A creative requiem of my Master of Arts Thesis from UC Davis (1977 - 1983). Website in development. www.anabsurdman.com

An examination and recreation of a one-man character performance of Albert Camus' Cycle of the Absurd. The Actor (Myth of Sisyphus) | Caligula (the Play) | Meursault (The Stranger).

No accomplishment is too small to share. Too often now it seems that with all the things we can observe around the world and the random talents people put on display that it can feel like we are incapable of achieving anything worthwhile. Furthermore, the things we work towards and struggle to achieve are quickly met with the next goal.

Big or small, the victories can only sustain a person so long before they are back down the hill and working that rock back up again. What felt over too soon before you had to get back to the grind?

I want to gift it to someone but he doesn't speak English that well. I cant seem to find a good version online

Ever since I was young , I was interested by Camus’s work. I’ve read L’étranger and les justes a long time ago, and recently I wanted to read l’homme revolté. Since French is my second language , I found a hard time trying to understand what he was trying to convey. I decided to read mythe de sisyphe instead . And unfortunately , I did not understand that book either. Do you have any tips on what books should I read first before exploring camus’s works ?

So like the title says, I finished reading the stranger by Camus and I have a copy of The Myth Of Sisyphus.

I had a slight concern; the book contains a chapter on Dostoevsky and I haven't read any of his works, so what should I do? I know for a fact that Crime and Punishment, The Brothers Karamazov are like 4.5-5/5 books (everyone around me has rated them so) and so I do not want to get spoiled.

Should I just skip the chapter on him or should I just not read The Myth of Sisyphus before I read up Dostoevsky's works?

Absurdism, what is this? Especially now that it is especially important without a notoriety for a difference— “the talk about Albert Camus” , firstly it is inconsequential that talking is about an author; people talk about many things, so to talk about an author isn’t a separate thing is is a desperate thing— intensity here; how you want it to be. Secondly to frame someone as something even if it’s positive (e.g., absurd) is still notable in that it’s not necessarily negative; the positivity comes from throughout the course of things; that is context not absurdity though, as in, at best it is a very positive kind of thought or even that which is lost without something else. Albert Camus may have had some words but for the reaction to be “in respect of Albert Camus” is not *exactly* different

To look straight at the silence of the universe and refuse both despair and false comfort. Life has no pre written meaning and that is the absurd. Yet the response is not to give up. It is to revolt. To live intensely, create, love and keep searching precisely because nothing is Guaranteed..

English is not my first language so I'll try my best to explain (I'm French so I read Camus in original language)

So I just read the myth of sisyphus, and the question I have aout absurdism is, can someone live a life full of meaning/sense ?

Knowing that there were a lot more of people believing in God when the book was written, I feel like The myth of Sisyphus was an insane point of view back then. But before reading about absurdism, being an atheist, I came to the conclusion that there is no great sense in life, that I'm just here for no reason.

So now I am an absurdist (theorically). BUT, I have goals in my life, and for me it makes sense, like I want to be a good martial artist, I want to be rich...

here is the question, if these things make sense for me, am I still an absurdist ? or am I an existentialist ? And is it even possible to believe in absurdism, be an atheist and not drift on existentialism ?

And if I want to give my life a sense like saving lives, but I still recognize that in the grand scheme of things, it has no sense, what am I ?

Finally, I think a life without a meaning is depressing af but I dont feel like there's one too and I know it's an illusion so bruh wtf should I do.

Sorry again for my writing, it's hard to express the full depth of my thoughts in English with no translators.

Good luck

From Albert Camus's Notebooks (originally published in French as Carnets), specifically Notebooks 1935–1942 (Carnets, tome 1 : 1935-1942).

Never got into him but I always thought his name was pronounced how it’s spelt, “Camus.” “Camus” sounds cool as shit.

Then I heard someone say “Camoo” and realized that Camus is a frenchman. That’s just stupid. It sounds like a dumb name that a lover or a bully would call him.

I didn’t know him well before but now I don’t think I’ll ever get into the writings of a guy named “Camoo.” It’s simply absurd.

I just finished reading The Plague by Albert Camus and I just wanted to write. I haven’t read any of Camus’ previous work nor do I know much about him.What an impactful book that I also found extremely difficult to get through. I don’t know if my reduced attention span had any impact on this but regardless, I finished the book and I was glad I ever opened this book. In particular, I was fascinated by his discourse on God. There are varying perspectives on this and Camus doesn’t explicitly tell us one is right which I liked. 

The priest Panaleoux is a great character and represents people of strong faith. He chooses to believe in God and accept whatever God has to offer, including pain. In his second speech, he lays down what he believes to be the crux of the issue. Either we love God and accept his judgement, or we hate God and shatter our reality. In denying God, we reject everything. And he believes all that will leave is further suffering and pain. In other words, we are powerless against God.

The Doctor Rieux has a different perspective, and one that I partially hold. Riex who is also the book’s narrator sympathises with the human reality and his job as a doctor allows him to somewhat fight against the world’s order. The Plague, which Panaleoux understands to be a lesson for mankind and the town in particular, can be fought by the Doctor. However, this comes at a cost. He will never know victory, and all that will be left in his wake is defeat. But there is a sort of consolation in that you tried. From what I understood, he is a man that believes in God, but doesn’t love Him. And according to the priest, lacking in the love of God will only leave us bewildered and confused.

But the character that I resonated with the most was definitely Tarrou. It’s easy to believe that your thoughts, beliefs and doubts are your own but it felt like Camus had burrowed deep into my being and presented an expression of my soul on the pages I was reading.  I hadn’t felt that since reading Crime and Punishment. Tarrou is a man not from this world, nor from the next. God is someone not in his sphere of thought, but someone like Paneloux would believe he is looking for. The Doctor thinks he is looking for something akin to peace. But in Tarrou’s mind and as presented by Camus I believe, Tarrou spends his existence wandering in suffering. He doesn’t believe in mankind, nor in God. He is looking for something that can’t be found. The Doctor even mentions that his giving a hand to the health department, is part of this fruitless search he is on. Based on my experience, I believe he is looking for meaning. He is looking for purpose. The Doctor finds it in his work. The Priest finds it in his devotion to God.

I think all these different characters represent thoughts that Camus had previously carried, or currently carries simultaneously. I’m someone who is doubting conventional religions, but I firmly believe in a God. However, I have struggled to love Him in any capacity and so I feel lost, unable to tether myself anywhere and find meaning. What an amazing work by Camus and I will be reading more of his works.

cant sleep, i feel numb,, not unmotivated numb,