|
|
|
|
我最喜歡的三位文學家是：卡木、卡夫卡、和達斯妥也夫斯基。文學之外，卡木和達斯妥也夫斯基兩位在倫理學上對我的啟發和影響非常大。相對而言，卡夫卡對我的啟發和影響主要在文學。卡夫卡作品 – 小說和寓言兩者 – 題材主要都來自他的夢境；夢又與意識相關；從而，卡夫卡在這兩個課題上也提示了我一些思考路徑。
今年4月起我將本部落格過去有關卡夫卡和達斯妥也夫斯基兩位的文章分別收集在他們各自的專欄。由於前一陣子我從《傳媒》上轉載了幾篇討論卡木作品和思想的文章。我想是時候也為他另開一欄。
我第一次接觸到卡木的作品是1975年前後。讀完《異鄉人》後，接著開始讀《反叛》和《西席弗斯神話及其他散文》。前者因為「序言」中有一段話(我當時覺得)對中國有輕視或貶低之意，在「民族主義」作祟下，引起我對他的反感。讀完該「序言」後沒有繼續讀全書。後者只讀了它的第一章。可能因為我的理工生涯和缺少大風大浪的人生歷練，這三本書對我沒有產生什麼特別的感觸或吸引力。但讀過卡木《沉淪》一書後，印象頗為深刻；我決定回頭重讀他早期著作如以上提到的三本。可能隨著年齡和人生閱歷增加，見識和悟性略有長進；我開始了解和接近卡木的某些思想。不過，1995他過世後出版的遺作《第一人》並沒有給我留下什麼印象。
在此謹致數語，感謝和紀念這段思想緣。
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
《卡木《異鄉人》小探》讀後
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
我讀《異鄉人》在50年前，那時文學、哲學、和英文閱讀能力都不怎麼的；粗淺了解故事情節已頗費力，對書中的義理就完全無緣參透。
該文1,400字有餘(本欄上一篇)，卻分成11小節和9個主題(「前言」和「結論」除外)；「淺出」有之，「深入」則未及也。雖然如此，卡荻女士的大作仍有可參考之處；值得一讀。在此指出有待斟酌的三點：
1) 詮釋 -- 過於「加油加醬」；如第6節和以下第3)小段的討論。
2) 文風 -- 略嫌「堆砌重複」；如「荒謬」及其相關字高達16個之多；「坦直」及其相關字有5個(1)。
3) 邏輯 -- 不夠「嚴謹細緻」；如作者強調小說主人翁莫索的「坦直」(請見該文第1、3、4、8、和9等5節)。這未必是卡木的意旨；此外，用它來解讀莫索的「行為模式」，也不合心理學、社會學的通行理論，或一般人的「印象」。「冷漠」、「涼薄」、「反社會」、「我行我素」、「自我中心」、或「不近情理」等詞庶幾近之。
附註：
1. 「坦直」：我用它來翻譯該文作者卡荻女士所用的honest與honesty。
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
卡木《異鄉人》小探 - Apurva Khadye
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參見本欄下一篇《讀後》；原文各小節未加序號，亦無「前言」此子標題。
Exploring Albert Camus’s The Stranger: Absurdism, Alienation, and the Philosophy of the Everyday
Apurva Khadye, 11/26/25
0. 前言
Albert Camus’s The Stranger (L’Étranger, 1942) is a short yet powerful novel that immerses readers into the detached mind of Meursault. Set in French-occupied Algiers, story follows a man who lives without pretence or passion in a world obsessed with meaning.
From his emotionless response to his mother’s death to his calm acceptance of his own execution, Meursault becomes a mirror reflecting the tension between human longing for purpose and the universe’s indifferent silence.
Camus’s narrative is deceptively simple; each sentence plain, yet philosophically dense. The Stranger is not just a story about murder or morality; it’s a study of what it means to exist when existence itself feels absurd.
1. The Origins of Absurdism
Albert Camus wrote The Stranger during the Second World War, at a time when Europe was struggling with loss, violence, and meaninglessness. France was under Nazi occupation, and Camus; born in Algeria, was intimately aware of the fractures between identity, morality, and power.
The novel was published alongside his philosophical essay, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942). Both works express his concept of the Absurd; the conflict between the human desire for order and the world’s indifference.
“The Absurd is born of this confrontation between the human need and the unreasonable silence of the world.” — Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus
While The Myth of Sisyphus argues for acceptance of this condition without despair, The Stranger turns that idea into lived experience.
Through Meursault, Camus shows that the only authentic response to absurdity is honesty; a refusal to pretend life has meaning when it does not.
2. Plot Overview
The story begins with one of literature’s most famous openings:
“Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday; I can’t be sure.”
These lines set the tone for Meursault’s detached view of the world. He attends his mother’s funeral with no visible grief, shocking readers and those around him. Soon after, he resumes his life in Algiers; swimming, smoking, and spending time with Marie, a woman who accepts his passivity.
Things change when his neighbour Raymond drags him into a violent feud with an Arab man. One blistering afternoon on the beach, under the oppressive glare of the sun, Meursault shoots the man; five times. His explanation? The sun was too hot.
The second half of the novel shifts to Meursault’s trial. The court condemns him less for murder and more for his emotional indifference. His crime is not just killing a man; it is failing to play by society’s moral rules. Ultimately, he is sentenced to death, yet finds an odd peace before execution, accepting that both he and the world are indifferent to meaning.
3. Meursault and the Absurd Hero
Meursault is one of modern literature’s most puzzling figures. Is he heartless or radically honest?
Camus described him as a man who refuses to lie. Meursault will not fake grief, faith, or guilt. In this, he becomes the embodiment of the Absurd Hero; someone who accepts life as meaningless and lives truthfully within that reality.
When the prison chaplain urges him to seek God, Meursault’s passionate outburst marks his awakening:
“I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world.”
This is the novel’s turning point. Meursault realises that life’s lack of meaning is not tragic; it is liberating. He no longer seeks divine comfort or social approval. Instead, he recognises that freedom comes from embracing the world’s indifference.
Meursault’s refusal to conform exposes society’s hypocrisy. He is executed not for murder, but for being different; for showing the world what it truly looks like when stripped of illusion.
4. Camus’s Philosophy of the Absurd
To understand The Stranger, one must understand Camus’s Absurdism.
Camus rejected both religious faith and nihilism. He believed that although life is meaningless, we must continue living and creating meaning for ourselves.
For Camus, Meursault is not a sociopath but a truth-teller; a man who accepts reality without comfort or delusion. Society, in contrast, cannot handle this honesty. The courtroom scene symbolises this conflict. Instead of focusing on the murder, the prosecutor accuses Meursault of being a moral monster because he did not cry at his mother’s funeral.
In other words, Meursault’s real crime is his refusal to pretend.
Through this absurd trial, Camus reveals how human beings cling to false meaning; religion, law, morality, to shield themselves from the chaos of existence. Meursault’s indifference becomes a mirror reflecting that denial.
5. Language and Style
Camus’s style in The Stranger is famously plain and precise. Every sentence is short, sensory, and emotionless. This minimalism reflects Meursault’s perception of life, rooted in the immediate, physical present rather than abstract ideas.
When describing his mother’s funeral, Meursault doesn’t express sadness; he describes the heat, the smell of varnish, the glare of the sun. His world is tactile, not moral. Camus’s sparse prose forces readers to project meaning into the text, making them uncomfortable participants in the absurd.
6. Colonial Silence
Beneath its philosophical themes, The Stranger also reflects the colonial tensions of French Algeria.
The Arab man Meursault kills is never named, and his voice is never heard. This silence is not accidental; it represents the erasure of colonised identities in a system dominated by French power.
Postcolonial critics have argued that this absence is itself a political statement. Meursault’s emotional emptiness parallels the moral void of colonial society, where the death of an Arab man barely registers as significant.
Camus, though often criticised for avoiding direct political commentary, uses this absence to highlight a world built on moral blindness. The novel’s very indifference becomes a critique of the colonial order that normalised violence and dehumanisation.
7. Religion, Death, and the Rejection of Consolation
Religion plays a crucial symbolic role in The Stranger. The priest who visits Meursault before his execution insists that he seek God’s mercy. But Meursault refuses, not out of arrogance, but because he sees no point in lying.
This rejection of faith is not a denial of meaning; it’s a refusal to accept false comfort. In his confrontation with death, Meursault experiences clarity: all humans share the same fate, and death makes everyone equal.
“For the first time, I laid my heart open to the benign indifference of the universe.”
This line captures the essence of Camus’s Absurdism. Death is the final truth. Yet by accepting it without illusion, Meursault transcends fear. His peace at the end is not despair, but defiant freedom.
8. Critical Reception
When The Stranger was first published in 1942, it divided critics. Some praised its originality; others condemned its moral ambiguity. Jean-Paul Sartre called it “a perfectly constructed novel of the Absurd,” while religious commentators labelled it nihilistic.
Over time, The Stranger became a cornerstone of 20th-century philosophy and literature, influencing generations of writers and thinkers; from Orhan Pamuk to Haruki Murakami.
Contemporary readers, as seen on Booktok and Bookstagram, often experience conflicting emotions: fascination, discomfort, even confusion.
This ambiguity is deliberate; Camus wanted readers to feel the absurd, not just understand it.
The book’s endurance lies in its paradox: it is both alien and intimate. In an age of social media, constant noise, and performative empathy, Meursault’s honesty feels unsettlingly modern. His detachment reflects a world where authenticity is often punished.
9. Why The Stranger Still Speaks to Us
More than eighty years later, The Stranger remains strikingly relevant.
In a world where people curate emotions online and meaning feels increasingly fragmented, Camus’s message resonates deeply: to live authentically in an indifferent world is the ultimate act of rebellion.
Readers today find Meursault both frustrating and fascinating. His refusal to conform challenges our assumptions about morality, empathy, and identity. In many ways, he anticipates the modern anti-hero; disillusioned, reflective, and painfully honest. Through him, Camus reminds us that confronting meaninglessness can lead not to despair, but to strength.
The recognition that the universe owes us nothing frees us to live truthfully, moment by moment.
10. Conclusion
In the closing pages of The Stranger, Meursault finally finds peace.
He embraces the world’s indifference and recognises that the only true freedom lies in accepting life as it is, without pretending, without hope, without fear.
Camus invites readers to share this awakening. To accept that meaning may not exist, yet life remains worth living. To see, as he wrote in The Myth of Sisyphus, that
“the struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart.”
The Strange endures because it tells an uncomfortable truth:
Happiness is not found in illusion but in awareness.
And perhaps, in recognising our shared absurdity, we become a little less like strangers, to the world, and to ourselves.
Written by Apurva Khadye
Writer & professional overthinker Expect musings, rants, reviews & cold-tea crises. Book announcement coming soon. buymeacoffee.com/apurvakhadye
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
|
|
** 本文原為《文學和倫理學之《一個怪人的夢》和《沉淪》讀後》的一部份；發表於2022/09/26(該文已刪除)。現在將這兩篇名著的「讀後」獨立成章，分開發表(請見以下「前言」最後一段)。造成不便，尚請見諒。
0. 前言
七月下旬在YouTube上看到一個介紹達斯妥也夫斯基《一個怪人的夢》這部影片(以下分稱達氏和《怪人》)。它的主題讓我聯想到卡木的《沉淪》。我大概在40多年前讀過《沉淪》；當時印象深刻，並引起我在「倫理學」議題上的一些想法。因此，我決定以兩書為基礎(1)，談談我的「道德觀」和「倫理觀」(2)。由於「道德」一詞常常引起人們在歷史、教條、道學、情緒、或偏見等等層面的反應，我過去傾向用「社會規範」來代替它(3)。本文沿用「道德」一詞。
本文第1節簡單介紹該書內容：第2節則談談我的感覺和淺見。
以下的摘譯和敘述根據該書奧布萊恩教授的英譯版本。摘譯部份加了引號(「」)；敘述部份則沒有引號。所有未沿用通譯者是我的翻譯；請自行斟酌其「信、達」程度。 -- 以上文字發表於2022/09/26。
本文原與《達斯妥也夫斯基《一個怪人的夢》讀後》合併為一篇文章，做為拙作《文學和倫理學之「行為指南」》討論的基礎。由於我最近分別成立了三位文學大師：卡木、卡夫卡、和達斯妥也夫斯基的個別專欄，決定將本文獨立出來。意旨未變，內容略有修改。此外，這兩篇「讀後」原來是一篇文章，自然意旨相近，部分內容有重複之處。不過，對文學或倫理學有興趣的朋友，還是不妨將這三篇文章對照參看。 -- 最後這段文字在2026/05/08補增。
1. 故事情節 (奧布萊恩 英譯，網路版)
網路版第1 -- 4頁是該書的內頁、出版者、及「提示導言」等。小說正文部份共40頁。
1.1 第5 -- 14頁
故事一開始，主角克萊芒士坐在阿姆斯特丹一個叫「墨西哥城」的酒吧喃喃自語。雖然從主角語氣聽來他有一個嘮叨的對象，應該是兩個人在對談；但主角的對話人從頭到尾沒有搭腔。主角介紹了周遭環境、自己的身分、和自己過去片片斷斷的種種經歷。隨著主角獨白的內容，故事場景有些變化。
1.2 第14頁
「… 我走上藝術橋 … 一種不可一世和洋洋自得的感覺油然而起 – 我真的很難表達它們 – 這種感覺使我心花怒放。我挺挺胸準備抽根煙，一根讓我感覺良好的煙；就在這一剎那，我身後陡然爆出一陣笑聲。我嚇了一跳，整個身體迴轉了180度；但看不到一個人影。我走到橋的護欄旁，塞納河中沒有一艘渡輪或遊船。我轉身面對聖路易島，又聽到身後的笑聲。聲音好像漸漸往下游淡去。我僵在那裏一動也不動，笑聲雖然變小了，我仍然能夠清楚的聽出它來自身後；但周圍沒有任何人，聲音是從水中冒出來的？我感到心臟砰砰地跳著。」
接著在第16、21、23、25、26、27、29、30、32、33、40、42、43等13頁上，「笑聲」一再出現，折磨和煎熬著主角。
1.3 第23頁
「… 那晚在皇家橋上，我走過一個上身倚到護欄外，緊緊盯著河水的身形。仔細打量後，看得出是位穿著黑衣的年輕女子。她暗淡頭髮和外衣領口間的後頸，白皙微帶涼意，讓我一陣心動。我躊躇了一、兩秒就繼續走下去。過橋後我隨著人潮轉向我住的聖米歇爾廣場區。走了不到50公尺，我聽到身體撞擊水面的聲音。雖然有段距離，但在寂靜的午夜聽起來聲音大得嚇人。我停下腳步但沒有轉身。馬上聽到『救命！』；喊了幾聲，聲音逐漸遠去微弱，然後突然聽不到了。接下來的寧靜和黑夜一下子停滯著像是沒完沒了。我想跑開但動彈不得。寒冷和驚嚇讓我全身發抖。我跟自己說，趕快做些什麼吧，但我突然變得全身無力。我已經忘了當時怎麼想的，大概不外是『太晚了』、『太遠了』之類。我抬不起腳，但仍在傾聽。慢慢的我在濛濛細雨中離開，沒有把這事告訴任何人。」
1.4 第44頁
「… 啊，小女人，求求妳再跳一次河！這樣也許我就可以有個機會，救救妳跟我自己！」
2. 作品主題 – 道德感
本節討論我看了這本小說後的感受和感想；網路上有相當多其他學者/讀者對這本書的評論和詮釋，請自行搜尋、參考(4)。
2.1 解讀基礎
如上所述，《沉淪》和《怪人》這兩本小說，在情節和意旨兩方面都相當接近(5)：
「主角在碰上一個『自己應該採取些行動但沒有做任何事』的情況後，人就瘋掉了！」
一個人真的會因為自己的「作為」或「不作為」而發瘋或變成神經病嗎？
很顯然，卡木和達氏都這樣認為或希望。從這個單純的角度看，我們可以把它們歸入所謂的「警世小說」。當然，卡木和達氏除了是大文豪外，也都是深邃睿智的思想家；除了「警世」，這兩部鉅作分別表達了他們的倫理觀。此處簡單談談卡木的思想(請參考本欄其它貼文)；達氏思想簡介請參見此欄各文。
和主張「人生行為論」哲學家們相同，卡木的「人生荒謬論」也同意「人生虛無論」所主張的：「人生沒有客觀的意義和目的」。但接受這個認知後，在人「(應該)如何面對生活」的議題上，三個思潮的主張並不相同。大概的說：
1) 人生虛無論認為：人生既然沒有意義或目的，則「道德」也就沒有意義。換句話說，所有的行為沒有「被容許」或「不被容許」的分別。
2) 人生行為論強調：一個人的行為和行動界定她/他是怎麼樣的(一個)「人」；當然也就定義了此人(人生)的意義和/或目的。
3) 人生荒謬論也重視行為和行動；但他強調的是：一個人不應該盲從時下流行的主張或教條；她/他需要深思熟慮的來選擇自己人生意義和/或生活目的；然後在行為和行動中勇敢的追求並實踐它們。
總之，行為論(沙垂)和荒謬論(卡木)跟虛無論的不同在於：沙垂和卡木兩位都堅信：
a. 「人有選擇或創造自己人生目的和意義的自由與能力。」；從而：
b. 「人必須面對自己行為的後果」。
《沉淪》這部小說(以及沙垂許多作品)的主題，在從負面指出：
a) 「一個人沒有能力或權利不去面對自己行為的後果」；或
b) 「一個人沒有能力或權利不對己的行為負責。」
達氏《卡拉馬佐夫兄弟們》中有一段名句，從另一個方式來表達以上詮釋b)：
「沒有上帝或來世？那就相當於世界上沒有什麼事不能做；如果真是這樣，人不就可以為所欲為了嗎？(6)」(裴維爾/芙蘿杭斯基 英譯，維克斯勒引用)
從東方文化觀點看，達氏這句話表達的是：
沒有主宰賞善罰惡的老天爺或閻王爺，人自然就會肆無忌憚的為所欲為，只圖個眼前歡了！
換句話說，如果沒有上帝，所謂「輪迴報應」、「善惡到頭終有報」、或「不是不報，時候未到」等等，只是忽悠壞人，或受害者自我安慰的話語。這就引出倫理學上一個基本，但一直沒有定論的問題：「道德的約束力從何而來？」；以及連帶而來的第二個問題：
「我為什麼要接受道德的約束？」或
「只要我我喜歡，有什麼不可以？」
卡木(1913 -- 1960)在20世紀中期的西歐，主張無神論和造反有理論。達氏(1821 -- 1881)則生活在在19世紀中、後期，是一位東正教信徒和俄國傳統派；但兩人卻寫出在情節和意旨上相當接近的作品。除了在時代、地區、和思想上是一個有趣的對比外，我想這個現象值得我們深思它所蘊含的意義。
道德感或羞愧心能夠擔負約束人們行為的功能嗎？我將在《文學和倫理學之「行為指南」》中討論這個問題。
2.2 《沉淪》的解讀和討論
在《沉淪》中，卡木手法雖然迂迴，但表達的非常明確。看了小說第一頁後，讀者立刻會感覺到主角可能是個神經病；但「神經病」的症狀要到第14頁才出現(請見本文1. 2節)。從此，沒有笑者的「笑聲」經常出現。第23頁卡木才說出導致主角變成「神經病」，從而在四顧無人環境下，他不斷聽到「笑聲」的原因：
「一個女人投水或掉進河中，主角沒有採取任何行動。」(綜合本文1. 2節「第23頁」的譯文。)
最後卡木畫龍點睛的借主角口中說出以上1.2節中「第44頁」中那句話。
以上是我「解讀」本書主題的根據；它們當然在「摸象」之列。在我看到此書的評論中，重點大部分放在主角過去的經歷；沒有提及我認識到的該書主題。沙垂說：《沉淪》一書是卡木作品中最精彩和最不被理解的一部，有點言過其實。我沒有讀過卡木所有的著作，不能對「最精彩」這個評論置喙；但難以苟同「最不被理解」。
卡木是無神論者和「人生荒謬論」者。對他來說，做或不做一件事，是一個人自己思考後的「選擇」；而不是由一個人是否害怕「最後審判」的結果來「決定」。《沉淪》的主角在事情發生當下選擇了「不作為」，然後在「良心」或「道德感」的煎熬下，無法面對自己(過去)那個「選擇」或「『不作為』的行為」，從而崩潰乃至於發瘋。
我所詮識《沉淪》這部小說的主題，跟卡木的「人生荒謬論」有衝突嗎？根據我以上2.1節中的討論，我覺得它們之間並沒有衝突。這個判斷能夠說得通嗎？請見《文學和倫理學之「行為指南」》。
後記：
我不是一個多愁善感的人，中學時代喜歡看武俠小說。當然也有機會讀到一些世界文學名著。例如高中三年我到建中對面的中央圖書館讀了80%朱生豪先生翻譯的莎士比亞劇本；承同學劉容生教授介紹，看了好幾本屠格涅夫的小說；以及達氏的《罪與罰》和歌德的《少年維特的煩惱》等。大學時代幾乎沒有看什麼小說；大概就看了《咆嘯山莊》、《科學怪人》、《台大青年》上翻譯的好幾部沙垂劇本、和小半本《地下室手記》(服預備軍官役時它在《拾穗》連載，沒來得及看完就出國了)。
我從小對倫理學有興趣。我對道德或倫理的認知，著重在人際互動。由於自己生活經驗相當「單向度」，工作後開始讀文學作品來補足這一方面的欠缺。但由於時間和英文程度雙雙不足，我大概讀了達氏、卡木、和卡夫卡三位70%左右的作品。其它大文豪就是一、兩本或兩、三本。英、美作家我涉獵的更少。因此，我以上的詮釋純屬井底之蛙的見解，敬請指正。 -- (2022)
附註：
1. 請參見拙作：《達斯妥也夫斯基《一個怪人的夢》讀後》(該欄2026/05/06)，以及《文學和倫理學之「行為指南」》。
2-1 「道德」：(一個人用來)認定「對」、「錯」或「好」、「壞」的一組「信念」，「判斷」或「態度」。
2-2 「倫理學」：研究「道德信念」是否合理的哲學學門。
2-3 準此，「倫理」指的是「道德信念」、「道德判斷」、或「道德態度」的理由和/或基礎。
以上2-1和2-2兩個「定義」翻譯自此文第1節下的說明(該欄2026/05/06)。2-3則是我根據這兩個「定義」所做的闡述。
3. 史特勞斯曾說：「離開『社會』，『道德』並無意義」(What Is Political Philosophy? And Other Studies，40 – 55頁)。
4. 請見：Interpretation、Study Guide、Modern Society、和Comments and outlines等。
5. 最近重讀此文，忽然想起，在某本(或某篇)文學評論中讀過：卡木對達斯妥也夫斯基甚為心儀；他曾將後者的《群魔》改寫為劇本。因此，《沉淪》和《一個怪人的夢》在故事與意旨上有相似、相近之處，雖然不能說一脈相傳，應該並非偶然。 -- 10/2024
6. 對達氏這句話詳細討論，請見《達斯妥也夫斯基《一個怪人的夢》讀後》第2.1節(該欄2026/05/06)。
附錄 1：術語/一般名詞中英對照(正文中有連結者未列於此)
人生行為論 – existentialism，通譯為「存在主義」或「存在哲學」。
人生荒謬論 – absurdism，通譯為「荒謬哲學」；請參見Albert Camus。
人生虛無論 – nihilism，在本文第2.1節中的用法，通譯為「道德虛無主義」或「存在虛無主義」。在一般哲學領域中的用法，請見下面的「虛無論」。
主題 – theme
東正教 – Eastern Orthodox Church
泛斯拉夫主義 – pan-Slavism
情節 – plot
虛無論 – nihilism，通譯為「虛無主義」；在本體論、認識論、和倫理學等領域各有其特定主張。
附錄 2：人名中英對照(以英語發音為準)
卡木 – Albert Camus，通譯為 卡謬
沙垂 – Jean-Paul Charles Aymard Sartre，通譯為 沙特
芙蘿杭斯基 – Larissa Volokhonsky
奧布萊恩 – Justine O'Brien
達斯妥也夫斯基 – Fyódor Mikháylovich Dostoyévskiy，或譯為杜斯妥也夫斯基、朵斯妥也夫斯基
維克斯勒 – Vlad Vexler
裴維爾 – Richard Pevear
本文於 修改第 4 次
|
|
音容宛在：卡木的真知灼見 -- Dhananjay Khadilkar
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
下文是作者跟法國歷史學家與卡木傳記作家澤瑞斯基教授之間的電台訪談。第1到5節子標題是作者的提問；各節內容則是澤瑞斯基教授的回應。這應該是卡木逝世60周年紀念活動之一。
由於它是電台談話節目性質，全文只有1,200字上下；不過說得上簡明扼要，可視為卡木作品的導讀。澤瑞斯基教授把卡木寫作生涯劃分成三個環節；並點出各環節意旨的要點：
1) 人生荒謬論。
2) 溫和形式反抗論。
3) 博愛論。
Life after death: the lasting legacy of Albert Camus
Dhananjay Khadilkar, RFI, 04/01/20
0. 前言
Albert Camus, one of the most influential writers of the 20th century, died in a car crash on 4 January 1960, aged 46. Sixty years on, RFI speaks to Professor Robert Zaretsky, French history expert at the University of Houston and Camus biographer, about the French-Algerian’s extraordinary legacy.
1. What are the core ideas of Camus’ philosophy?
““For Camus, meaninglessness or absurdity is a consequence of two forces: humankind’s thirst for meaning and the world’s silence. No matter how insistent, loud or ardent our demand for meaning is, the response from the world or the cosmos, as Camus more than once called it, is tender indifference. So the convergence of our need for meaning and the refusal of the world to offer any form of meaning leads to our absurd condition. And acknowledging the absurdity of the world for Camus means that we need to turn to one another and to collective action for meaning.
“His first cycle of works, which he called the cycle of absurdity, has three works in it The Stranger, The Myth of Sisyphus and Caligula. During the Second World War, when he became the editor of the resistance newspaper Combat, and in the years immediately following the war, he wanted to know what our response to this absurd condition should be.
He thus turns to a second cycle of works. In the cycle of absurdity, he gave us a diagnosis of absurdity while in the second cycle, which he called the rebellion, he offers a prescription to what our response should be. That cycle also has three works: The Plague, The Rebel and The Just.
“In that cycle he sees resistance, a kind of intense, even extreme moderation, as our response to meaninglessness or the absurd condition. In The Rebel, he tweaks Réné Descartes’ famous notion ‘I think therefore I am’. For Camus, it becomes ‘I rebel, therefore we are’. In a nutshell, that is Camus’ diagnosis and cure for our absurd condition.”
2. Is Camus’ philosophy of meaninglessness disheartening or is it liberating?
“It’s both. Camus’ position is that there is no reason for hope but that is no reason for despair. In other words, as we learn at the end of The Plague, we will never be able to defeat the plague once and for all. The plague can represent many things. In the 1940s, it represented the Nazi occupation of France. It was the most obvious and immediate interpretation of his novel. But it can also mean the new varieties of totalitarianism, authoritarianism or the forms of populism that we now see taking root in Europe and the US.
“As the characters in the book understand, their victory over the disease is not a lasting one. Sooner or later, it’s going to collapse under the force of new events. But that’s not a reason to stop resisting. We must continue what we have always done. So while Camus is not a wild-eyed optimist, he insists that through our insistence upon maintaining our dignity as human beings, and joining others when it is threatened, we continue to invest our life with meaning. In a way, that’s as good as it gets.”
3. How much of an influence did Camus’ upbringing have on his philosophical development?
“His childhood and early experiences in French Algeria had a tremendous impact on the way he saw the world. You can point to so many different factors. For example, his father died when he was just a year old. Camus was born in 1913. His father was drafted into the French army in 1914 at the start of the First World War and died the same year. So Camus never knew him. His father was from France but moved to French Algeria as a young man and became a foreman at a vineyard. Following his father’s death, his mother, who was born in Mallorca, moved Camus and his brother to Algiers.
“Camus’ mother supported them by becoming a housecleaner. So their upbringing was extremely poor. It was also in many ways a silent upbringing. His mother was deaf and largely mute. She had a vocabulary of a few hundred words and was illiterate. So too was his grandmother (in whose house they lived). One of the elements that I find so compelling in Camus’ novels as well as in his philosophy is the presence of silence which is a reflection of the silence of his childhood.
“The impoverished nature of his childhood deeply influenced his writing, his politics and in many respects, his attitude towards life. He became a spokesperson for those who were disenfranchised and disempowered and those who, as he said in his Nobel Prize speech, didn’t have a voice. You see this not just in his writing but in his actions during his lifetime.”
4. Can Camus’ ideas be implemented in our daily lives?
“Yes absolutely. For me, his notion of rebellion is perhaps the most important aspect of his philosophy. He contrasts rebellion to revolution. By rebellion, he understands, as I suggested earlier, a kind of extreme moderation. That when our dignity is threatened by somebody or something else, we resist, we say no. But the act of resistance should never lead to us becoming like our oppressor. We should always insist not just on our own dignity, but also on the dignity of those who oppose us.
“I see this playing out in Algeria today with the protest movements against the authorities in Algiers. It’s quite remarkable. If Camus were alive today, he would be deeply impressed by the way in which millions upon millions of Algerians are rebelling in moderation against the military rule. So the most important element I would take from Camus’ life and thought is this notion of rebellion, as a kind of non-violent resistance against the forces of oppression, authoritarianism and populism that we see springing up across the globe.”
5. Had Camus lived longer, what writing do you think he would have undertaken?
“When he died in 1960, he had already embarked on the third cycle of his writing works. He had already begun the novel that would be a part of it and was carrying a manuscript of the novel in the car in which he died. That manuscript was of Le Premier Homme or The First Man. It’s through the prism of The First Man that I often want to see Camus today.
“He still recognised our absurd condition and the need for rebellion. But at this point in life, he wanted to emphasise the need for love. By love, he didn’t mean anything sentimental or squishy. By love, he meant commitment to one’s community and to others, to the dignity of all human beings and commitment to nature. If you read his lyrical essays, they express an extraordinary attachment to the natural world. That’s almost always the world of Algeria – the coasts, the mountains, the plains. If he had not died in 1960, I do see Camus turning in the direction of environmental action. He would have been a beacon, one of the great voices for green policies and green politics.”
|
|
|
本城市首頁
看回應文章
等級：8
