Scan barcode
barosanna's review against another edition
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
daja57's review against another edition
4.0
A doctor in the Algerian city of Oran notices rats dying in the streets. Before too long, he and his colleagues are recording mysterious deaths. When the authorities realise that there is bubonic plague in town they seal off the city. Immediately, people are cut off from their loved ones, the doctor from his wife who is being treated for TB in a sanatorium; the only communication allowed being the telegram. And in the sealed off city, the death toll rises.
The reactions of the doomed inhabitants is recorded faithfully (not so faithful is the medical details; by the time of the setting it was known that bubonic plague isn't spread from person to person so quarantine is unnecessary and there were reasonably effective anti-plague serums). The narrative concentrates on a small group of acquaintances:
Dr Rieux who keeps plugging away at his job despite that he never heals anyone and the prophylactic measures he applies are of doubtful use;
Cottard who attempts suicide before the plague strikes but then flourishes on the fringes of the black market and the people smuggling trade;
Rambert who spends much of his time trying to find a way to escape the city;
Grand the clerk who has been repeatedly denied promotion and whose hobby is to write a novel whose first sentence he endlessly repolishes;
Tarrou who is the secular conscience of the group;
Father Paneloux the priest who, in a hell-raising sermon, tells the people that the plague is punishment for their sins (he likens the city to Sodom) although he dilutes this later after watching an 'innocent' ten year old boy dies
and there are a host of thoroughly believable minor characters as well. Although there are no Arabs. None at all. They don't even die.
Camus has a brilliant dead-pan style. He writes journalism although the point is to explore morality. The full horror of the pestilence is given through the small details: the cinemas are full although they only have the same films which they show again and again; prison warders who die are recommended for the military medal but the military authorities object so a plague medal is proposed instead but it doesn't work because it is too easy to get. And I loved the explanation of the various ways in which a bureaucrat can say no.
This is a beautifully written and thought-provoking novel. But why no Arabs?
The reactions of the doomed inhabitants is recorded faithfully (not so faithful is the medical details; by the time of the setting it was known that bubonic plague isn't spread from person to person so quarantine is unnecessary and there were reasonably effective anti-plague serums). The narrative concentrates on a small group of acquaintances:
Dr Rieux who keeps plugging away at his job despite that he never heals anyone and the prophylactic measures he applies are of doubtful use;
Cottard who attempts suicide before the plague strikes but then flourishes on the fringes of the black market and the people smuggling trade;
Rambert who spends much of his time trying to find a way to escape the city;
Grand the clerk who has been repeatedly denied promotion and whose hobby is to write a novel whose first sentence he endlessly repolishes;
Tarrou who is the secular conscience of the group;
Father Paneloux the priest who, in a hell-raising sermon, tells the people that the plague is punishment for their sins (he likens the city to Sodom) although he dilutes this later after watching an 'innocent' ten year old boy dies
and there are a host of thoroughly believable minor characters as well. Although there are no Arabs. None at all. They don't even die.
Camus has a brilliant dead-pan style. He writes journalism although the point is to explore morality. The full horror of the pestilence is given through the small details: the cinemas are full although they only have the same films which they show again and again; prison warders who die are recommended for the military medal but the military authorities object so a plague medal is proposed instead but it doesn't work because it is too easy to get. And I loved the explanation of the various ways in which a bureaucrat can say no.
This is a beautifully written and thought-provoking novel. But why no Arabs?
vampiresreadtoo's review against another edition
3.0
A bit boring at first because nothing really happens in this book, but the characters have really interesting reflexions and I marked a lot of quotes that I found beautiful
evmondo's review against another edition
dark
hopeful
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.75
Prosaic, heavy, and utterly depressing, but, nevertheless, hopeful and beautiful. Poignant considering how parallel it felt to the most recent Plague. Loved the liking of religion and judicial systems to the Plague itself
trin's review against another edition
3.0
I get why a lot of people are reading this now: Camus is incredibly insightful with his observations about the human reaction to this kind of disaster. The town of Oran, infected with bubonic plague and shut off from the rest of the world, becomes a microcosm of humanity in its people's denial, rage, fear, acceptance, perverse pleasure, courage, cowardice. Camus captures the changing mood of the whole town over the long period of isolation, but in particular follows a few representative residents: the doctor, the priest, the government clerk, the visiting journalist, the mysterious outsider, the depressed criminal.
Some of these are more interesting or nuanced than others. I'm no fan of religion, but the priest feels like a caricature; and while the arc of the Cottard, the formerly suicidal criminal, actually feeling relief at the rest of the town coming to see the world as bleakly as he does, the character becomes increasingly cartoonish as the book continues. On the other hand, Rieux the doctor, while almost Atticus Finch levels of noble, throughout feels real and grounded, and his friendship with the mysterious Tarrou is touching.
You'll note, however, that all of the above characters are men. There are times when a male-driven cast of characters is justified -- I always like to cite the prisoner of war movie The Great Escape, mostly because I really love The Great Escape -- but a story in which you're attempting to give voice to an entire community's experiences is not one of them. It's never stated explicitly, but it is also largely implied that all of these characters are white Christians (or white atheists). In Algeria, remember. Altogether, this strikes me as a major failure of imagination and empathy on Camus' part, which is a pity, because as a whole this is a very empathetic book (especially compared to the only other Camus I've read, The Outsider -- but that's another story). I'm sorry, but you can't write a full and true examination of humanity and forget every part of it that isn't male and white.
Some of these are more interesting or nuanced than others. I'm no fan of religion, but the priest feels like a caricature; and while the arc of the Cottard, the formerly suicidal criminal, actually feeling relief at the rest of the town coming to see the world as bleakly as he does, the character becomes increasingly cartoonish as the book continues. On the other hand, Rieux the doctor, while almost Atticus Finch levels of noble, throughout feels real and grounded, and his friendship with the mysterious Tarrou is touching.
You'll note, however, that all of the above characters are men. There are times when a male-driven cast of characters is justified -- I always like to cite the prisoner of war movie The Great Escape, mostly because I really love The Great Escape -- but a story in which you're attempting to give voice to an entire community's experiences is not one of them. It's never stated explicitly, but it is also largely implied that all of these characters are white Christians (or white atheists). In Algeria, remember. Altogether, this strikes me as a major failure of imagination and empathy on Camus' part, which is a pity, because as a whole this is a very empathetic book (especially compared to the only other Camus I've read, The Outsider -- but that's another story). I'm sorry, but you can't write a full and true examination of humanity and forget every part of it that isn't male and white.
jemin's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
my first book in like a month!! unfortunately i stopped following the plot halfway through and i think it has a super deep message but im not quite sure what that is
danielhume's review against another edition
5.0
Great book.... don't know if I want to ever read it again.... so depressing. 4.5 out of 5 stars for me.
dr_sol's review against another edition
dark
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
brisingr's review against another edition
DNF @ 63% because this is SO boring !! i have to get through tens of pages before a good sentence pops up and honestly? at this point, it's just not worth it.