the stranger

[juturna]

I just finished reading The Stranger by Albert Camus and WOW. I'm finding it hard to find the words to begin speaking about that book. It was genius from beginning to end. I was just wondering in a question directed to anyone on the forum who speaks French, since Camus wrote the book in French, were any of the values and themes originally intended in the book lost in the English translation? Does anyone have any opinions on the book because I just can't read a book like that and not process it.

 

[del]

I strongly recommend The Plague if you haven't read it as well.

The Stranger and The Plague are two of the three books that I've probably read 10+ times (the other being Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl).

They resonate with me to a degree I still cannot express.

 

[Concojones]

What do you like about his writing?
When I was 18 or so, I read someway into each book but wasn't impressed (probably my bad).
edit: no wait, I did like 'the Stranger', but if it had hit me like a brick I'd still remember today.

 

[The Fury]

It's not "your bad", different people have different tastes.

I've only read the plague so far but i really enjoyed it.

 

[Sugarpop]

The Stranger is an excellent book. May I recommend 'The Unbearable Lightness of Being' by Milan Kundera if you would like to venture deeper into existentialist fiction?

 

[Citronelle]

I know this is a really delayed comment, but I just wanted to respond to this:

I was just wondering in a question directed to anyone on the forum who speaks French, since Camus wrote the book in French, were any of the values and themes originally intended in the book lost in the English translation?

I read the book in its English translation my junior year of high school, and about a year later read the original French version. The translation by Matthew Ward is excellent, about as literal a translation as possible while still conveying the novel's ideas effectively. I think the relative minimalism of Camus' writing lends itself well to translation, at least in this instance. I've briefly perused the other translations, found Joseph Laredo's to be acceptable and Stuart Gilbert's to be unbearable and inaccurate. But, as I mentioned, these opinions are based off of a brief perusal, so there could be more to the translations. I can vouch for Matthew Ward's, though.

May I recommend 'The Unbearable Lightness of Being' by Milan Kundera if you would like to venture deeper into existentialist fiction?

I second this recommendation! I read this book about two years after I read The Stranger, and it definitely eclipsed The Stranger in my list of favorite books.

 

[dialectical_stew]

I loved "La Peste". Even one of us heartless bastards can relate to the sublime idea of human solidarity right?

 

[DetachedRetina]

Not a bit is lost in translation. It is just as flat and absurd in french.

 

[snafupants]

My overwhelming impression after reading The Stranger and The Plague was that Camus was an intellectual lightweight. Nietzsche for kindergartners. I mean, whenever philosophers attempt to fictionalize their beliefs it's a dicey, often diluted, proposition.

 

[Antediluvian]

I have not read The Stranger, so can't comment on it as a whole. The Myth of Sisyphus I found interesting for the lines such as this:

"the lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time crowned his victory"

Anyway, Sartre claimed himself to be more intelligent than Camus during a drunken confession to the writer, and it seems quite a few readers agree. Although it has been said Camus was better at writing in a way as to captivate his audience, whereas Sartre lagged behind, especially in "Being And Nothingness," when the philosopher's writing was stepping out of the primordial ooze, this does not mean the ideas of Camus were somehow better.

 

[DetachedRetina]

Camus writes better essays than novels IMO

 

[snafupants]

I have not read The Stranger, so can't comment on it as a whole. The Myth of Sisyphus I found interesting for the lines such as this:

"the lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time crowned his victory"

Anyway, Sartre claimed himself to be more intelligent than Camus during a drunken confession to the writer, and it seems quite a few readers agree. Although it has been said Camus was better at writing in a way as to captivate his audience, whereas Sartre lagged behind, especially in "Being And Nothingness," when the philosopher's writing was stepping out of the primordial ooze, this does not mean the ideas of Camus were somehow better.

Camus' writing style certainly wasn't insufferable, but I felt like much the same person on the last page as the first page. Russell, Wittgenstein, Emerson, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer actually make an impression on one's ontological mental turf, because of their paradigm-upending, somewhat pessimistic yet life-affirming ethos, whereas I felt Camus basically recycled ideas from Dostoevsky and Nietzsche and infused those ideas with sugar and charm. There's little truly original about Camus; there was nothing Camus could teach me. Even aesthetically Camus doesn't hold a candle to Faulkner or Miller or Yeats. Camus, in a word, is boring.

 

[Antediluvian]

Camus' writing style certainly wasn't insufferable, but I felt like much the same person on the last page as the first page. Russell, Wittgenstein, Emerson, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer actually make an impression on one's ontological mental turf, because of their paradigm-upending, somewhat pessimistic yet life-affirming ethos, whereas I felt Camus basically recycled ideas from Dostoevsky and Nietzsche and infused those ideas with sugar and charm. There's little truly original about Camus; there was nothing Camus could teach me. Even aesthetically Camus doesn't hold a candle to Faulkner or Miller or Yeats. Camus, in a word, is boring.

Camus had a more poetic prose than Sartre. But, from what I've read of Kafka, I prefer his prose over Camus' in that it seemed more original. Regrettably, I haven't read much of Russell and the like, but Wittgenstein impressed me with his seemingly in-depth examination of the philosophy of mind and language. The Anatomy of Thought touches upon his work, as well as that of other philosophers, it may interest you.

 

[Starswirl]

This thread has been resurrected twice before, let's go for three!

Contrary to many of the opinions people have given in this thread, I'll say that the book's true beauty can only be seen in its original French. A French version can be found online here: http://www.hightech-planet.com/pdf/camus_l_etranger.pdf (the book's copyright has expired in Canada, thus it is online).

Many English translations capture Camus' writing very well, but not as well as the French version. The grammar in the book may be its most fascinating quality. Since the story is told in the first person, the grammar changes to reflect Mersault's character development. In the beginning sentences are very simple (ex. "J'ai bu.", "I drank.") and even someone beginning to learn French could understand some of it. But by the end, Camus is using very sophisticated, complex grammar.

I would recommend that everyone read the book (hell, even the half-literate George W. Bush read it during his presidency) if only for the ending few paragraphs, which are some of the most beautiful passages in all French literature (again, they're especially beautiful in the original French).

If you like Camus, I would recommend some of the writings from his early life. Camus himself, after he had become famous, did not like his early writing as it is not focused on promoting an idea or philosophical message. The beauty of the writing lies in the passion; Camus' early lyrical essays may be the most passionate, beautiful works I have ever read. They can be found in English in the collection "Lyrical and Critical Essays". I particularly adore the sub-collection entitled "L'envers et L'endroit".
_____

TLDR Version: Learn French. Read Camus. ????. Profit!

 

[Emelina]

Awesome, someone else liked Camus Everyone I know who read it seems to have found it boring/didn't understand it. I really loved it, not so much for it being original or brilliant (I never analyzed that much), but for finally reading something I felt identified with. It was the first book I felt that impact with, so it's very dear to me. I will certainly look up The Unbearable Lighntess of Being too.

 

[just george]

The stranger is something you can read?

And here I was all this time thinking that it was something...different.

Must be an Australian thing