On the restoration of communication as a form of rebellion in Albert Camus’ thought
On the restoration of communication as a form of rebellion in Albert Camus’ thoughtOr, how the play The Misunderstanding (1944) was a rehearsal for The Plague (1947)
1. During the early period of the German occupation of France, 1942-1943, while Albert Camus was recovering in Le Panelier from his regular treatments for tuberculosis, and while he was working on the second version of his plague novel, he was also meditating deeply on the language studies of Brice Parain. It was in this context that he wrote a play, The Misunderstanding, which had a brief run in Paris, in the Théâtre des Mathurins, in late August 1944 – incidentally, during the first days of the liberation of Paris. The gloomy tenor of the play ran counter to the spirit of the moment – which is partly why the run wasn’t very successful – although in hindsight, it also proved somewhat prescient, regarding the impending purge and Camus’ own thinking regarding that experience. In many respects, his work on this play, along with the meditations on Parain’s language studies, prepared Camus for this coming period. Although Camus’ 1943 essay, “On a Philosophy of Expression by Brice Parain”, is his most important and focused statement on the topic of language, it would be a mistake to see this as the starting point for his reflections on language, more generally. His lyrical essays of the late 1930s contain meditations on language that may be seen as rehearsing Camus’ later arguments in Sisyphus, and which therefore prepare his reception for encountering Parain’s works in 1943, and for his transposing of the arguments of Sisyphus into an argument about language. 2. In his 1937 essay, “Death in the Soul”, Camus describes a trip to Prague. ‘I was thousands of kilometers from home,’ he wrote. ‘I could not understand their language... I felt lost.’
Here Camus reflects on how language contributes to creating an ‘inner structure’ which creates the illusion of familiarity within the world, an illusion which is disrupted when the language collapses, or else, as when one travels, the local language is different from one’s own.
Here Camus begins to outline the experience of the absurd – without yet naming it as such – which he would later explore in Sisyphus.
It is clear from this why Parain himself would have thought a great deal about these essays of Camus’ when he finally read them in 1942. 2. These meditations on language and the experience of absurdity continued in Camus’ second collection of lyrical essays. In “The Wind at Djemila”, for example, he reflects on how language is often used to console and distract from the present moment. ‘What meaning do words like future, improvement, good job have here? What is meant by the heart’s progress?’ he writes. ‘If I obstinately refuse all the “later on’s” of this world, it is because I have no desire to give up my present wealth.’ What is interesting about these moments when Camus reflects on language is that, more often than not, they are also moments where he explicitly makes a link between how we use words and how we directly think and act – that consistent thread, which runs through his work, and which we have already cited previously, regarding the necessity of thinking and acting without the mediating prop or support of abstract systems, doctrines, or ideologies, which proffer false promises of alleviating from each individual the responsibility for their own lives. It is in the same paragraph, already cited above, from “The Wind at Djemila”, where he first stated: ‘Everything I am offered seeks to deliver man from the weight of his own life.’ But here we can see that Camus explicitly links this situation to a question of language. To refuse this offer amounts to finding the right word: ‘But it seems to me that if I had to speak of it, I would find the right word here between horror and silence to express the conscious certainty of a death without hope.’ Likewise, it was in the context of his later essay on Parain where Camus stated:
It is in this context, and following this consistent thread that runs through Camus’ life and work, that we can see how this essay on Parain not only transposes arguments from Sisyphus, but at the same time prepared the ground for Camus’ arguments to come. It is in Parain’s work, for example, where Camus finds a criticism of 19th century German philosophy and Hegel in particular. This criticism is based on ‘the compromise’ with the ‘Pascalian dilemma’, which Camus referred to in Sisyphus as ‘philosophical suicide’. Here Camus reads Parain as arguing that these attempts at ‘deifying history’ operate through smuggling what Parain referred to as the idealist hypothesis into the sensualist hypothesis, which is only possible, Camus states, ‘if we carry our abstractions right into the heart of concrete things.’ And because, for Camus, the sensualist hypothesis is predicated upon the human body and the natural world, it is perhaps no coincidence that it was only within the year of writing this essay on Parain that Camus began including references to Hegel in his notebooks – already cited – which explicitly draw this distinction between history and nature. 3. When in The Plague Tarrou outlined his resolution to choose “the side of clear speech and action” – to find the tools for rebellion within language – he acknowledges at the same time that language itself is also the source of many of our problems: “I understood that all human sorrow came from not keeping language clear.” It is an idea that can be traced back to Camus’ engagement with Parain. Following his essay on Parain, Camus began expanding his reflections on language to incorporate also its use in communication more generally, associating it with the process of abstraction. Around that time, for example, he wrote in his notebooks:
In the second instalment of “Letters to a German Friend”, written in December 1943, Camus writes: ‘You always distrusted words. So did I, but I used to distrust myself even more.’ And in the third letter, from April the following year, he writes, describing one of the underlying reasons for the descent into war: ‘It is merely that we didn’t give the same meaning to the same words; we no longer speak the same language.’ Later, around the time that Camus signed the petition to commute the death sentence of Robert Brasillach, he added to his notebooks: ‘I am not made for politics because I am incapable of wanting or accepting the death of the adversary.’ It was in combining these two parts of his thinking – communication and his opposition to the death sentence – that shaped his thinking over the coming years, and which came to structure The Plague. The first statement of this new way of thinking came in his 1946 lecture, “The Human Crisis”. ‘We must call things by their right names and realize that we kill millions of men each time we permit ourselves to think certain thoughts,’ he said in that lecture. ‘One does not reason badly because one is a murderer. One is a murderer if one reasons badly. It is thus that one can be a murderer without having actually killed anyone.’ Characteristic of this is the process of abstraction which leads to what Camus calls in this lecture the ‘substitution of the political for the living man’, a form of nihilism which tends not to human life, but to the preservation of an ideology in the form of some human caricature. ‘What counts now is not whether or not one respects a mother or spares her from suffering,’ Camus states, ‘what counts now is whether or not one has helped a doctrine to triumph.’ At the heart of all of this is the question of communication, and its disruption:
One purpose of rebellion, then, for Camus, becomes the restoration of communication, through the elimination of injustice, slavery, oppression, and violence. Or rather, the elimination of injustice, slavery, oppression, and violence, through restoring our communication – through the rescue and rehabilitation of language from ideology – becomes one of the main tactics of rebellion. ‘For he cannot communicate with his fellows in terms of values common to them all,’ Camus states here of the ideologue. ‘And since he is no longer protected by a respect for man based on the values of man, the only alternative henceforth open to him is to be the victim or the executioner.’ Later that same year, Camus wrote a series of articles for Combat with that title – “Neither Victims Nor Executioners” – arguing against both these alternatives, and arguing instead for a position in which neither one nor the other would be viable. In both lecture and subsequent articles, the problem of restoring communication revolves around a question of persuasion. In “The Human Crisis”:
And later, in “Neither Victims Nor Executioners”, Camus argued, more succinctly, that ‘there is no way of persuading an abstraction’ – and yet ‘we live in a world of abstractions, a world of bureaucracy and machinery, of absolute ideas and of messianism without subtlety.’ This is why, in part, Camus didn’t want to write “Neither Victims Nor Executioners”, knowing already what the reaction would be among his contemporaries, especially the intellectual class, embedded, as they were, inside their own abstractions, cushioned from reality, even as they sought to dominate it. ‘My anguish at the idea of doing those articles for Combat,’ he confided to his notebooks. Significantly, considering Camus’ ecological imagination, this note is couched in his preference for the concrete of nature over the abstractions of the political. The prior note reads: ‘There are moments when I don’t believe I can endure the contradictions any longer. When the sky is cold and nothing supports us in nature… Ah! Better to die perhaps.’ And then, the very next note, referencing the “Neither Victims Nor Executioners” articles, Camus refers back to this previous note, and ends with what he would prefer to be writing instead:
4. The flipside of this question of persuasion, for Camus, was the more difficult question of polemics. Shortly after the publication of The Plague, he wrote in his notebooks:
The restoration of communication, however, becomes even more complicated when one’s political opponents have rendered themselves abstract, a self-caricature of whatever ideology they are choosing to hide behind, be it on the right or the left. It is this question which Camus would later examine in The Rebel. ‘Language destroyed by irrational negation becomes lost in verbal delirium,’ he writes there: ‘subject to determinist ideology, it is summed up in the slogan.’ In The Rebel Camus repeats the claim – first floated in “The Human Crisis” – that true dialogue cannot exist between a master and slave, a victim and executioner, but that this can be corrected through the process of rebellion, in both thought and action. ‘The mutual understanding and communication discovered by rebellion can survive only in the free exchange of conversation,’ Camus states. ‘Every ambiguity, every misunderstanding, leads to death; clear language and simple words are the only salvation from this death.’ A person who lies cuts themself off from other people, and, as in acts of murder or violence, this reduces the world to silence. For Camus, such violence – whether it is verbal or physical – signifies a ‘rupture in communication.’ And if communication and persuasion is only possible among equals, predicated upon a shared reality, then persuasion must be based on drawing attention to what is always held in common: the physical world, of nature and bodies. ‘Dialogue and personal relations have been replaced by propaganda or polemic, which are two kinds of monologue,’ he states. ‘Abstraction, which belongs to the world of power and calculation, has replaced the real passions, which are in the domain of the flesh and of the irrational.’ He later explains this further, by drawing on an analogy from the theatre, the kingdom of the body: ‘On the stage, as in reality, the monologue precedes death.’ 5. And it was for the stage that Camus first wrote a work which was explicitly composed around these questions of language, communication, and violence. The Misunderstanding was written during the period 1942-1943 when Camus was recovering in Le Panelier, when he was meditating deeply on the work of Parain, and also drafting the early versions of The PlagueThe basic plot for this play actually comes from a newspaper article which Camus read in January 1935, in L’Écho d’Alger, regarding a murder in Yugoslavia. Camus first used a variation of this story – transposing the action to Czechoslovakia – in The Stranger. In prison, Meursault finds a newspaper clipping, which he rereads obsessively.
For The Misunderstanding, Camus makes more changes to the story – to minimise the number of characters, to tighten the plot, and increase the tension, to make more suspenseful for the stage. Motivations change, too. In The Stranger version, the son keeps his identity hidden ‘[a]s a joke’. But in The Misunderstanding, this story becomes a tragedy of communication and language. When the son (Jan) first comes to the hotel, he is looked at, but not seen, not recognised, by his mother. This initially throws him. ‘You know quite well it needn’t have been difficult,’ his wife (Maria) says soon after, ‘you had only to speak. On such occasions one says “It’s I,” and then it’s all plain sailing.’ But he decides to return, to take advantage of this cloak of anonymity, to get to know his family and their situation more clearly, before revealing himself.
Much of the play is then concerned with enacting various aspects of language, the etiquette of conversations, social roles versus private expression, and even bureaucratic aspects of communication: police forms, passports, and identity papers.
In the end, it was his passport – which his sister (Martha) had an opportunity to see at the beginning, but didn’t take – which revealed his identity to his family. But they had already killed him by then. Afterwards, when his wife returns, his sister explains what happened. And once more, the situation is described in terms of a problem with communication and language.
In a 1957 preface to the publication of his collected plays, Camus discussed The Misunderstanding:
It is this idea which, structuring The Misunderstanding in 1943, was developed further by Camus in The Plague. Next week we will examine how these ideas about language and communication came to structure The Plague. If you appreciate reading this newsletter, and you want it to continue, then please consider doing one of two things, or both: please consider signing up to this newsletter (or updating to a paid subscription). And please share this newsletter far and wide, to attract more readers, and possibly more subscribers, to ensure that it continues. You’re a free subscriber to Public Things Newsletter. For the full experience, become a paid subscriber. |
Older messages
14. On the transposition of The Myth of Sisyphus into an argument about language
Monday, November 8, 2021
Or, the influence of Brice Parain's philosophy of expression on Albert Camus
13. On the resistance to nihilism, abstraction, and ideology in The Plague
Monday, November 1, 2021
Or, how Albert Camus' novel implicates us all
12. On Camus’ outline for a politics of non-violence and non-domination
Monday, October 25, 2021
Or, how Camus' ecological imagination resists nihilism and ideology
10. On the ecological imagination of Albert Camus
Tuesday, October 19, 2021
From 'Don Juan Faust' to Euphorion
11. On how Albert Camus’ ecological imagination structures The Plague
Tuesday, October 19, 2021
The natural comedy, romance, and tragedy of the novel
You Might Also Like
"Parable" by Nickole Brown
Sunday, April 28, 2024
Let us not with one stone kill one bird, Facebook Twitter Instagram Poem-a-Day is reader-supported. In honor of National Poetry Month, please consider making a gift to help cover the costs of this
“CNN” (SHORT STORY)
Sunday, April 28, 2024
Another day another presentation for creative director Philip Morris. Philip is holed up in a luxury hotel suite, sweating the details for a major strategy presentation to the new chairman and chief
The Gorgeous Dress Trend Taking Over For Spring
Sunday, April 28, 2024
Throw on and go.
12 Weeks to the Strongest Body of Your Life!
Sunday, April 28, 2024
Build A Better Body Today! Mens Health Shop logo Save 50%! On Sale Now! Build a stronger body This 12-week program is packed with workouts designed to help you get leaner, faster, more muscular, and
The merger self, the seeker self, and the difficult balance of intimacy and independence; attention as devotional practice; goodbye Moon
Saturday, April 27, 2024
NOTE: This newsletter might be cut short by your email program. View it in full. If a friend forwarded it to you and you'd like your very own newsletter, subscribe here — it's free. Need to
Take Up to 59% Off Popular Tech Items From Amazon’s Warehouse Sale
Saturday, April 27, 2024
We dug through Amazon Warehouse's inventory to find the best from the pre-owned tech section. Right now, we're seeing major deals on electronics and gadgets with some items listed for up to 59
Only four days until Poetry & the Creative Mind
Saturday, April 27, 2024
Join us! View this email in your browser Join us this Tuesday for Poetry & the Creative Mind. The Academy's signature celebration at the close of National Poetry Month features a spectacular
Use the 12-12-12 Method to Finally Declutter Your Home
Saturday, April 27, 2024
How Unsecured Loans Work. Getting rid of stuff can be frustrating. You need a system. Not displaying correctly? View this newsletter online. TODAY'S FEATURED STORY Use the 12-12-12 Method to
Weekend: It’s Officially Lettuce Wrap Season 🥬
Saturday, April 27, 2024
But first: fly roundtrip to Canada from $124 — Check out what we Skimm'd for you today Subscribe Read in browser April 27, 2024 Daily Skimm Header Image Together with dollar flight club But first:
The Week in Review
Saturday, April 27, 2024
Week of Apr 22 — Economy eases, Fertility falls, New home purchases pop ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏