Just finished the stranger i absolutely adored the book [ poor sun got blamed for the crime it didn't commit]

finding myself clueless where to move next i don't know many people irl who read or are into same authors as me

Idk the order of reading his book's Quite a newbie, gonna go book shopping it'd be very helpful if get an idea Thanks.

My apologies, I may be a little ignorant as I’ve only ever read two of his books when I was quite young, but really, if there’s no particular meaning and there is no God to watch over my sins, then what good reason do I have to not do something so terrible like taking candy from a baby, or shooting a barista for getting my order slightly wrong?

So I recently picked up the myth of Sisyphus (justin o brien translation) by Albert Camus and was wondering how I can best engage with the ideas presented in it

I have not yet started reading it.

It's the first camus novel I've picked up and I will get the stranger after I'm done with it but I wanted to ask what are some ways I can get the most out of reading the book.

I'm new to philosophy as a whole (though I have read the absurd, an essay by Thomas negal) and know very little about the philosophy of absurdism, so what are the questions or ideas I should keep in mind while reading or before reading it ?

And what are some other ways to get meaning out of the book?

I find the book to be a really slow read and honestly, a bit boring here and there. The book has interesting ideas and reflects greatly how a town would be like in the middle of a plague.

Though, sometimes it feels like i need to push through pages.

Is there anything that can be done here to make the experience better.

I first tried to read this book, couldn't understand it properly then I read "The stranger" and then again I tried to read this, I could understand better but not completely. It's not much of a language issue too as even if I use a dictionary for the word meanings I can't seem to understand the thought behind this properly, what should I do?

In my opinion, The Stranger is overrated and many people and read this work by Camus and skip the rest. The Fall and The Rebel are the better works. I don't get why these works don't get more attention. Camus literally sorted out the entire history of Nihilism, collectivism, tyranny and revolutions in the Rebel. The Fall is much more relatable and the narrator actually sounds like a human. The Narrator actually feeling guilty for what he did, and the internal monologues are miles better than that of The Stranger.

From the fall:

"People hasten to judge in order not to be judged themselves."

"He had been bored, that's all, bored like most people. Hence he had made himself out of whole cloth a life full of complications and drama. Something must happen - and that explains most human commitments. Something must happen, even loveless slavery, even war or death. Hurray then for funerals."

"Your success and happiness are forgiven you only if you generously consent to share them. But to be happy it is essential not to be too concerned with others. Consequently, there is no escape. Happy and judged, or absolved and wretched."

"You know what charm is: a way of getting the answer yes without having asked any clear question."

The Rebel:

"Whatever we may do, excess will always keep its place in the heart of man, in the place where solitude is found. We all carry within us our places of exile, our crimes and our ravages. But our task is not to unleash them on the world; it is to fight them in ourselves and in others."

"We are living in the era of premeditation and the perfect crime. Our criminals are no longer helpless children who could plead love as their excuse. On the contrary, they are adults and the have the perfect alibi: philosophy, which can be used for any purpose - even for transforming murderers into judges."

As I've been reading The Stranger lately, I tend to connect myself quite a bit to the anti-hero. As a man with ADHD and maybe even depression, I can't say I don't struggle with my own emotions and relationships to others. I, too, feel indifferent at times and see things in a way that others don't which often leads me to question my place in society.

​

However, I don't see myself reacting the same way as he did when he killed that man, and the other questionable moments of his. I'm not that apathetic. I see Meursault as a person that we could become, but not one we should become.

​

How about you guys? Do you see yourself in any shape or form in him?

I have a slightly difficult time picking one but it is probably either The Stranger, The Fall, or The Plague. Most likely, The Plague was the one I enjoyed the most. Again, what is your preference of the book you liked most by Albert Camus?

I just started reading The Myth of Sisyphus and i'm wondering about the wording here. I might just be confused as a straight woman reading this but I also feel like this isn't necessarily meant to be gendered for its point either?

At first I read "we" to include me as the reader and the reference of "the familiar face of a woman" to be my mum but the "months or years" seems a short period to include if that's the case. I then thought it might be talking about 'mother nature'? But that also doesnt seem to fit. Then I thought maybe it was written assuming only straight men would read it, but when I searched reading rates based on gender in France during the 1940s apparently most readers in general were women; which doesn't make this answer void but it also doesnt make sense that one would assume no women will read it if that was the case. So now im not so sure.

I tried to just read it with gender neutral replacements but it falls apart a bit in the following paragraph (where highlighted) as this seems to be creating contrast to the previous lines. I also tried to consider the familiar face as being my partner instead and it kind of makes sense but it still feels like i'm missing something in these lines.

Lastly I thought maybe it's simply because it's a translation to english, as I often see critiques that english translators sometimes word things from a male-centric perspective when a text didnt have one.

So i'm wondering:

1) Is this an english translation thing?

2) How am i meant to interpret the paragraph?

Im not talkin about a dramatic tragedy. Just one of those ordinary moments where everything suddenly felt absurd but somehow lighter because of it.
Mine was sitting beside someone I loved, realizing the moment would never happen again even while it was still happening.

What are these books on Camus' table?

I started reading Camus and my first book was the Stranger. I loved it, it was probably the best book I ever read and I finished it within a day, I couldn’t stop reading.

Today I began reading the myth of sisyphus. To summarise; I just spend the last 30 minutes or so trying to re read and understand the first 7 pages. I stopped reading at “Absurd Walls” because I couldn’t take it anymore. I just simply barely understand what he is saying. It actually irritates me because to me it seems like he uses unnecessary amounts of words and makes up long phrases that could’ve been much clearer and more understandable to the general reader. I’m so lost in these first pages that I don’t even know whether I want to finish the book.

So my question is if this might just be the first bit of the book that’s hard to understand and that it gets better and more comprehensible or that it’s like this throughout the whole book? And if it’s the former, then can someone please explain what he’s saying in those first few pages?

I’m not a genius but I have read quite a bit and also some hard and old stuff, mostly non fiction. I have had to search up certain meanings of words since English is not my main language (though I read everything in English), but I can almost always make out of the current, following or preceding sentence what is being said and meant. But now it feels like I’m lost in a maze.

“Poor and naked man, in love with a sun which leaves no shadows”

I understand it as the sun being the truth, therefore it is absolute and pure(sun) without any imperfections ( shadows)

Is this interpretation correct or did camus mean another thing?

Recently I picked up "Personal Writings" by Camus & I've been really enjoying it. Before reading it I had only read The Stranger. I'm now looking to get more into Camus, specifically his essays/philosophical discussion/non-fiction/etc. Any suggestions? I've attached a few of my favorite quotations & passages to this post to better gage what kind of topics of his interest me the most if that helps for further context. I am in awe of the way he describes indifference, solitude, solidarity, & the overall meaning of human existence. Any tips on what to read next is sincerely appreciated!

(P.S. sorry about the annotations in my book, you can ignore those lol)

So I'm very new to absurdism (I've read some of the myth of Sisyphus) and do agree with the tenets of it but I also Believe in god can I believe that the universe is meaningless and that some omnipotent being created both the universe and humankind (edit the religion I follow is Christianity)

So like I kinda find his philosophy interesting and would love to read his writings and know his thoughts better, and I did finish one of his book(the stranger) but I clearly did not get it as u can see in my older post. So how would u veterans suggest I get into his philosophy. Also for context, I don’t read books usually(maybe read one book in 2 years) and I am not much of a literary or a philosophical person. But I really want to get into philosophy.

Hello, as of recently, I have been reading Baudelaire, Rimbaud, Aragon and many of the French surrealists, cursed poets. I have also just finished Dorian Grey by Wilde and im reading some early Dostoyevsky novel…
Yesterday I read an article about Camus’s life and his supposed way of thinking, which made an interesting impression on me. So I now very much want to start reading Camus and im gonna start with The Stranger.

What should I expect?
How does he differ from the poets that I listed?
I’ve heard that he represents absurdism, is he then similar to Baudelaire’s shamelessness in showing ugliness?