#letranger

by Albert Camus

What’s it about?

The main character is Meursault, a French man living in Algeria who is so disconnected from his environment that he barely registers the fact that his mother dies at the very start of the book, and seems to have no feelings whatsoever about murdering an Arab, for which he is sent to jail.

There is a context that most modern readers miss. The book was written in the middle of World War II, but the book explicitly deals with the brewing tensions in Algeria which would eventually erupt. As a pied-noir himself, Camus would have been very sensitive to these tensions.

There is a strong argument that proper, grown-up literature doesn’t need “context” and any effort to provide one dilutes the universality of the text. For instance, you don’t need to know anything about Joe McCarthy to get the point of The Crucible. I agree with this argument, but I’ve given you the context anyway because I’m complicated and I have layers.  

That all sounds a bit grim.

While it is indeed a bit grim, it should be judged as a work of absurdist literature, which includes Waiting for GodotandCatch-22. They are all unquestionably a product of existential philosophy, which broadly speaking deals with how people should relate to the universe when god has been removed from it. 

I don’t care about any of that. Also, you sound pretentious.

Right. I might be pretentious, but the book was a genuine attempt to respond artistically to the idea (now very mainstream) that each individual is horrifically alone in the universe, and that life is meaningless. Mersault has several opportunities to make things easier for himself by simply lying about how he feels, and he refuses to do so. 

Therefore, the sociopathic character is more “authentic” than all the “good” people who end up killing him. Although if you’ve read Game of ThronesandThe Outsider has too much meaninglessness for you, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

Camus was famous for putting across his existentialist philosophy in accessible literature, while his frenemy, Jean-Paul Sartre, was famous for more direct, intractable existentialist philosophy in works such as Being and Nothingness. As you might expect, both men violently rejected the idea that either could be considered an existentialist.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Even if you can’t relate to it, it’s probably a good idea to play the game of whatever society you’re in.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“A guidebook for people interested in solving the Muslim problem.”

Should I actually read it?

Yes. Every so often, it’s good to be confronted with how meaningless everything is. Some people never consider it at all. 

Je suis à la recherche
d’un homme que je ne connais pas,
qui jamais ne fut tant moi-même
que depuis que je le cherche.
A-t-il mes yeux, mes mains
et toutes ces pensées pareilles
aux épaves de ce temps ?
Saison des mille naufrages,
la mer cesse d’être la mer
devenue l’eau glacée des tombes.
Mais, plus loin, qui sait plus loin ?
Une fillette chante à reculons
et règne la nuit sur les arbres,
bergère au milieu des moutons.
Arrachez la soif au grain de sel
qu’aucune boisson ne désaltère.
Avec les pierres, un monde se ronge
d’être, comme moi, de nulle part.

“Chanson de l’étranger”
Edmond Jabés

Je suis l’étranger
Et ça peut se voir
Je ne parle pas
Tout à fait comme toi
Je viens de la plate-bande
Ou les aubergines
Se violacent dès l’aube
Elles sont comme moi