"The Fall" by Albert Camus

I want to write about what I’ve read in “The Fall” by Albert Camus.

The last book I read by him, “The Stranger,” left a deep imprint on me. I had read it almost 2 years ago, and I couldn’t forget it. It introduced me to absurdity, to a “non-chalant” final boss. I always thought about what I had read and what I had felt every once in a while. Back then, I had just gotten back to reading after a 3-year study gap. Hence I was eager and greedy to read the works of many other authors first rather than read multiple works by one. And I’m glad I did, because here I am, excited to purchase and read another novel by him even after years, even after all the authors I’ve gotten to know.

“The Stranger” introduced me to absurdity, and “The Fall” feels like a drunk and extremely chalant guy yapping. The chatterbox is talking to you throughout the book. Till now, I’ve read a bit more than half of the book. I thought I’d finish it in one sitting, but it was too much. At one point I cried; at another I laughed. Sure, it’s like listening to a guy talk non-stop, but you can’t stop because you want to know him and his views, and also because you’re a great listener. So you listen.

He’s a narcissist. He exploits people, especially women. Everything is a game to him, and his reward is praise and getting to feel really good and superior. But slowly he talks about how he realized that he actually hates those who usually receive his help. He helped them only because he thought they were underneath him. He, a man who forgets easily, now remembers the one time he was crossing a bridge at night and hearing a scream behind him, a splash, the running water, and he didn’t do anything about it. Because saving the person who jumped would surely be a suicide case. He didn’t call for help, he didn’t look back, and he simply kept walking. Now he never crosses bridges at night.

After remembering certain scenarios in his life for the first time and contemplating them, he is distraught. Now he has remorse for his selfish ill intentions, even though the by-products were good. I think this is one of the deepest questions Camus raises. If a person helps others, but does so out of vanity, superiority, or the desire to be admired, is the act still good? He feels as though he wasn’t being authentic. Suddenly he wants to ruin his perfect “good” image. He tries to be authentic and miserable to gain maybe affection and sympathy. All this change because he realised that he wasn’t really happy nor fulfilled as he thought he was. He noticed the people around him and felt extremely judged. Hence, he observed that judgement is a natural thing for everyone to indulge in and that it’s also in human nature to always believe in their own innocence.

“You won’t delight a man by complimenting him on the efforts by which he has become intelligent or generous. On the other hand, he will beam if you admire his natural generosity. Inversely, if you tell a criminal that his crime is not due to his nature or his character but to unfortunate circumstances, he will be extravagantly grateful to you. During the counsel’s speech, this is the moment he will choose to weep.”

In another scenario, he talks about debauchery. How he confidently had his way with women. And yes, he did have certain principles, like keeping away from friends’ wives. And hence he would end the friendship a few days in advance.

Jean-Baptiste Clamence, if that’s what his real name is, believes that one is either happy and judged or absolved and miserable. And currently, in the narration, he was neither, and hence the changes he had been trying to make. He talks often about death and suicide, which makes me think that he’s confessing and maybe he will commit suicide right after. All this and more in just 65 pages. An intense long conversation with a fictional character has never been so enlightening, enraging, funny, and philosophical.

I didn’t intend to write about what I’d read, but I just had to. That’s what Albert Camus does. Getting to know him through his work is like getting to know the enemy, maybe even the shadow self in you. The way this character breaks down his personality and experiences makes me feel like I’ve neglected myself in comparison. Anyways, I needed to take a break from the conversation because I saw many glimpses of myself and my life in it. There’s too much to ponder about, and it’s heavy. I feel like someone who got trapped in a conversation with a person they can’t decide whether they despise or understand.

You know the work is good when you start questioning your own morals.

“The Fall” doesn’t merely make you feel understood. It makes you feel observed, as though someone has been quietly taking notes on parts of yourself you usually avoid looking at. That’s probably why I needed a break. Not because it’s intellectually difficult, but because it feels psychologically invasive.