The Plague is not just a great piece of literature; it holds profound significance, especially in the context of the current pandemic situation the world is grappling with. It has relevance throughout human history as the saying goes, "plague never really goes away." I perceive the plague as a symbol of the inevitability of human suffering. Crisis, sickness, torture, and death can strike at any moment, highlighting our existential vulnerability that we have endured across all ages.

In the face of collective adversity, we have the power to choose our own unique response, which is our fundamental freedom. The characters in The Plague represent various almost stereotypical ways humans can react to suffering. There is the religious view, the clinging to duty, the surrender to obligations, hope, closeness, tenderness, and connectedness to others, making the best of ourselves and others, the small joys of everyday life, and even illegal actions for personal benefit. These are all paths we can take when confronted with a destructive force greater than ourselves.

The main theme also explores how we form our own meaning, morality, philosophy, and world-view and how these are challenged by the reality of life. We see opposites in Father Paneloux and Tarrou. One uses the external system of belief to impose forced meaning on senselessness, while the other arrives at his own morality in conjunction with his self, respecting the absurd element of life. In some ways, The Plague reminds me of The Brothers Karamazov, where each character employs a different system of belief in the face of life's burdens, especially the debate about religion and God, similar to Ivan Karamazov's argument using the suffering of children.

The cruelty of nature is vividly described in the scene of the agony of a young boy's death. This showcases the brutal and indifferent nature of suffering, its absurdity. It is randomly distributed, and the innocent suffer as much as the vile, something incomprehensible to human reason, regardless of one's religious beliefs. So, what should we do in the face of the absurdity of suffering? Camus suggests that the answer lies in the act of rebellion against cruel circumstances, no matter how futile our actions may seem. One must imagine Sisyphus happy, right?

I also noticed overlapping themes with The Stranger, such as the contrast between human law and justice, and the difference between judging and trying to understand one's actions. In this book, there is extensive commentary on both the collective and the individual. The beauty and horror of the story are presented in unique and highly memorable scenes. The dead rats on the streets are haunting and set the torturous atmosphere of the book. The entire experience of reading it took me back to my time working in palliative care, facing dying people daily. I truly identified with Doctor Rieux, especially the burnout process he endured, feeling tired and apathetic in the face of suffering while still maintaining his devotion to duty. No matter how helpless one feels, meaning can be found in small acts of kindness and connection. However, I think one of the main ideas is that even when we can't find meaning, life is still worth living, and a small moment like swimming in the sea can make the burden of existence tolerable.

This book has numerous layers, and there are many excellent reviews from my friends on Goodreads. I don't want to repeat what has already been said, but if you haven't read it, you must!

“But what does it mean, the plague? It's life, that's all.”

One

There was a book that I read very thoroughly, and perhaps if I had read it more continuously, it would have been even better.

I loved it! It talked a lot about the separation of people, about the pain that people feel from separation and distance. About a city that has been seized by a plague and no one has the right to enter or leave the city. About the beliefs that people can have in such a period. About those who are either afraid of death or fight against it. About those who, when facing death, suddenly remember what life means and how they should live. Those who had forgotten a lot of things and death and the plague had awakened them. About people who are all plague-stricken and don't know how to live. About love and distance. About everything! And he had beautifully packaged his ideas and his characters in the book and presented all the philosophical discussions in the form of a novel. There are many places in the text that a person likes to underline, so that when he turns the page a few months or years later, his eyes fall on them. And it is a book that should be read about. See how they draw from the events of this book and surely at that time, many more things will be grasped by a person.

Two

It was interesting that in one place in the book, reference is made to an incident that occurs in the novel "The Stranger". A kind of special mischief! Of course, I don't know if this book was written earlier or that book, and we'll see if "The Stranger" got its idea from here or if Camus carried out this game during the plague.

Three

"Indeed, who could claim that the eternity of a joy could compensate for a single moment of human pain?"

An efficient novel that sometimes borders on dullness. However, by the last one-third of it, all the underlying meanings and the symbolism become evident. Camus is constantly describing the city during the epidemic, and at the same time, he is also depicting the everyday life of every person. Whether we are engaged in a battle against a pestilence or simply going about our daily lives, attempting to avoid pain and ennui, it is an unending battle that will not culminate in victory.

This novel seems to present a rather bleak view of life. The description of the city during the epidemic serves as a powerful metaphor for the chaos and uncertainty that we often face in our lives. The characters in the novel are all struggling to come to terms with the situation, and their experiences are relatable to our own. Camus's writing style is simple yet effective, and it manages to convey the complex emotions and ideas in a clear and concise manner.

Overall, this novel is a thought-provoking and engaging read. It makes us reflect on our own lives and the battles that we are constantly fighting. While it may not offer any easy solutions or answers, it does encourage us to face our challenges with courage and perseverance.

Have you ever been told that certain books can change the way you see the world? Well, ladies and gentlemen, for me, without a doubt, this has been the case with this wonderful work.

Albert Camus was a quite well-known writer thanks to his novel L’étranger (The Stranger). However, he also published other works such as Le mythe de Sisyphe (The Myth of Sisyphus), La chute (The Fall), or La Peste (The Plague). The latter tells what happened when a plague epidemic occurred in Oran, Algeria in the 1940s.

At first, Camus intended to title this work Les prisonniers (The Prisoners), Les éxilés (The Exiles), or Les séparés (The Separated). In the end, he decided to title it La peste. He began to have the idea for the novel around 1938, but he did not start writing it until 1942 when he was in France to cure his tuberculosis and Nazi Germany had occupied half of French territory. At that time, he was alone, separated from his wife and his native land, Algeria. Once the war was over, the novel was published. The public's success was immediate, but the intellectual world was much more reserved because they considered it dishonorable the way Camus had mocked the work of the Red Cross through one of the main characters in the novel.

However, what Camus wanted was to convey a message of hope by exalting human values such as solidarity, friendship, or tenderness.

The first time I read one of his works, I was in my first year of college in a subject called modern European literature (if I remember correctly). We had to read a series of classics in order to then be able to carry out an analysis. We read from Oedipus Rex, Antigone, Hamlet, and ending with The Stranger and Eugène Grandet. I didn't even know that The Stranger was coming. So I set out to read it, and it seemed to me a different reading from what I was used to reading, especially because of Meursault and his way of seeing the world. In the end, I liked it much more than I expected.

Time passed, and one day, while browsing on Booktube France, they were talking about another of his works, La Peste. Everyone considered it his great masterpiece. Because of this, I noted it down to take it into account in the future.

Two years passed, and when I was in my third year of college, I had another subject called contemporary French literature. We also had to read The Stranger for the final exam, and the professor told us that we had to carry out an analysis of another contemporary French book. I asked him at that moment if I could do it on this other book by Camus, and he told me that there was no problem at all. The first time I read it in Spanish, it seemed to me a rather pedantic and boring story. However, I reread it, but this time in French in order to be able to do the work, and... my world changed.

Everything about the book fascinated me. The characters, the way of seeing the world, and their reflections on it left me amazed. I liked the book so much that I decided to do my final project on it. It was thanks to this work that I realized two things:

In the first place, that La Peste can be read in three different ways: the first as the account of an epidemic, the second as the symbol of the occupation of any totalitarian regime, and a third considering the plague as an existing evil. In the second place, that many of the characters had their resemblance to the author, especially Rieux, Rambert, Grand, and even Cottard.

On the other hand, I cannot end this review without even commenting on the way the novel is written. Its prose is simple. It should be noted that each word is carefully placed to give the meaning that the author wanted, but the best of all are its reflections. As I said before, it was thanks to them that I truly fell in love with this book. Among them is this conversation that Doctor Rieux has with Tarrou:

“I know nothing, Tarrou, I swear to you that I know nothing. When I got into this profession, I did it a bit abstractly, in a certain way, because I needed it, because it was a situation like any other, one of those that young people choose. Perhaps also because it was extremely difficult for the son of a worker, like me. And then I had to see what it is like to die. Do you know that there are people who refuse to die? Have you heard a woman shout 'Never!' at the moment of dying? I have. And I immediately realized that I could not get used to it. Then I was very young, and it seemed to me that my repugnance reached the very order of the world. Later, I became more modest. Simply, I do not get used to seeing people die. I know no more. But after all…”

Rieux fell silent and sat down again. He felt that his mouth was dry.

“After all?” said Tarrou softly.

“After all…” repeated the doctor and hesitated again, looking at Tarrou attentively. “This is a thing that a man like you can understand. Isn't it true that since the order of the world is governed by death, perhaps it is better for God not to create one in it and to fight with all his strength against death, without raising his eyes to the sky where He is silent?”

“Yes,” agreed Tarrou. “I can understand that. But your victories will always be provisional, that's all.”

Rieux seemed to become gloomy.

“Always, I know that. But that is not a reason to stop fighting.”

“No, it is not a reason. But I imagine, then, what this plague must be like for you.”

“Yes,” said Rieux. “An endless defeat.”

To this, we must add a thousand more throughout the book. If it is true that sometimes the novel can be burdensome, but it must be read calmly and enjoyed. It is not a love story or an adventure story. It is a story where we see death, separation, selfishness, even the death penalty, and religion.

For those of you who have taken a little of your time to read this review, if you have never read Camus, I recommend him to you without a doubt. I can say with certainty that this is one of my favorite books, and it is the only one that I never tire of reading.

If one were to take this book and compile all of the new and not repeated information in it, the result would be a story scarcely larger than a short story.

This book is, in fact, the same plot and sentences copied over and over again in different orders and with scarcely varying vocabulary.

The only reason I can see for this book getting more than one star is that it revolves around the plague.

The book is purely rated on the concept of what it could have been.

I read high reviews on this book and wondered if they had even read the same book.

Each point I read, I found that I could counter and prove it insufficient and false in my own mind.

The book follows the varying emotions of the people of Oran.

But what emotions? The entire book is told by a completely monotonous narrator who refers to himself in the third person: "the narrator chooses to portray this exact occurrence over and over and because...".

In my personal opinion, a book about the plague should delve more deeply into the emotions of the people rather than simply stating that they did one thing because of the plague and then did the exact opposite also because of the plague.

The people of Oran did not portray emotions at all.

In fact, for most of the book, the reader feels as if they are gazing at the town through the foggy window of a skyscraper far above the city.

The author portrays the citizens as if they are minute ants scrambling and dying at the edge of his gaze, but are so insignificant that the only trait noticeable is the movement and basic actions of the ant.

The story's emotions evolve throughout the novel in a beautiful portrayal of despair.

Personally, I do not think that this story evolved at all.

It was the same plot rambling on chapter after chapter.

The only despair and sympathy I felt was for myself and fellow readers for having to endure this book.

A book is supposed to make you feel something towards the characters and plot within the book.

This emotion could be love, hatred, or sympathy, as long as there is an actual emotion.

The only feeling I felt was a monumental wave of boredom.

I kept hoping that the elderly and senseless man who spit on the cats would change his habits and spit on the narrator himself for writing this book in such a dull fashion.

The narrator treats feelings as if they are another entity entirely and he is gazing at them through the wrong end of the binoculars.

Each character was written to be dynamic and unique.

Actually, it was not until I was 3/4 of the way through the book that I could even determine which character was which.

Everyone blurred and mixed because of the lack of personality and feelings.

This task of sorting through flat characters was made even more difficult by the constant interruption of death.

I actually got to the end of the book thinking a character was dead when, to my mild surprise, he was still alive and that it was in fact a different old man who had died.

The only semblance of relief from the monotonous plot was in the irrelevant and confusing back stories given to some of the characters.

These pages were the only ones that included any variation throughout the entire novel.

Meanwhile, they were completely confusing.

In one back story, the character declares that he in fact had the plague.

This was when I thought that maybe the author had decided to make an interesting twist in saying that it was in fact this character who had brought the plague to the city.

Alas, this was not the case and the author was just saying that the character was plagued by unimportant memories of the past that did not affect the story whatsoever.

The final part of the book, I had hope for.

This was when the book finally seemed to be steering away from the overwritten deaths and occurrences of the plague.

I was about halfway through when the author decided that it was once again time to revisit the plague and kill off another character.

Surprisingly yet not surprising at all, the narrator barely showed any emotion to the death of one of his closest friends.

After this, I thought there was no one else he could kill off without ending the book with no conclusion at all.

To my dismay, the author decided to kill off the narrator's wife and send one of the last remaining friends to prison after completely losing his mind.

This was in fact the end of the book.

To make clear what I just stated: THE ENTIRE BOOK NEVER CHANGED AND EVEN THE ENDING FOLLOWED ALONG THE SAME DULL LINE OF DEATH.

I hope this review spares even one innocent reader before they fall into this mental mind trap of a book.

No one should have to endure this kind of horrendous literature.

I recommend keeping a distance of at least 10 miles between you and a copy of this book.

**Expanded Article**

But, you know, I feel more fellowship with the defeated than with saints. Heroism and sanctity don't really appeal to me, I imagine. What interests me is being a man.

This profound thought sets the stage for the exploration in Camus' "The Plague".

In The Plague, Camus creates a powerful and metaphorical image of the world grappling with evil. The symbol of this evil is the titular plague that devastates Oran in an unspecified year in the 1940s. The author deliberately leaves the year undefined, emphasizing that the events could have occurred at any time. It could be a war, an earthquake, a serious illness, a famine, or something we're grateful hasn't happened to us. It could be anything. And in this case, it was the plague.

Camus vividly shows people not only struggling against the evil outside but also with their own inner demons - their frailties, fears, lack of empathy, and simple human decency. One of the main characters, Dr. Rieux, due to his profession and mostly because of his approach to life, along with Tarrou, quickly tries to organize life in the plague-ridden city. Their actions and attitudes suggest associations with the French Resistance movement. Disagreement on evil and passivity is their motto. The plague turns the inhabitants of Oran into prisoners, and from that point, the novel reads like a report from a besieged city.

What would you do in their place? Would you try to escape like the journalist Rambert, because there's so little you can really do and there's a love waiting for you in another city? Or would you, like Father Paneloux, entrust everything to God, acknowledging that man must suffer and there's a deeper sense in it? Or perhaps, instead of succumbing to the general hopelessness and ugliness, you would try to save something beautiful for yourself, like Joseph Grand, who keeps refining the sentence about the young horsewoman riding a handsome sorrel mare along the flowery avenues of the Bois de Boulogne?

There are as many attitudes and behaviors as there are characters. From nobility, selfless help, and everyday heroism to meanness and indifference. We know ourselves only to the extent we have been tested. Indeed. Plague was hailed as the manifesto of a new humanism, showing the new challenges facing people who survived the hell of war. The novel explores human behavior at a crucial moment, telling, without pathos and big words, about simple human solidarity and morality. All the characters in the novel are shown from the perspective of their response to the plague. In this way, Camus shows different reactions to the plague and, more generally, to every evil that comes to man from the outside.

Plague is a novel-monument, a novel in which all the nagging doubts and harassing existentialist questions and problems resonate. Is a man inherently evil, and only the lack of opportunities to do evil makes him a good man? Is he doomed forever to fight with evil? Does his life have a deeper meaning? What does it mean to be a man? Can one be a saint without God? Does suffering and death have the power to redeem anything, any unspecified sins?

Many people died, but the town survived. Love probably endured the time of separation, but the human is no longer the same. Deprived of his illusory sense of security, enriched with new knowledge that evil can always return, but there are more things to admire in men than to despise.

The Plague: A Thought-Provoking Novel

The plague is one of the deadliest pandemics known to mankind throughout history. It has left millions of casualties in its wake. In Albert Camus' novel "The Plague", the story is set in the city of Oran. This city, at that time, was a bustling economic and commercial center. The people lived a routine life, with their daily activities following a set pattern. However, everything changed when the unexpected happened - the arrival of the plague.

The novel begins with the discovery of dead rats on the streets. At first, the people were惊讶 and curious, but soon fear and anxiety set in as more and more rats died and strange symptoms began to appear among the citizens. Despite the initial disbelief, it was eventually confirmed that the city was facing a plague epidemic. The authorities took measures to quarantine the city and try to contain the spread of the disease.

The story follows the lives of the people of Oran during the plague. We see their various reactions and emotions, from the initial shock and denial to the acceptance and resignation that comes with living in a state of crisis. The characters in the novel, such as Dr. Rieux, Tarrou, Paneloux, and Cottard, each have their own perspectives and ways of dealing with the plague. Some, like Dr. Rieux, work tirelessly to fight the disease and save lives, while others, like Cottard, find strange comfort in the chaos and uncertainty.

As the plague continues to rage on, the people of Oran are forced to confront their own mortality and the meaning of life. They learn to adapt to their new reality and find strength in unity. The novel explores themes such as human nature, morality, religion, and the struggle between good and evil. It makes us question how we would react in the face of a similar crisis and what values we would hold dear.

In conclusion, "The Plague" is a powerful and thought-provoking novel that offers a深刻insight into the human condition. It reminds us that in times of crisis, we must come together and support one another. It also serves as a警示of the importance of being prepared for the unexpected and taking measures to protect ourselves and those around us. Whether you are a fan of literature or simply interested in exploring the human psyche, this novel is definitely worth reading.

**The Plague: A Timeless Reflection on Life and Activism**

In 1971, at the age of eighteen, I first read Albert Camus' "The Plague." It was a time of intense activism, with the anti-war, civil rights, women's, and environmental movements all in full swing. I, like many others at my small religious college, was committed to "Doing Good" in the world. Camus' words, such as "All I maintain is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims, and it's up to us, so far as possible, not to join forces with the pestilences," became a banner for me.

Set in Oran, Algeria, the novel chronicles a fictional plague that strikes a town of 200,000. The townspeople's responses mirror Kubler-Ross's five stages of grief, with some characters showing selfishness and a retreat into individual love, while others, like Rieux and Tarrou, commit to doing good in the face of death. The plague in the book is both literal and figurative, representing not only the disease but also the ennui, malaise, and passivity that can afflict society.
As I reread the book in 2020, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, its message felt more relevant than ever. We too are facing a crisis that has forced us to make decisions about what side we are on. The choices are not always easy, but as Camus makes clear, we must resist, we must act. We must be like Rieux, who, despite his weariness with the world, continues to work with the dying and search for a cure.
In a world filled with compassion fatigue, climate change, pandemics, and endless wars, it can be difficult to remain vigilant and committed to doing good. But as Camus reminds us, there are more things to admire in men than to despise. We must not give in to passivity, bitterness, or silence. We must be part of the healing movements, working with others to make the world a better place. And even though we may not be saints, we can all do our part.

A great novel, and it is most deserved that the author was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. It is an allegory that uses the bubonic plague instead of the Holocaust itself. The prose masterfully captures the fear and acceptance of fate. The characters are truly memorable, from the doctor to the brave clerk Grand and his perseverance to write a perfect sentence amidst the horror and desolation.

This existentialist classic tells the story of a plague set in the real city of Oran, Algeria. When a bubonic plague breaks out, the city and its inhabitants are isolated from the rest of the world. The story is seen as an allegory of when the Nazis occupied France.

The story, told by Dr Rieux, provides an eyewitness account of a plague that starts with one dead rat and then spreads like wildfire. Camus weaves the story around several eccentric characters and their behaviors. Dr Rieux struggles to cope with the increasing death toll. Tarrou, who has seen everything, and the journalist, Rambert, both join voluntary health teams to assist. The civil servant, Grand, stops his obsessive writing for the public good. Of course, there is a villain in Cottard, a black marketer making money from people’s misery. However, it is not all doom and gloom.

Towards the end of the book, the third-person narrator, Dr Rieux, states a good reason for the story and perhaps echoes what is happening with the Coronavirus. He says, “to state quite simply what we learn in time of pestilence: that there are more things to admire in men than to despise.”

Reading it made me think also of Brexit and the isolation and misery it will bring. The parallels and repetition of history seem almost ordained. It is quite topical now for the Coronavirus and the Spanish Flu, as it shows how humanity copes and perseveres in the face of great adversity.

I have been in search of books that could be suitable for my new Fall semester course on Apocalyptic Literature. This particular one seemed like a perfect match. I had read some of Camus before, such as The Stranger, which was of course excellent with its unreliable narrator and suspense. However, I don't remember much about The Fall. Camus, like Sartre, in my mind, belongs to the category of philosophers who perhaps shouldn't have ventured into creative writing. But Sartre is definitely on the better side as his big ideas don't completely overshadow the story.

Unfortunately, The Plague didn't quite appeal to me. The story starts interestingly with the town of Oran in the 1940s being gradually overrun by dead rats. At first, the townspeople aren't overly alarmed, but as people start getting sick and the number of dead rats increases daily, anxiety builds. The story follows Dr. Rieux, who tries to raise the alarm, and Rambert, a journalist stuck in the town when it's cordoned off. But after Part I, the novel sags in the middle as we simply wait out the plague. I didn't really care about the characters, and I expected Camus to thwart their efforts and not give a happy ending.

What was fascinating were the sociological observations about the town's daily life. Some people live in fear, while others live for the moment. However, these sections couldn't carry the book for me. The ending was a bit of a surprise as it wasn't as bleak as I thought. Maybe it's because of my misunderstanding of Camus' philosophy. All in all, it's not a bad book, but not great either. I did learn that people look at you strangely when you read Camus in a coffee shop. But in the pursuit of good literature, one has to take some risks.

I wanted to step off the street that was close by and place my foot on a dead, emaciated mouse whose long tail had turned black with plague. As I looked at it carefully for a moment, I realized that it was a swollen rat that had been soaked by the rainy and muddy weather. The impact of the book on me was like this.

The city of Oran in the book "The Plague" has more of a personality than all the characters, and the narrator describes the city more than anyone else. Throughout the book, I did not identify with any of the characters. Neither with Dr. Rieux who sacrifices his life day and night and goes from one hospital to another, nor with Rambert who has been separated from his love, nor with Grand who is in a state of intense anxiety in search of a complete and flawless sentence. I identified with the city. A city that was already bad from the very beginning, even before the plague attack. Because the plague is actually, as we realize, within people. The people of the city had the plague even before the attack of the bacterium Yersinia pestis.

In fact, novel writing is a dangerous task for a philosopher. Because he must be careful to pour his philosophical beliefs into the vessel of the novel and the structure of the novel and the writing pattern are more important to him than the issuance of a statement and the expression of an opinion. For this reason, I was a little dissatisfied that I also gave three stars to the Faulkner book that I had read before this novel because the Faulkner novel was full of story compared to "The Plague" and the space of the story had taken shape in it.

Also, watch the video that the Instagram page "School of Life" has posted about Albert Camus;

https://www.instagram.com/p/BsvME1zgKRq/

The Plague is a truly depressing novel that delves into the horrors of the bubonic plague.

At its core, it explores how people coped with this unexpected and terrifying event. Initially, I was rather disappointed by the seemingly lifeless and uninteresting characters. However, the final chapter completely transformed my perception of the novel. The reason they appear lifeless is because the narrator is presenting his observations. He can only describe what he sees, unable to account for the inner feelings of others. Being part of this plague-ridden city himself, he attempts to convey the emotions of the others through his own grief and sadness.

Interestingly, the quarantined individuals chose to live their lives in the dullest possible way. They were merely surviving, rather than truly living. The worst way to exist is without knowing one's true purpose and source of happiness. While the plague was undoubtedly a devastating and life-altering event, it is crucial to learn how to live with the consequences. Dwelling on the negatives will not lead to improvement. Without the motivation to find a cure, the seclusion of the people would not have been sufficient. Sooner or later, cases would have emerged outside the quarantined area, and without efforts to find a cure, it would have meant total eradication.

The Plague teaches us that even in the most devastating situations, there is always a way out. The last paragraph of the book, taken literally, might seem to invalidate my previous opinion. The author states that the Bacillus, the etiological agent of the bubonic plague, has not been completely eradicated and could resurface in the future. This implies that past mistakes should not be repeated. People now have the knowledge to prevent the spread of the sickness, so what happened in the past should not occur again. Ignorance can be deadly, and it is up to each individual to address this issue.

I have read numerous reviews that explore the various ideas presented in this novel, and I agree with most of them. As a beginner in the realm of classics and speculative fiction, I am eager to explore more of this genre. I understand that my ideas may not be entirely correct, but I hope that no one will belittle me in the comments section. Let's engage in a mature discussion of ideas. It is always enjoyable to educate others, but in the right way. We should not be ignorant individuals who believe that all our ideas are infallible.

This novel, although only a few pages more than 300, took me 12 days to complete. It is dense and lacks a fast pace. However, I still thoroughly enjoyed it, despite some dull moments. I have been busy with life and have not properly prioritized my reading, which has led to a slower pace.

I rate this novel 4/5 stars. It is one of the most thought-provoking novels I have read. I still have much to analyze about the plot, but it is currently 4 am and I am feeling a bit sleepy. Discussing and analyzing classics is both fun and rewarding because they have substance. They not only entertain but also educate and inspire. I cannot wait to read more of Camus' works. He is an excellent author, and I highly recommend this novel.