Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

movement in Nausea

Expand Messages
  • notorious@oasismail.co.uk
    Hi, I m reading the part in Nausea where Roquentin describes the shivering of the tree, and I m finding the subsequent explanation of movement a little
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 17, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,
      I'm reading the part in Nausea where Roquentin describes the
      shivering of the tree, and I'm finding the subsequent explanation of
      movement a little difficult to grasp. Here's my interpretation, could
      you tell me where I'm going wrong?

      - existence is not given birth to, or produced by transition. it
      exists only in the exact present. it is not caused, but comes into
      existence from nothing and back into nothing.
      - movement exists and causes the shaking of the tree, but the tree is
      obliterated and renewed with each passing moment in its new position.

      So, does this mean that existants are completely unconnected to their
      past/future selves, there are no causes? How can movement exist then
      if it is essentially a cause that happens over time?

      Thanks,
      Barry
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.