Absurdity in Comus’ novels Many writers have written on the absurd, each with his
or her own interpretation of what the absurd actually is and their own ideas on the importance of the absurd. For example, Sartre recognizes the absurdity of individual
experience, while Kierkegaard explains that the absurdity of certain religious truths prevent us from reaching God rationally. Camus was not the originator of absurdism and regretted the continued reference to him as a philosopher of the absurd. He shows less and less interest in the Absurd shortly after publishing The Myth of Sisyphus. To distinguish Camus''s ideas of the Absurd from those of other philosophers, people sometimes refer to the Paradox of the Absurd, when referring to Camus''s Absurd.
His early thoughts on the Absurd appeared in his first collection of essays, “The Two Sides of the Coin” in 1937. Absurd themes appeared with more sophistication in his second collection of essays, “Nuptials”, in 1938. In these essays Camus does not offer a philosophical account of the Absurd, or even a definition; rather he reflects on the experience of the Absurd. In 1942 he published the story of a man living an Absurd life as “The Stranger/The Outsider”, and in the same year released “The Myth of Sisyphus”, a literary essay on the Absurd. He had also written a play about a Roman Emperor, ‘Caligula’, pursuing an Absurd logic. However, the play was not performed until 1945. The turning point in Camus''s attitude to the Absurd occurs in a collection of letters to an anonymous German friend, which may have been written to Martin Heidegger. The first three letters have been respectively published in the Revue Libre in 1943, in the Cahiers de Libération in 1944, and in the newspaper Libertés, in 1945.
In his essays Camus presented the reader with dualisms:
Happiness and sadness, dark and light, life and death, etc. His aim was to emphasize the fact that happiness is fleeting and that the human condition is one of mortality. He did this not to be morbid, but to reflect a greater appreciation for life and happiness. In Le Mythe, this dualism towards became a paradox: We value our lives and existence so greatly, but at the same time we know we will eventually die, and ultimately our endeavours are meaningless. Whilst we can live with a dualism (I can accept periods of unhappiness, because I know I will also experience happiness to come), we cannot live with the paradox (I think my life is of great importance, but I also think it is meaningless). In Le Mythe, Camus was interested in how we experience the Absurd and how we live with it. Our life must have meaning for us to value it. If we accept that life has no meaning and therefore no value, should we kill ourselves?
However, Camus says that it matters little whether we die at twenty or at fifty. Why not commit suicide right away and be done with it? And yet, although suicide is theoretically possible because in the context of the absurd there are no sanctions to proscribe it, Camus rejects it. And he does so because the idea of the absurd leads him to postulate three premises: freedom, passion, and rebellion. In the final analysis suicide is redundant because it destroys all future choices, it negates the individual’s emerging passion for life, and it contradicts a person’s nascent rebellion. Camus wants to exercise a person’s freedom, he realizes that he loves the world passionately, he feels free to create himself, and he is in revolt against all forces that debase human beings. Death in its various disguises dehumanizes, and suicide represents an alliance with the absurd that he is now rebelling against. Instead of concluding that the absurd leads to nihilism, Camus believes that it is an invitation to live. Freedom and passion color life with meaning, hope reappears on the horizon, and purpose is a mountain that invites ascent. Therefore, it is obvious that his absurd ideas are different fromothers.
Meursault, the Absurdist hero of the Outsider, is a murderer who is executed for his crime. Caligula ends up admitting his Absurd logic was wrong and is killed by an assassination he has deliberately brought about. However, while Camus possibly suggests that Caligula''s Absurd reasoning is wrong, the play''s anti-hero does get the last word, as the author similarly exalts Meursault''s final moments.
Camus'' understanding of the Absurd promotes public debate; his various offerings entice us to think about the Absurd and offer our own contribution. Concepts such as cooperation, joint effort and solidarity are of key importance to Camus.
Camus made a significant contribution to our understanding of the Absurd, but was not himself an Absurdist.