How we cite our quotes: (Chapter.Paragraph)
Quote #1
In Thérèse Raquin I set out to study temperaments. [...] I chose protagonists who were supremely dominated by their nerves and their blood, deprived of free will and drawn into every action of their lives by the predetermined lot of their flesh. Thérèse and Laurent are human animals, nothing more. [...] I freely admit that the soul is entirely absent. (Preface.4)
This is where Zola lays out his entire scientific project for Thérèse Raquin as a "study of temperaments." He's looking at Thérèse, Laurent, and company as scientific objects—not people with souls. Whether or not he succeeds in this project is for you to decide.
Quote #2
My aim has been above all scientific. When I created my two protagonists, Thérèse and Laurent, I chose to set myself certain problems and to solve them. Thus I tried to explain the strange union that can take place between two different temperaments, showing the profound disturbances of a sanguine nature when it comes into contact with a nervous one. Those who read the novel carefully will see that each chapter is the study of a curious case of physiology. [...] I have merely performed on two living bodies the analytical work that surgeons carry out on dead ones. (Preface. 5)
Notice how Zola tries to set up his characters' love affair as an experiment and then employs a medical metaphor. He first describes them as a study of "a curious case of physiology," and then as like the "analytical work" carried out by surgeons. That's a lot of science for one book to hold.
Quote #3
Nature and circumstance seemed to have made this man for this woman, and to have driven them towards one another. Together, the woman, nervous and dissembling, the man, lustful, living like an animal, they made a strongly united couple. They complemented one another, they protected one another. (8.7)
Zola's aiming to study the effects of heredity and the environment on the individual. Here, we see how Thérèse and Laurent's temperaments complement each other perfectly.
Quote #4
At the same moment, this man and this woman had felt a kind of failing of the nerves [...]. An affinity of blood and lust had been established between them. [...] From then on, they had only one body and one soul to feel pleasure and pain. This community, this mutual interpenetration, is a psychological and physiological fact that often occurs between those who are thrown violently together by great nervous shocks. (18.3)
Zola again uses medical-sounding language to describe how Thérèse and Laurent become one "organism" after the murder of Camille. This is not your prototypical, rosy-colored-glasses version of novel-lovin'—it's very dry.
Quote #5
Thérèse's dry, nervous character had reacted in an odd way with the stolid, sanguine character of Laurent. Previously, in the days of their passion, this contrast in temperament had made this man and woman into a powerfully linked couple by establishing a sort of balance between them and, so to speak, complementing their organisms. The lover contributed his blood and the mistress her nerves, and so they lived in one another, each needing the other's kisses to regulate the mechanism of their being. But the equilibrium had been disturbed and Thérèse's over-excited nerves had taken control. Suddenly, Laurent found himself plunged into a state of nervous erethism; under the influence of her fervent nature, his own temperament had gradually become that of a girl suffering from an acute neurosis. It would be interesting to study the changes that are sometimes produced in certain organisms as a result of particular circumstances. These changes, which derive from the flesh, are rapidly communicated to the brain and to the entire being. (22.2)
Zola encapsulates his entire scientific project here by describing how Thérèse's nervous temperament affects Laurent's sanguine temperament. He continues to use medical-sounding vocabulary when he explains how the mixture of Thérèse's nerves and Laurent's blood regulates the "mechanism of their being." Are you buying Zola's objective take on lust and love yet?
Quote #6
His remorse was purely physical. Only his body, his tense nerves and his trembling flesh were afraid of the drowned man. His conscience played no part in his terror: he did not have the slightest regret having killed Camille. (22.5)
Zola insists in his Preface that his characters have no soul. Laurent doesn't actually feel guilty for murdering Camille; his body is merely experiencing a nervous shock. Hm…
Quote #7
His physical suffering was frightful, but the soul remained absent. The wretch did not feel a shred of remorse. His passion for Thérèse had infected him with a dreadful malady, that's all. (22.5)
According to Zola, Laurent is nothing more than a human animal. He therefore has no such thing as a conscience, and his suffering is merely a sickness, a "malady"—not a sign of moral guilt. Or it is, and Zola is full of it.
Quote #8
Thérèse, too, was deeply disturbed, but in her it was simply that her original temperament had been greatly over-stimulated. [...] Laurent had been for her what she was for Laurent: a kind of violent shock. (22.6)
Like Laurent, Thérèse also experiences changes to her temperament after Camille's death. And Zola also continues to insist on the fact that Thérèse's sufferings are the result of a shock to the nervous system, not the manifestations of guilt.
Quote #9
Some strange phenomenon had doubtless taken place in the organism of Camille's murderer. [...] Perhaps Laurent had become an artist [...] after the great disruption that had unbalanced his mind and his body. [...] In the life of terror that he was leading, his thoughts became exaggerated and rose to the ecstasy of genius; the sickness of the spirit, as it were, the neurosis that was afflicting his being, was also developing a strangely lucid artistic sensibility in him. (25.26)
Due to Thérèse's influence, Laurent develops a delicate sensibility. Which means that Thérèse's nerves are beginning to dominate his blood. This blending of nerves and bloods is what turns Laurent into an artistic genius. We guess Zola's got a scientific explanation for everything, huh?
Quote #10
It was essential for one of them to disappear for the other to enjoy a measure of peace. This idea occurred to both at the same time: both felt the pressing need for separation and both wanted that separation to be eternal. The murder that they were each thinking about seemed natural to them, inevitable, a necessary consequence of the murder of Camille. (31.44)
Zola is totally invested in the idea that people have no free will. Not only is the murder of Camille presented as an inevitable result of Thérèse and Laurent's affair, but the final suicide of the two murderers is also seen as a "necessary consequence of the murder of Camille." There's a long chain of cause-and-effect going on here, Shmoopers.