The Fall by Albert Camus is a profound and thought-provoking work. Set in Amsterdam just after World War II, it tells the story of Jean-Baptiste Clamence, a former lawyer who now calls himself a judge-penitent. Clamence meets an ordinary man in a bar and takes him on a journey of self-discovery. Through his first-person narrative, Clamence peels away the layers of his inauthentic personas, revealing his true self and the hollowness of human existence.

Clamence once believed himself to be a model citizen, but a series of events shatters this illusion. He witnesses a woman commit suicide and fails to help her, and he is humiliated by a motorcyclist. These experiences lead him to realize his own hypocrisy and guilt, and he retreats from his settled life to spend his days recounting his story.

The novel explores themes such as morality, guilt, hypocrisy, and alienation. It shows how the false veneer of morality that we build around ourselves can lead to an inauthentic and hollow existence. It also suggests that the only way to begin to free ourselves from the expectations of others and avoid bad faith is to embrace isolation.

The Fall is a complex and multi-layered text that requires active reading and reflection. It is a powerful exploration of the human condition and the absurdity of life. Whether you see Clamence as a satirical portrait of Sartre or as a reflection of Camus himself, the novel offers a profound and disturbing look at the modern world.

The Fall
Albert Camus

The hero of the fall is all of us.

If someone disagrees, then he is a great hypocrite, which automatically makes him look even more like this hero.

We are all part of this story of the fall, whether we like it or not.

The idea that we are all the hero in this context is a powerful one.

It makes us take responsibility for our actions and the consequences that follow.

When we recognize ourselves as the hero of the fall, we are more likely to learn from our mistakes and grow as individuals.

And those who oppose this view, by being hypocrites, only further emphasize the importance of this concept.

They show that they are not willing to face the truth about themselves and their role in the world.

So, let us all embrace our role as the hero of the fall and strive to make a positive change in our lives and the lives of those around us.

**The Fall**

My dear Camus, I love you. Your works have always had a profound impact on me. The way you describe the human condition, the struggle between good and evil, and the search for meaning in a seemingly absurd world is truly remarkable.

The fall, as you have so beautifully depicted it, is not just a physical event but a metaphor for the moral and spiritual decline of humanity. It is a reminder that we are all capable of great things, but also of great failings.

Your words have made me question my own beliefs and actions, and have inspired me to strive for a better understanding of myself and the world around me. Thank you, Camus, for your wisdom and your art.

I truly enjoyed this book and I dare say that many times I found myself identifying with the character. Perhaps a bit too much, we all make "similar" mistakes, at least when it comes to our relationships with people. From the book, I remember one sentence, which I even consider a life rule: "To be happy, you must not worry too much about others."

This rule has really made me think. In our daily lives, we often spend a lot of time and energy caring about what others think, say, or do. We worry about whether we are liked, accepted, or approved of. But sometimes, this excessive concern can actually make us less happy.

By learning to focus more on ourselves and our own well-being, we can free ourselves from the burden of constantly pleasing others. We can pursue our own dreams and interests, make decisions that are right for us, and live a more authentic and fulfilling life. Of course, this doesn't mean that we should completely ignore others or be selfish. It just means that we need to find a balance between caring about others and taking care of ourselves.

The 'cocoon of conventionality' that we spin for ourselves can be quite comforting.

It provides a sense of security and familiarity, allowing us to move through life without constantly having to question or challenge the status quo.

However, when this cocoon is suddenly ripped away, whether through a major life event or a moment of self-reflection, what emerges is not always a 'butterfly with ethical wings'.

Camus, the renowned philosopher, reminds us that our character is not something fixed and immutable.

Rather, it is a complex interplay of projection and interjection, both influenced by and influencing the society in which we live.

Our values, beliefs, and actions are shaped by the cultural, social, and historical context in which we find ourselves.

At the same time, we also have the power to project our own individuality and make a difference in the world around us.

Understanding this dynamic relationship between our character and society is essential for living a meaningful and ethical life.

“People are in a hurry to pass judgment so as not to be judged themselves.” This statement reveals a common human trait. We often rush to evaluate others, perhaps unconsciously hoping to deflect attention from our own flaws and shortcomings.

“Freedom is not a reward or a decoration that you can toast with champagne. Instead, it is hard work and a long-distance run, all by oneself, extremely tiring. Alone in a dull room, alone in the dock before the judges, and alone to make up one's mind, both in front of oneself and in the face of the judgment of others. At the end of every freedom, there is a sentence, which is why freedom is too heavy to bear.” Here, the true nature of freedom is described. It is not something easily achieved or enjoyed. It requires great effort and courage to face the consequences that come with it.

“Your success and happiness are only forgiven you if you generously agree to share them. But to be happy, it is essential not to be too concerned with others. As a result, there is no escape. You can be happy and judged, or absolved and miserable.” This passage presents a dilemma. On one hand, we are expected to share our success and happiness with others. On the other hand, being too concerned with others' opinions can prevent us from truly being happy.

“Friendship is less simple. It takes a long time and a lot of effort to obtain, but once you have it, you can't get rid of it; you just have to deal with it. Don't think for a moment that your friends will call you every evening, as they should, to find out if this happens to be the evening when you are deciding to commit suicide, or simply whether you don't need company, whether you are not in the mood to go out. No, don't worry, they'll call the evening you are not alone, when life is beautiful. As for suicide, they would be more likely to push you to it, because of what you owe to yourself, according to them. May heaven protect us, dear Monsieur, from being put on a pedestal by our friends!” This description of friendship shows its complexity. Friends may not always be there when we need them the most, and sometimes they may even have expectations that can add pressure to our lives.

“He had been bored, that's all, bored like most people. So he had fabricated a life full of complications and drama out of thin air. Something had to happen - and that explains most human commitments. Something had to happen, even loveless slavery, even war or death. Hurray then for funerals!” This passage suggests that boredom can drive people to seek excitement and meaning in their lives, even if it means creating unnecessary drama or getting involved in harmful situations.

“Have you noticed that only death awakens our feelings? How we love the friends who have just left us? How we admire those of our teachers who have stopped speaking, their mouths filled with earth! Then the expression of admiration naturally emerges, the admiration they may have been expecting from us all their lives. But do you know why we are always more just and more generous towards the dead? The reason is simple. With them, there is no obligation. They leave us free, and we can take our time, fit the testimonial between a cocktail party and a nice little mistress, in our spare time, in short.” This final passage points out the irony that it is often only after someone has died that we fully appreciate them and express our admiration. Perhaps this is because when they are alive, we are too busy with our own lives and concerns to truly see and value them.

"Fall" - a work by Camus that was most beloved by critics. And there are several reasons for this. At the same time, it is also the work of Camus that blatantly presents something that it is not... Yes, this is the most deceitful and insidious work.

Let's start with what, in my opinion, critics liked. Firstly, the morality in this story (or novel?) seems clear and understandable. In other works of Camus, he is not so straightforward. In "The Stranger", Meursault is an anti-hero (yes, yes, a negative character, look more closely!). But it is he who proclaims the key ideas of Camus' absurdism. "The Plague" is already focused on positive characters, but their morality is a revolt in the name of the non-future. Yes, the main heroes fight against evil, but they don't believe that good will come after victory. What a tiring position, isn't it? In "Fall", everything is clear: a negative character who experiences repentance and remorse. The moral boundaries are clearly drawn, and the audience will not get lost among complex considerations.

Secondly, the form of presentation is both original and classic. From the classics, we have a three-act structure: 1) the main hero lives in an illusion about himself; 2) the main hero despises himself and the world; 3) the main hero accepts himself - and feels remorse for the sins of the past. And the original form of presentation is that the whole story is a monologue of the main hero, who has already managed to "get drunk" and can hardly string two words together. Drunken warnings that reveal the depth of the fall of the main hero! Oh, this cannot but be captivating - in combination with the clarity of the morality of the work.
Thirdly, the images. Oh, here Camus again (but, in fact, for the first time, because "A Happy Death" was published 10 years after Camus' death) uses his erudition to the fullest! And critics simply love to decipher riddles! Therefore, we have a whole set of symbols here. The action takes place in Amsterdam, which is below sea level (isn't it a metaphor for the underworld?). The main hero lives in that part of the city that is surrounded by canals. And this concentric map of the city is the nine circles of hell! The bar where people cannot understand each other because they speak different languages - isn't this the Tower of Babel! And also doves as angels, snow as a promise of salvation from God... Yes, Camus generously sprinkled symbols. And this is enchanting.

Nevertheless, this is the most insidious story of Camus. It is by no means simple, and even less straightforward! It is not moralizing. Although the first reading leads precisely to such conclusions: if you don't pay attention to the details, then this story is... boring. The drunken warnings (or "stream of consciousness") of the amoral main hero, generously sprinkled with images and metaphors. Scholasticism! In fact, "Fall" by Camus is a completely different work! But why does he finally manage to present something that it is not?

Well, here are my thoughts. First, in what the deceitfulness of the story is manifested. Then, why Camus wrote it this way. Firstly, the false three-act structure. Camus creates the impression that we are dealing with "illusion - refutation - remorse", because the main hero first considers himself a moral person, then realizes that he cared only about his own interests - hiding behind noble motives. And then repentance comes. In fact, if you carefully reread the work, the three-act structure will remain, but completely different: "illusion - contempt - hypocrisy". That's why the story is called "Fall". The main hero moves only downwards. That's why his "repentance" takes place... in hell (Amsterdam is below sea level, as we remember, and the main hero's house is surrounded by nine circles of canals). Because repentance has not come. The main hero first believes that he is a good person, but then realizes that this is an illusion and... that's all. In the second act, he despises everyone around him for hypocrisy (and this shows that he is still hurt by the moral imperfection of the world and people). But in the third act, he already forgets about moral despair and decides to play a role in order to again receive the love and care of others. Yes, he returns to the stage of "illusion", but this time cynically and hypocritically!
Secondly, morality is still present in the work. But it is more complex. "On the surface" lies the idea: to do good to people, but at the same time to receive a reward and glory as a moral person is rather a hidden self-interest. But if this were Camus' moral message, then what is the rest of ⅔ of the work for? Camus simply poses a different question. But it makes sense if you know the previous two periods of his work: the absurdist ( "The Stranger", "Caligula", "The Myth of Sisyphus") and the rebellious ( "The Plague", "The Just", "The Rebel"). "Fall" here plays the role of an interlude or a pause: instead of moving on to the third stage in Camus' work, he sums up the previous ones. And therefore, the moral question of "Fall" sounds like this: how to be moral in a world that is absurd and whose inhabitants are far from moral ideals? The main hero chooses the path of denying any values except his own advantage. But this is also a fall!
Thirdly, Camus' image system is more complex, since the central episode - the suicide of a woman on the Pont des Arts - Camus first "masks" as a chimerical hallucination. The main hero hears laughter that rings on the bridge, and then seems to run along the river. Chimerical, because a year later in the same place a woman jumps into the water - and the main hero will hear her pleas for help, which will move downstream. And this is not a simple coincidence: Camus in this way tells us an important thing about his hero. And this leads us to the key: what place does this story have in Camus' work. "Fall" is an interlude because in it Camus attacks Sartre. But for him, this task is not so important. It is "situational": Camus wants to show the mistakes of Sartre's philosophy and ethics, but has not yet had time to expound his views.

But in what does the refutation of Sartre consist? And how is this related to the episode on the bridge? And for this, you need to know what Sartre is writing at this time. Yes, everything is so intertwined that "Fall" is probably the most complex work of Camus. So, Sartre in "The Roads to Freedom" proposes a very clear view of freedom - responsibility for one's actions. If a person is aware of his actions and is ready to answer for them - he is free! In "The Age of Reason", Daniel does this - a homosexual who condemns himself for this and therefore decides to punish himself by marrying a woman. Of course, the woman does not know that Daniel is gay. And so will she be happy in a marriage where her husband does not love her? And is it moral to perceive another person as an instrument for the implementation of one's desires? Sartre believes that yes - this is still freedom! Camus sees such an approach as incredibly dehumanizing! And for this he writes "Fall". And this is the key idea of the work. And it is expressed in the last paragraph.

"Say these words that have been ringing in my ears for many years and that I finally say in your mouth: 'Girl, oh, girl! Jump into the water again, so that for the second time I get the opportunity to save both of us with you!' For the second time? Oh, what carelessness! Think, my dear metre, and suddenly we are caught on a word? Fulfill the promise! Br-r! The water is so cold! But no, you don't have to worry. It's already too late, and it will always be too late. Fortunately!" Here is the quintessence of Camus' work. The main hero has accepted his imperfection, but is he free? Is this freedom true? Here you can notice another allusion. Sartre once said: "Hell is other [people]." Camus asserts the opposite. The world will always be imperfect. It cannot be corrected. But a person can be human, take care of others. Not everyone, because this is also impossible, but at least a small circle. A year later, Camus will say: "Life is more important to me than truth." And this is a slap in the face of Marxism (in the version of Stalin), where "the forest is cut down - the chips fly." As if the life of one person, if it comes to the happiness of all mankind. Camus is disgusted by this view. But it is this view that Sartre is broadcasting in France. (Yes, Sartre was a Stalinist).
Therefore, the main hero of "Fall" really experienced a fall - not when he realized that the world is imperfect and cannot be corrected in any way, but when he decided that he didn't care, he would continue to live for his own pleasure! But at the same time, he will manipulate others to evoke their sympathy. In fact, this is parasitism on the kindness of others... Therefore, "Fall" is a loud slap in the face of existentialism in the version of Sartre. It is a sharp criticism of Sartre's concept of freedom, as well as his idea that a person must create himself - and this is a moral ideal. Camus criticizes such a view, showing the Sartrean individual who creates himself and is responsible for his actions, but this does not lead to anything good, and even vice versa - it creates a society of hypocrites and scoundrels. What is Camus' answer? Care for the Other. This is how Camus planned to develop the third - final! - stage of his work, which he called "Love". And he even managed to write part of the novel "The First Man". However, this work remained unfinished... Thus, "Fall" is the last completed major prose work of Camus. A work that masquerades as a simple story in order to force readers to think about what morality and freedom are? But, in fact, this is a complex philosophical and sociological story that I had to reread twice with an interval of two weeks in order to fully appreciate the author's mastery.

Camus, yet again, demonstrates his prowess as a master of the philosophical novel. In less deft hands, the form of this book, which consists of a lengthy monologue by the protagonist, Jean-Baptiste Clarence, to a fellow bar patron (us), could have been awkward and artificial. However, Camus's prose is so hypnotically engaging that I was easily drawn into the role of Clarence's confessor. And despite the fact that a book composed of anecdotes and ruminations could have easily devolved into a rambling mess, Camus manages to infuse Clarence's soliloquy with a satisfying dramatic rhythm.

Of course, since this is a philosophical novel, we must inquire into what Camus intended to convey through this story. Clarence is talented, articulate, and highly intelligent, yet he has led a completely unsatisfying and inauthentic life. Clearly, he is afflicted by some sort of spiritual ailment. But what exactly is it?

Clarence initially achieves respect and success through good deeds, functioning as a kind of public defender. However, his motivation is entirely base and selfish, exemplifying La Rouchefoucauld's maxim that vicious motives can give rise to virtuous behavior. His phoniness is exposed, at least to himself, when he chooses to ignore a woman's suicide rather than risk his own life. Thoroughly disillusioned with himself, he ultimately concludes that we are all guilty and condemned. As completely base creatures, our only recourse is to confess our guilt and submit to something greater than ourselves (what precisely is left unspecified).

Now, if you have any knowledge of Camus, you are aware that he does not want us to accept the judgment of this judge-penitent. Clarence's problem, in essence, is that he is a hypocrite, meaning he cannot take responsibility for either his good or bad actions. He describes himself as being driven by impulses or desires rather than by choices or values. And when faced with his own shortcomings, he condemns all of humanity for their fallen nature rather than himself for his specific choices. In this regard, Camus's portrayal of Clarence is rather similar to Sartre's critique of inauthenticity (albeit far more vivid).

So, if we do not wish to end up like Clarence, what should we do? We must determine our values and then hold ourselves accountable for living up to them. This may not sound overly difficult. Yet I suspect that, more often than we care to admit, we lead our lives more like Clarence than like Camus.

One. I didn't have a good feeling about the translation of "Shurangiz Farokh".

Two. Read the preface of Hoshang Golshiri after reading the book.

Three. The book is of small volume but its attraction is low and you must read it with patience.

Four. After reading the fall of pages 146 to 157 of the book "The Philosophy of Comu"; Richard Kember; read Khashayar Deihimi.

********************************************************************************

Sometimes, strange murders occur in the cemetery. Page 47 of the book.

The feeling of realizing rights, the satisfaction of one's conscience from one's justice, the joy of respecting oneself, these are powerful motives that support us or push us forward. Page 49 of the book.

Living above others is still the only way for most people to see a human being and respect him. Page 56 of the book.

Dear sir, wasn't this really heaven: to live directly in the mix? My life was like this. I never needed to learn how to live. In this regard, I knew everything from birth. Page 57 of the book.

Friendship is not so simple. It comes with a lot of pain over the days, but since it has come, there is no other way to get rid of it, one must brave it. Page 60 of the book.

Man is like this, dear sir, he has two faces: he cannot love a bourgeoisie other than himself without loving himself. Page 63 of the book.

I love life, this is my real weakness. I love it so much that I have no concept of anything other than life itself. Don't you think there is something common in this addiction to life? Page 100 of the book.

People rush to judge others so that they are not judged themselves. Page 105 of the book.

We rarely tell the secrets of our hearts to those who are better than us. We even avoid their presence. On the contrary, most of the time we confess our secrets to those who are similar to us and share in our weaknesses and oppressions. Page 107 of the book.

Believe that religions go wrong from the moment they break the moral law and issue threats. Page 132 of the book.

The censor loudly proclaims what it prohibits. Page 136 of the book.

Camera has given us a mirror, and this mirror reflects the human of our era.

It captures the essence of our lives, the emotions we experience, and the moments that define us.

With a click of a button, we can freeze time and preserve memories that will last a lifetime.

Whether it's a beautiful landscape, a loved one's smile, or a historical event, the camera allows us to document and share these precious moments with the world.

It has become an essential tool for artists, journalists, and everyday people alike.

Through the lens of the camera, we can see the world from different perspectives and gain a deeper understanding of ourselves and those around us.

The camera truly is a remarkable invention that has changed the way we perceive and remember the world.

A such a small book which didn't make a ripple for me. Generally, my mind was racing. I got trapped, educated, and reread most of the sentences one, two, three times, as if there was a comma after each one that made me stop and send me back to the beginning to understand what I had just read while rereading it.

Our false innocence, the vulgar and harsh inner revelation of the repentant lawyer Jean-Baptiste Clamence, which made me see my own personal shit. With small and bigger lies, we carefully build in all our life the piles of our apparent kindness, our high ethics, thus creating our personal chaos, in which we enclose our perfect self. We have an opinion about everyone and everything. We are the bright all-knowing and the great judges who constantly give a step and opportunities to ourselves to raise and admire ourselves. But how perfect, innocent and good we are, humble doves that are not to blame for anything, we have nothing to attach to us. We develop the art of pushing our conscience under the blanket that wraps the self we show in society. I would like some praise for this self, if it doesn't bother you, I'm a little nourished by it. Also, I'm glad I have all of you as friends, at such a distance as needed so that I don't have many obligations towards you, that would be heavy and unbearable for me.

And when the surface dries up a little, then BOOM! We fall into the pit with the furies until we put them back in our heads and start again from the beginning.

"I will reveal a great secret to you, my dear. Don't wait for the Second Coming. It comes every day."

"Without a doubt, I sometimes pretend that I took life seriously. However, very quickly, I realized how vain seriousness was and I simply continued to play my role as best as I could. I played the active, the smart, the virtuous, the good citizen, the indignant, the fair, the empathetic, the exemplary... Finally, I stop here, you have understood that I was like my Dutch, who are here without being here: I was absent when I was taking up the most space."

You, how many roles do you play every day and how much space do you occupy while you are absent? I play many and a lot! Maybe we have to pay some price for this, I don't know, maybe. However, we pay it retrospectively, in the sum that -impossible- we make at some point, a beautiful morning, a sunset, a night when sleep doesn't take us, with thoughts-snowdrifts that bring us our own maker, alive-dead and naked in front of our eyes.

**The Fall by Albert Camus: A Thought-Provoking Analysis**

The only reason for giving this work three stars was that it didn't have enough appeal for me. The narrative style of the story was very tiring and draining, and it wasn't until many pages had passed that the plot became clear. However, there is no doubt that this work is still one of Camus' greatest.

The story begins shortly after World War II. You are sitting in a dive in Amsterdam when a man comes and introduces himself. Aha! This man is none other than Jean-Baptiste Clamence (alias the penitent judge), who was formerly a lawyer and has now changed his name. You, sitting there, don't know exactly what a penitent judge is, but he promises to explain. The story continues in 6 chapters.

Jean-Baptiste Clamence tells his story. He describes Amsterdam, believing it to be very similar to the description of purgatory. He also talks about his past as a successful lawyer, his pride in helping orphans and widows, and his belief that he always took the right path. However, one day, while crossing a bridge in France, he hears a laugh. This incident shocks him and changes the course of his life. He gradually realizes that all his actions have been two-faced and that he has been living a lie.
One of the memories he recalls is when he saw a woman fall into the river but didn't jump in to save her. He justifies his actions by saying that he didn't want to risk his life for her. But deep down, he knows that he is a hypocrite.
In the end, Jean-Baptiste Clamence becomes a penitent judge, confessing his sins and judging himself. He believes that everyone is a sinner and that only by confessing can one find redemption. The theme of the story is complex and multi-faceted, exploring ideas such as guilt, judgment, and the human condition.
The characters in the story are well-developed, especially Jean-Baptiste Clamence, who is a complex and flawed character. The use of symbolism, such as the laugh, the doves, and the water, adds depth and meaning to the story.
Overall, The Fall is a thought-provoking and challenging work that requires careful reading and reflection. It is a classic of modern literature that continues to resonate with readers today.