Ladytoys betrouwbaar? Reviews en keurmerk
EROTIEKSITE VOOR VROUWEN MET PASSIE
De zekerheden van https://www.ladytoys.nl
Sneeuwgansstraat 9, 1826 gp Alkmaar
Ladytoys is geregistreerd bij UNUSED ALL-STAR 78 In Low Pro Bucket Bak Kemudi Luncur | Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers
78 In Low Pro Bucket (UNUSED) Universiteit Stellenbosch | SAUK.co.za - Nuus.info
Posts tagged with 'Universiteit Stellenbosch'
Navorsing deur die Universiteit Stellenbosch wys bejaardes in Suid-Afrika ly aan wanvoeding. ’n Kommervrye oudag is ongelukkig nie vir baie Suid-Afrikaners bo 60 beskore nie, het Maritha Marais, senior lektor in menslike voeding aan die fakulteit geneeskunde en gesondheidswetenskappe, bevind. Die navorsing is onder alle rassegroepe in stedelike en landelike gebiede gedoen. Die Wêreldgesondheidsorganisasie het […] Leon Lemmer: Oor ‘vryheidsvegters’ en eksistensialisme (Deel 2) – praag.co.za
Claude Lanzmann (gebore in 1925) is die laaste oorlewende getuie van die binnewerking van die Franse eksistensialisme na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog. Hy was deel van die vriende- en werkkring van Sartre en Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986), Sartre se lewenslange vennoot/metgesel. Lanzmann het ook vir Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961) en Albert Camus geken. Camus het op die buiterante van die eksistensialisme beweeg. Hy wou graag in Parys ‘n verligte intellektueel wees maar het dit bitter moeilik in die oorverligte geselskap van Sartre en Beauvoir gevind. Camus is in Algerië gebore en het daar opgegroei en was bekommerd oor die veiligheid van sy ma, wat in Algiers bly woon het. Sy novelle, Die pes/The plague (1947), kan as ‘n allegorie gelees word van die verpesting wat die FLN in Algerië en die ANC in Suid-Afrika was en is. “We all were up against the wall that plague had built around us, and in its lethal shadow we must work out our salvation” (The collected fiction of Albert Camus, London: Hamish Hamilton, 1962, p 200).
Lees ook: Oor ‘vryheidsvegters’ en eksistensialisme (Deel 1)
Claude Lanzmann, Simone de Beauvoir en Jeal-Paul Sartre in Egipte
Lanzmann het ook vir Gilles Deleuze (1925-1995), ‘n nie-eksistensialis, goed geken omdat hy, soos Sartre, met Lanzmann se suster, die aktrise Évelyne Rey (1930-1966), deurmekaar was. Lanzmann (outobiografie hier onder, Kindle 5216) en sy suster (2541) het Algerynse FLN-terroriste in hulle wonings gehuisves, insluitende Ahmed Taleb Ibrahimi (gebore in 1932), wat ‘n minister in die eerste Algerynse regering ná onafhanklikheid was (2586, 5216).
Lanzmann en Beauvoir het sewe jaar lank (1952-1959) soos man en vrou saamgewoon. “I am the only man with whom Simone de Beauvoir lived a quasi-marital existence” (3602). Terselfdertyd het Lanzmann deurlopend ‘n goeie verhouding met Sartre gehad. Lanzmann het later drie keer getrou, maar dit het hom nie van hierdie eksistensialistiese binnekring vervreem nie. Lanzmann het ‘n leidende aandeel in die begrafnisreëlings van sowel Sartre as Beauvoir gehad. Na Sartre se dood het hy die hoofredakteur geword van die tydskrif, Les Temps Modernes, wat in 1945 deur Sartre tot stand gebring is.
Lanzmann het in 2009 ‘n boek in Frans gepubliseer, wat in Engels vertaal is, The Patagonian hare: An autobiography (London: Atlantic Books, 2012, 545p; Amazon Kindle $13,67). Die boektitel verwys na ‘n haas wat Lanzmann as bejaarde mens in Patagonië teëgekom het en hom opnuut laat besef het dat hy hier en nou springlewendig is (2725); “Patagonia and I were true together” (7914). Hiermee bevestig Lanzmann sy eksistensialisme; dus die werklikheid van sy bestaan, sy syn, wat vir hom die voorwaarde vir die ervaring van die bestaan van alle dinge en gebeure is. “It has never occurred to me, in all the years I have amassed, to dissociate myself from the present, to say, for example, ‘In my time …’ My time is the time I am living right now and even if I like the world less and less – with good reason – it is mine, absolutely” (7898). “You must understand that I love life madly, love it all the more now that I am close to leaving it” (319). Die volgende sin laat my aan Afrikaners in die nuwe, opgedonderde Suid-Afrika dink: “We may be alive, but we no longer recognize the places of our lives; we are no longer contemporaries in our own present” (2389).
In die voorwerk van die boek word genoem: “This publication was granted a translation subsidy from the Centre National du Livre, French Ministry of Culture” (25). Die Franse regering is klaarblyklik bereid om geld te bewillig ten einde hulle kultuur in ander tale te bevorder. Daarom kan Afrikaanse vertalings van Franse boeke seker ook op sodanige subsidiëring aanspraak maak. Dan Roodt het bv vroeër vanjaar ‘n vertaling van een van Jean-Philippe Toussaint se boeke onder die titel, Die badkamer, gepubliseer waaroor ‘n resensent, Joan Hambidge, liries is (Netwerk24, 1 Mei).
Naas joernalis was Lanzmann ook rolprentregisseur. Sy bekendste rolprent is Shoah (1985), met ‘n tydsduur van 9½ uur, wat oor die Holocaust handel en waaraan hy twaalf jaar gewerk het. Ongelukkig word sy outobiografie met herinneringe hieraan oorlaai. Soos Sartre en Beauvoir het hy kommunistiese neigings. Hulle het (terugskouend in die geval van Lanzmann) die Republikeine tydens die Spaanse Burgeroorlog (1936-1939) teen Francisco Franco (1892-1975) ondersteun en daarna die FLN (Front de Libération Nationale) in Algerië. In 1964 het Sartre die Nobelprys vir Letterkunde geweier omdat hy nie met so ‘n Westerse instelling geassosieer wou wees nie. “He did not want to compromise his independence and … he deplored the [Nobel] committee’s tendency to offer the prize only to Western writers or to anti-Communist émigrés, rather than to revolutionary writers from the developing world” (Sarah Bakewell, bron hier onder, p 277). Na alles wat Sartre gedoen het om bv Algerië se bloedige dekolonisering te bevorder, het hy waaragtig gesê: “I might have accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for what I did to help the Algerian people” (4006); dieselfde prys wat FW de Klerk en Nelson Mandela in 1993 ontvang het; eintlik as beloning en bekroning vir alles wat hulle gedoen het om die ANC aan die bewind te kry.
Lanzmann se Joodsheid slaan oorweldigend oral in die boek deur. Wat van ander mense verwag word, geld nie noodwendig vir Jode nie. “Assimilation is another form of annihilation, a triumph of forgetting” (1428). Jode kan hulle kultuur en godsdiens behou, maar van die blanke Algeryne verwag Lanzmann dat hulle hulle kultuur versaak en met die Moslems assimileer. Soos in Suid-Afrika tydens ons stryd teen die terroriste was daar in Frankryk ‘n veldtog teen konskripsie vir diensplig in die kolonies, bv Algerië, met Lanzmann as een van die leidende figure. Hy het Algerië se onafhanklikheid entoesiasties gevier (5216), maar is spoedig uit sy naïwiteit geskok toe die nuwe regering besluit het om 100 000 troepe na die Midde-Ooste te stuur “to liberate Palestine. For me, it was over: I had thought it was possible to believe both in an independent Algeria and the state of Israel. I was wrong” (5221).
Lanzmann was ontevrede met die volgende reaksie van Sartre op die “massacre of the Israeli athletes in Munich” in 1972: “In this war, the only weapon the Palestinians have is terrorism. It is a terrible weapon, but the oppressed have no other … The principle of terrorism is that one must kill” (5954). Sowel Lanzmann as Sartre het die Moslems in Algerië as vryheidsvegters beskou. Noudat Israeli’s in München afgemaai word, word die geweldenaars terroriste genoem. Lanzmann skryf: “Sartre’s comments are hardly surprising: this was how the Algerian War had been triggered, by an attack on civilians, and though we deplored it, we did not express our indignation at Algerian terrorism, but considered it a response to secular colonial oppression, to institutionalized torture” (5954). Sartre “did support Palestinian terrorism, the taking hostage of the Israeli athletes and their assassination in Munich being but a forerunner to a long series of bloody actions” (5981).
Vir Lanzmann en sy politieke meelopers was Fanon wat die “vredesikoon” Nelson Mandela vir linkses in Suid-Afrika was en is. “The encounter that really shook me, unsettled me, captivated me and that was to have a profound effect on my own life was my meeting with Frantz Fanon” (5024). Nadat hy Sartre se opstel, Réflexions sur la question juive (1946, in Engels: “Anti-Semite and Jew”) gelees het, “Fanon became acutely conscious of being black” (5029). Die afleiding wat gemaak kan word, is dat die swartes, soos die Jode, na bewering slagoffers van diskriminasie en benadeling deur die blankes is. Lanzmann skryf: “Fanon is infinitely more violent and demanding: just as Jews are not the creation of the anti-Semite … so blacks will finally be free of the white masks glued to their skin only through struggle, by becoming the sole authors of their own freedom” (5034). Die titel van Fanon se eerste boek is Black skin, white masks (1952).
Hoe het Fanon sy kennis van psigiatrie misbruik om sy politiek te pas? “By linking mental illness to colonial alienation” (5040). Fanon is in 1956 uit Algerië verban. Lanzmann het Tunisië en Algerië besoek en met lede van die FLN-topstruktuur kennis gemaak. In Tunis het Lanzmann vir Fanon besoek. Oor al hierdie FLN-“vryheidsvegters” is Lanzmann in die wolke. “It was hardly surprising that we idealized these people, that we regarded them as our purity” (5179). Fanon “questioned me about Sartre, about Sartre’s health, and I could sense the affection, the admiration he felt for the man” (5050). Sartre se boek, Critique of dialectical reason (1960), het Fanon grondig beïnvloed. “He talked with … persuasive power … about African unity and brotherhood” (5061). “Fanon saw a generalized armed struggle as the only hope for the emancipation of the African continent groaning beneath the weight of the various colonial powers, and cited Algeria as a model, as the spearhead in a struggle that would have to be ruthless: ‘And in our struggle for liberty,’ he concluded, ‘we should plan actions that will strike at the heart of the imperialists – we will have to act with force and, truth be told, with violence'” (5066). Na die publikasie van Fanon se boek, The wretched of the earth (1961), waaruit ek in deel 1 aangehaal het, “the ANC … were lucidly to choose the path of violence” (5066).
Fanon wou hê Sartre moet die manuskrip van hierdie boek lees en die voorwoord skryf (5098). Sartre “felt he too had to meet Fanon, something unusual for him” (5071). “It was easy for me to persuade Sartre to see Fanon, and it was I who organized their meeting in Rome in 1961 … Beauvoir and I went to meet Fanon at Rome airport; we had booked a room for him at our hotel and the three of us had dinner with Sartre on the first night. At this point something unthinkable, something unheard of happened: Sartre, who spent every morning, every afternoon writing, whatever the circumstances or the weather … who never compromised about his work schedule – he would never deviate from his schedule, nothing justified his not working – now Sartre stopped work for three days to listen to Fanon. Simone de Beauvoir did likewise” (5185). Dit is soos bv Max du Preez aan die blankes voorskryf: Moenie vir swartes die waarheid vertel nie; swyg en luister na wat hulle te sê het.
“Fanon’s words burned like flames. And he was also a gentle man whose delicacy and warmth were contagious … He was persuasive, convincing, it was impossible to raise objections, in the face of his words every objection seemed trivial. It is impossible to object to a prophet’s trance” (5190). Kortom, Fanon was vir hierdie drie Franse soos Nelson Mandela was/is vir baie misleide blankes. “I never saw Sartre as charmed, as captivated by a man” (5200). Oor Sartre se voorwoord by Fanon se boek (kyk deel 1) skryf Lanzmann: “Sartre was much critized for that preface … the call to violence and its glorification ring false, he clearly intended to please Fanon, using formulas such as ‘the patience of the knife’, or others that sound excessive or irresponsible when one reads them today, in the light of all the ‘nights of the long knives’ that still bathe independent Algeria in innocent blood” (5964). Ook in Suid-Afrika het ‘n swart regering nie ‘n einde aan bloedvergieting gebring nie.
Fanon “announced like a visionary that Africa, the Africa of his dreams, would not experience the Middle Ages as Europe had – one could not but be carried along by his words, could only subscribe to his glorious utopian ideal” (5072). “We now know that the real Africa is not the Africa of Fanon’s dreams, that it has not managed to bypass our Middle Ages. The real Africa is Rwanda, the genocide of the Tutsis, it is the Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Darfur and others [Marikana, Coligny]. Horror seems to slowly pervade the whole continent, not sparing Algeria … Once the French had left, the Algerians found themselves hobbled on the inside. Hobbled and lame” (5195).
‘n Motor kom klaargemaak uit ‘n fabriek. ‘n Mens word egter nie klaargemaak gebore nie. Eksistensialiste leer dat ‘n mens word wat jy is ingevolge die manier waarop jy lewe. Jy is vry om te kies watter soort mens jy wil wees. Van eksistensialiste kan tereg verwag word om ooreenkomstig hulle filosofie te lewe. Maar dit is daarenteen eintlik voor die hand liggend dat mense met verskillende eienskappe, bv talente, gebore word en dat omstandighede ook ‘n groot rol kan speel in wat ‘n mens word, al kan jy ‘n mate van invloed op jou eienskappe (bv intelligensie) en omstandighede (bv die beroep wat jy kies) uitoefen.
Sarah Bakewell (gebore in 1963) het bekendheid verwerf met haar boek, How to live (2011, 400p; Amazon Kindle $12,14), wat oor die Franse skrywer, Michel Montaigne (1533-1592), handel. Onlangs is ‘n boek van haar gepubliseer wat op ‘n verfrissende manier oor die lewe en idees van die prominentste eksistensialiste handel, At the existentialist café:Freedom, being and apricot cocktails (London: Vintage, 2017, 440p, R211; Amazon Kindle $14,46). “I think philosophy becomes more interesting when it is cast into the form of a life” (p 32); “the rich confusion of that person’s real life” (314). Bakewell het voorheen in boekwinkels en biblioteke gewerk en het baie moeite gedoen om eksistensialisme en veral ses eksistensialiste te verstaan.
Naas die Franse wysgere wat ek reeds genoem het, Sartre, Beauvoir, Camus en Mereau-Ponty, skryf sy ook oor die twee bekendste Duitse eksistensialiste, Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) en Karl Jaspers (1883-1969). Dan is daar ook die Deen, Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), wat ‘n voorloper van die eksistensialisme was, en die Duitser, Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), wat met sy fenomenologie ‘n wysgerige grondslag of wegspringplank aan die eksistensialiste gebied het. Husserl het gesê dat ons moet dink en handel volgens hoe dinge en gebeure hulle in ons sintuiglike ervaring voordoen: “to see what stands before our eyes” (39). Gras lyk vir ons groen en die lug blou. Hierdie soort direkte ervaring is voldoende om ‘n sinvolle lewe te kan lei. Ons hoef ons nie te verknies oor of die grasspriete werklik (of in hulleself) groen en die lug werklik blou is nie.
Fenomenologie word eksistensialisme wanneer dit die vorm aanneem van “describing lived experience as it presents itself” (34). Geen wonder dat eksistensialiste, soos Sartre en Beauvoir en die semi-eksistensialis Camus, naas wysgerige werke ook fiksie geskryf het nie. Eksistensialiste verwag dat ons ons vrye wil moet gebruik om self sin aan ons lewens te gee. “This life is what we have, and we must make of it what we can” (323). Syn/bestaan en sin/betekenis is van deurslaggewende belang in eksistensialisme. Dit blyk uit die twee vakkundig invloedrykste werke oor die eksistensialisme, Heidegger se Sein und Zeit/Being and time (1927) en Sartre se L’être et le néant/Being and nothingness (1943). ‘n Mens bestaan in tyd wat voortdurend besig is om uit te loop. As jou tyd uitgeloop het, is daar niks, hou jou gewaarwordinge op, is jy vir altyd uitgewis. Die dood “takes away the ability to experience anything at all, ever” (300).
Tydens besoeke aan Amerika is Sartre, Beauvoir en Camus met die Amerikaanse rassevraagstuk, soos ongelykheid, rassediskriminasie en rassisme, gekonfronteer. Dit was voor die groot instroming van swartes in Frankryk. “Many blackAmericans who found themselves in Paris after the war [1939-1945] appreciated the experience of being treated with basic human respect. They were more than respected; they were often idolised, as French youngsters so loved black American music and culture” (171).
Aan die begin van hoofstuk 12, waarin na Sartre se ontmoeting met Fanon verwys word, is daar hierdie sin: “If something is not true in the eyes of the least favoured, says Sartre, then it is not true” (271). Dit is dalk een van die oorspronge van die verderflike standpunt dat wat swartes as die waarheid beskou, die waarheid is. Byvoorbeeld, as swartes dink daar is niks goeds in slawerny, kolonialisme, imperialisme, rassesegregasie en apartheid nie, dat al hierdie verskynsels net sleg is, dan is daardie standpunt glo objektiewe waarheid. Dus, subjektiewe waarheid word tot die status van objektiewe waarheid verhef ten einde diegene wat na bewering benadeel is, as’t ware te vergoed. Myns insiens behoort geen rasionele mens met selfrespek hieroor met Sartre saam te stem nie.
Bakewell het by my as leser die indruk van intelligentheid gewek totdat ek op haar kommentaar op Sartre se pasgenoemde stelling afgekom het: “As an idea, this is astoundingly simple and refreshing. At a stroke, it wipes out the weasely cant indulged in by the advantaged – all those convenient claims that the poor ‘deserve’ their fate, or that the rich are entitled to the disproportionate wealth that accumulates upon them, or that inequality and suffering should be accepted as inevitable parts of life” (271). Alle armes verdien nie noodwendig om arm te wees nie, maar sommige luies en niksdoeners verdien dit wel. Alle rykes verdien nie noodwendig hulle rykdom nie, want daar is baie ryk skelms (bv die Guptas?). Maar dit hoef rykes nie verplig te laat voel om hulle rykdom vrywillig met armes te deel nie. Met allerhande belastings verplig die staat rykes in elk geval om hulle rykdom met armes te deel. In sekere opsigte is ongelykheid en lyding noodwendig deel van die werklikheid en albei word by sowel rykes as armes aangetref.
“From now on … Sartre submits himself joyfully to the alienated, downtrodden, thwarted and excluded. He tries to adopt the gaze of the outsider, turned against the privileged caste” (271). Suksesvolle en ryk mense is nie noodwendig suksesvol en ryk omdat hulle (onbillik) bevoordeel is nie. Hulle kan die aanskyn van bevoordeeldes hê danksy bv hulle talente, toewyding, deursettingsvermoë en doodgewone harde werk. Sukses en rykdom impliseer nie noodwendig die benadeling van ander mense nie. Verder was Sartre graag en lank blind vir die lot van diegene wat deur kommunistiese stelsels benadeel is (272).
Bakewell herhaal wat Lanzmann oor Sartre se ontmoeting met Fanon geskryf het (273-274), maar voeg by dat toe Sartre om 2-uur vm ophou gesels en wou gaan slaap, “Fanon was offended: ‘I don’t like people who hoard their resources'” (274); dus, hy as swarte voel geregtig op wat Sartre as blanke het, selfs Sartre se gedagtes of idees. Die oorverligte Sartre en Beauvoir hou egter niks teen Fanon nie. “Beauvoir recalled Fanon saying in Rome, ‘We have claims on you’ – just the sort of thing they loved to hear” (274); ‘n klassieke geval van ubuntu: blankes gee, swartes ontvang.
“That burning intensity, and the willingness to make demands and to assign guilt if necessary, was what had attracted Beauvoir to Lanzmann. Now it thrilled Sartre too. Perhaps it took them back to their war years: a time when everything mattered. Sartre certainly embraced Fanon’s militant arguments, which in this book [The wretched of the earth] included the notion that anti-imperial revolution must inevitably be violent, not just because violence was effective (though that was one reason) but because it helped the colonised to shake off the paralysis of oppression and forge a new shared identity. Without glorifying violence [?], Fanon considered it essential to political change; he had little sympathy for Gandhi’s idea of non-violent resistance as a source of power” (274).
“In his contribution [preface], Sartre endorsed Fanon’s view so enthusiastically that he outdid the original, shifting the emphasis so as to praise violence for its own sake. Sartre seemed to see the violence of the oppressed as a Nietzschean act of self-creation. Like Fanon, he also contrasted it with the hidden brutality of colonialism. And, as in ‘Black Orpheus’ [an essay by Sartre, 1948], he invited his readers (presumed white) to imagine the gaze of the oppressed turned against them stripping away their bourgeois hypocrisy and revealing them as monsters of greed and self-interest” (274).
“Sartre’s foreword to The wretched of the earth provides a snapshot of what was at once most odious and most admirable about him in these miltant years. His fetishising of violence is shocking, yet there is still something to be admired in his willingness to engage with the predicament of the marginalised and the oppressed in such a radical way. Indeed, Sartre had by now become so used to taking radical stances that he hardly knew any longer how to be moderate” (274-275). “In the case of anti-colonial violence, or violence against whites, Sartre’s own people were implicitly on the receiving end, but this only made him applaud it more. There was satisfaction to be had in reversing viewpoints and picturing himself standing in the gale of someone else’s righteous rage. Beauvoir similarly celebrated news of uprisings against France’s colonising forces around the world, feeling elated about anti-colonial attacks in Indochina in the 1950s” (275).
Die ouderdom bring soms wysheid. Selfs Sartre was aan die einde van sy lewe blykbaar nie meer volstoom onredbaar links nie. Toe hy blind was en nie meer kon skryf nie is ‘n reeks onderhoude met hom in die laaste weke van sy lewe gevoer. Sartre was “unusually apologetic – about his earlier pro-Soviet and Maoist views, about his 1946 book on anti-Semitism … and about his earlier fascination with violence … He admits to being a daydreamer in matters of politics” (309-310).
Skrywer Leon LemmerGepubliseer op 9 Januarie 2018 9 Januarie 2018 Kategorieë Leon Lemmer, RubriekeSleutelwoord Claude Lanzmann, eksistensialisme, Frantz Fanon, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir
Vorige Vorige artikel: H&M vra verskoning vir ‘oulikste apie in die oerwoud’-advertensie met swart kind
Volgende Volgende artikel: Taalstryd in skole: Panyaza Lesufi vaar teen Afrikaans uit