When Jean-Paul Sartre Refused The Nobel Prize For Literature

22 October 1964, everyone was waiting for the announcement of who had won the Nobel Prize for Literature. Finally, it was already afternoon, the news-tickers started working: Jean-Paul Sartre had been chosen to be honoured in Stockholm. A short time later, the news-tickers were busily writing again: Jean-Paul Sartre rejected the Nobel Prize for Literature. The literary world was left either speechlessly astounded or vociferously outraged.

Jean-Paul Sartre

It was around 1 pm on this 22 October 1964, when the news originating with the Swedish Academy came across the ticker that this year's Nobel Prize for Literature had been accorded to Jean-Paul Sartre, the author, playwright and founder of existentialism. The justification read that Jean-Paul Sartre's anarchistic spirit and his search for truth had exerted a far-reaching influence on modern literature.
 
Shortly afterwards came the next message which hit like a bombshell: Jean-Paul Sartre refused the Nobel Prize for Literature. The literary world went berserk. Journalists fanned out over Paris in the hope of finding someone or calling anyone who might know something. No one knew or even pretended they knew the background to the news. Journalists finally found Sartre and his life partner Simone de Beauvoir sitting in a restaurant and tried to get an interview. They were rebuffed with a statement that he had done it for personal and practical reasons and that he would issue a written statement with the full explanation the following day.

A day later, the newspapers were full of conjecture about Jean-Paul Sartre's reasons for the refusal. Swedish media were of the opinion that the Nobel Prize Committee had never been insulted more. The  refusal of the prize was unprecedented. George Bernard Shaw had not wanted the prize in 1925, but instead opted to donate the prize money to a literary society. Boris Pasternak had also rejected it in 1958 with a lot of help from his 'friends' in the KGB; Vladimir Putin knows how that one works very well.

Jean-Paul Sartre's rejection was unique: It was done voluntarily and based on his own conviction. He stated: A writer taking a political or literary stance should do so only with the means at his disposition - the written word. Any accolade received would put readers under pressure, which he consider undesirable. Writings would not read same if he were to sign "Jean-Paul Sartre" or "Jean-Paul Sartre, Nobel Prize winner". Furthermore, he didn't consider himself part of either political pole East or West and considered to be home in the free democratic order and socialism. By being awarded the prize, he felt he was being annexed by the West.

The journalists kept on drilling. Two days after the announcement, a team of journalists got lucky again. Again they caught Jean-Paul Sartre in a restaurant. They were kept waiting until the master was ready for them; when he was, they weren't. Neither camera nor sound was ready; the result was footage with too dark images and crackling sound. The catastrophe had high documentary value while he once again steadfastly refused to say something unambiguous. That was the problem of it all: How should he explain not taking sides without taking sides? He was sitting between two chairs; and that is the story the archive sequence tells us today.

The master seemed to refuse the media; at least that was the way it was interpreted. His motives for refusing the prize were difficult to convey. He did not want to be appropriated by any ideology. He was happiest in the no man's land between the political camps. And he didn't want the label "Nobel Prize" stuck unto his words to give them only seemingly more weight.

Jean-Paul Sartre was seemingly unfriendly, stubborn, and difficult to understand; or so it was received by journalists dealing with this particular story. But he was also open-minded, winning, and charming on other occasions.

On a visit to Geneva, he was accompanied by a team of journalists and cameramen from the Swiss newsreel company. As he tramped through the historic city together with Simone de Beauvoir, he showed a completely different side of his personality. It must have been a successful encounter between Jean-Paul Sartre and the media. Looking at the footage, he decided to write the voice-over comments himself. And not only that, he then did the voice-over himself. Jean-Paul Sartre in German acting as a speaker in the background. Unique. Unpredictable. Typical for him.

Further reading
High Literature: Being Politically Incorrect
United Nations World Capital Geneva
The Little Prince