L'Immoraliste

[Ghuyuran]

I have just read L'Immoraliste by André Gide. I wonder much about the character of Michel and how he seems the forerunner of people today, though by the end of the novel he is still unacceptable, even to us liberated masses. The idea of living each instant for what it is, the debauchery, global indifference, self-centered life and the flamboyant sexuality all recall modern man. One day, will people read this novel and find nothing wrong with the character?

[OrphanPip]

Should we find something wrong with the character? Gide certainly seems to argue otherwise in Corydon, granted Gide's affection for pederasty isn't likely to catch on with the masses.

I feel The Immoralist is really about the struggle between the desire to be the authentic individual in a society that functions off of the restrictions of individuality. Do we as a society have a right to stand in the way of self-realisation when it doesn't involve harm to others? Should we care? To what extent can we limit individual expression, and how much does the individual limit himself?

[Ghuyuran]

That is a very valid point of view. You made me realize that I was stuck within my own interpretation: I was offering only the negative aspects of what I saw or rather the only thing I saw was negative. You helped me clarify my question.

Michel does not do any direct harm to anyone, though one could very well condemn that his pederastry is nothing more than sexual abuse. By his account, he indirectly killed his wife: his discovery of himself inevitably affects those close to him. We should care to the extent that it affects us, haha. I'll say that our current society has never been so open to the realization of the self, which leads to my question.

What I meant by finding something wrong with the character is really all about his pederastry and self-centered life. Those are the two major points upon which I wish to discuss. Will one day people consider pederastry of this kind acceptable?

[OrphanPip]

Well the novel is partially autobiographical. Gide left his wife for a 15 year old boy, who he also happened to adopt. His attempt at justifying pederasty is certainly a reflection of his own values. I think most of us understand that pederasty is not necessarily a victimless act, because it can be exploitative. There are grey areas though, an adult having a relationship with a 16 or 17 year old is not the same as an adult pursuing a sexual relationship with a 13 year old.

And while we may condemn pederasty, Gide's relationship with that boy lasted 12 years, and they remained friends until Gide's death.

Self-centered behavior is not likely to take on in grand style either, but it always has its proponents during all periods.