolve us of responsibility or freedom towards our actions. He goes a bit further and says it is the same for feelings, as feelings are built upon action, felt feeling and manufactured feelings are the same. He gives the example of a young man during the war who has the choice between going to England to be part of the Forces Françaises Libres (French Liberation Army) or staying with his mother and caring for her. He loves his mother and stays to care for her, or, he doesn't love her but still stays to care for her which is an act of love; for Sartre this is the same. Therefore that young man is still absolutely free, his feelings do not dictate his conduct.

“Character traits also influence our behaviour, also restricting our freedom of action.” A simple rebuke for Sartre; character traits are a result of our actions and not the other way around — a coward is a coward because they act cowardly.

On a different angle, Sartre says that “signs” and advice given to us also do not do anything to impede our freedom. You are free to see any sign in anything and to derive any meaning from any sign you encounter. As for advice, not only are you free to follow them or not, but you also choose who you are going for advice; you most likely already know what you will be getting.

“Our past experiences dictate our actions.” Here, Sartre says that we are free to derive any meaning we want from our past experiences — if we are to consider it at all before doing actions in the present. We can draw what we want from our life and background and we are responsible for what we draw from it.

“Human nature constrains our freedom.” Sartre argues that there is no such thing as human nature; there is no predefined essence for the human as existence precedes essence. But he concedes that there is such a thing as a human condition, which is defined by all the limitations imposed on the human, whether physical, technological, historical... However, they don't take any freedom away from the human, those limitations do not define us and our actions, but we can choose to define ourselves and our actions with regard to them.

Critique of existentialism: On Quietism, Absurdism and Individualism

One critique of this doctrine is that it is ultimately one of inaction – what Sartre calls quietism. Absolute freedom, which comes with absolute responsibility for our actions would lead us to choice paralysis/inaction. This is wrong for Sartre, as not choosing is a choice in itself which we are also responsible for. Another angle is that since the human is nothing more than their actions — hopes, dreams and potential are not to be considered — the human has to act to define himself, otherwise we are nothing.

Some of his critiques touch on the subject of absurdism, since there is no human essence, there are also no human values (Sartre's doctrine is purely atheistic); the only thing that matters is our actions. Therefore we are free to act however we please as there is no predefined meaning to our existence or morals guiding our actions. Here Sartre responds that we humans create our own morals and he also simply reminds us that we still have total responsibility for our actions.

Another critique brought forward is that this is a very individualistic doctrine; since we have absolute freedom we are free to do as we please, with complete disregard for the others. This is reinforced by the fact that we create our own moral. Sartre has a bit more trouble replying to that but says that we have to choose others' liberty on top of our own. But also that we have to act as if everyone else was going to act like us.

Humanism

The most simplistic definition of the term humanism is: a system of thought placing the human at the center of everything. Sartre claims that existentialism is inherently a humanistic doctrine since it rests on human subjectivity. For him, every truth and action implies human subjectivity and environment. “The human is its own legislator” is a direct quote from Sartre when linking existentialism and humanism, we decide for ourselves what we are to become. In this sense, it is an optimistic doctrine based on actions and at its centre lies the human — and therefore it is humanistic.

My critique: On individualism, human definition and “human condition”

I believe that Sartre's rebuke of the individualistic nature of his doctrine is very weak and inconsistent with the rest of his argument. If we are to choose our own moral as an individual, and are to have absolute freedom, then there is nothing stopping us from disregarding others' freedom and well-being. If, like Sartre says, we have to choose other's freedom — and limit our actions to what we think would be ok for everyone to do — then we do not have our own absolute freedom, and do not get to define our own morals. That would mean that there is a predetermined moral conduct that all humans must adhere to, before being born and making their own, which completely contradicts the foundation of L'existentialisme est un humanisme. Staying consistent with the rest of his doctrine, and ignoring this poor rebuke, existentialism becomes an extremely individualistic doctrine; not only are we alone to choose our actions with no regard for anyone, but we also cannot be judged; there are no universal morals to be judged on since we construct our own. This is not very humanistic, as we are putting the individual, and not the human (in the broader sense of the term) at the focus of our doctrine.

His definition of the human is also deeply inhumanistic in my eyes: humans are more than just the sum of their actions. Actions, without words, are just what others can see of us and define us on. We are more than what others perceive of us; our reality is more than the reality of the others of us. We are to define ourselves with more than our actions; our hopes, dreams, feelings, needs, wants... They are all very real and contribute to our being.

I also find his views on the human condition very naive; for him, the only limiting factors are physical, physiological, historical (going hand in hand with technological and geographical). And apart from that we are free to act and define ourselves as we please. No. The limiting factors in his definition of human condition are only the ones we could define as universal; the ones that completely hinder one's freedoms during their whole life are of a socio-economical nature. It is easy to see that even at the youngest age, the kids of the bourgeoisie or the proletariat will both evolve in very different worlds and have very different freedoms. This is not by free conscientious choice of the individual, in this case the kid. Saying that this ultimately doesn't matter and that those different individuals both have absolute freedom (remember Sartre's definition of freedom is the freedom of action) is extremely naïve. More on this in another book analysis.

Budding reflection on absurdism

I am not convinced by Sartre's response to calling his doctrine absurdist. He says that since we create our own morals and also since we still bear responsibility for our actions, then his doctrine is far from absurdist. Since we define our own moral, as an individual, then they can arbitrarily take whatever form they want; since we have absolute freedom it doesn't matter. In this sense that part of the rebuke is ineffective. The second part says that we are responsible for our actions, so we can't do whatever we want. There cannot be responsibility without morals; since there is no universal moral for Sartre, then we must be responsible with respect to our own moral, which we established above as being potentially arbitrary and meaningless. Therefore this argument against the absurdist nature of his doctrine doesn't stand. Does the fact that we are free to act in as irrational and meaningless manners as we want to make existentialism and absurdist doctrine? To be honest I do not know enough about absurdism (yet) to deliver a final opinion. I believe that since in Sartre's doctrine we are to create our own meaning, as existence precedes essence – and meaning would be in our essence – at the very least it can be an absurdist doctrine. More on this in (yet) another book analysis.

Closing remarks

It would be more appropriate to judge Sartre's doctrine in the book presenting it, L'Être et le Néant but I cannot be bothered to read 700+ pages on Sartrian existentialism. This is why my own critique of the absurdist nature of existentialism is not a definite judgement. I can only judge on what is in this book; the response to other's criticism and the claim that existentialism is humanistic. As I have shown, his rebuke of other's criticism is quite weak and his argument for existentialism to be inherently humanistic is even weaker. However, this is not the only work of his defending existentialism; Critique de la raison dialectique is an 800+ pages book trying to conciliate existentialism and Marxism and in broader strokes solidify existentialism. I am also not reading that. Right now, I am more interested in getting a solid basis on many different concepts, rather than dedicating 8 months to just studying one thing in extreme depth. That will come later.

I have much to learn to be able to make more insightful commentary on what I read. This is in the works; I am stocking up on more or less obscure philosophical works (for the anglo world) while in France; I will become an academic weapon.