Good Secondary Texts on Jean-Paul Sartre's Being and Nothingness?

[lukasecho]

Can anyone recommend a good complimentary secondary text to use alongside reading Jean Paul Sartre's classic Being and Nothingness?

I am reading Being and Nothingness in a reading group but would like an additional text to provide background, a "reading" of the text etc. I find it usually helps.

Are either of the following reasonable/useful interpretations of B&N?

a) Sartre's Being and Nothingness: A Reader's Guide (A Reader's Guides) Paperback – 26 Feb 2009
by Sebastian Gardner (Continuum)

b) A Commentary on Jean-Paul Sartre's Being and Nothingness
by JOSEPH S. CATALANO 256 pages | 5-1/2 x 8-1/2 | © 1980 Midway Reprint (University of Chicago Press)

[lukasecho]

or any of the following?


- Jean-Paul Sartre
by Danto, Arthur Coleman, 1924

- Using Sartre : An Analytical Introduction to Early Sartrean Themes
McCulloch, Gregory

- Sartre : A Life
Cohen-Solal, Annie, 1948

- The Existential Sociology of Jean-Paul Sartre
Hayim, Gila J., 1938

- Sartre
Caws, Peter

- Sartre
Barnes, Hazel Estella

- The Philosophy of Sartre
Warnock, Mary

[MatejValuch]

In my opinion, this particular work of Sartre isn't that difficult that it needs any complimentary texts or interpretations.

You should form your own interpretation and impression while reading the book, and it may very well differ from that one of Catlano.
Reading secondary texts will just make you understand Sartre's thoughts within boundaries and limits of the interpreters.

[Terrapin Station]

In my opinion, this particular work of Sartre isn't that difficult that it needs any complimentary texts or interpretations.

That sure wasn't the case for me, but in general, I hate continentalism going all the way back to Kant. I didn't know what the fnck Sartre was talking about much of time in B&N. All of the "en soi's" and "pour soi's" made my eyes glaze over/made me just want to strangle him and make his eyes pop out more.

I agree with you that secondary literature is understanding someone's thought within the boundaries and limits of someone else's thought, but that's better than someone's thought seeming like a long list of arbitrary words. The best thing to do is to read a LOT of secondary literature, so you get a bunch of different perspectives.

Re the TC, I just glanced a bit at the Gardner book and it seems decent. In general, I'd look for works focused on Being & Nothingness if that's what you're working on, rather than more general books on Sartre. The key, if your disposition is anything like mine, is to look for secodary literature written by philosophers with an analytic orientatation.

[lukasecho]

I like to read a few secondary texts alongside a primary to understand how to position the primary work in current scholarship. This is required to really deal with a text at a Graduate Level. At MA / PhD level you are required to situate your thought/writings on a text within the contemporary reception of the text and the only way to do that is to read quite a bit of secondary material.

It is also useful to know as you go, what have been the most contentious issues, themes, arguments, and concepts, in a particular text. Which a good secondary text will point out.

I also appreciate the background material that a good secondary text will provide, i.e. where certain key concepts may have come from in the History of Philosophy. Which is hard to do yourself unless you are extremely familiar with all the possible points of influence.