Albert Camus enjoyed making work plans, and filing his thoughts and writings under headings.He thereby built a structure with the Absurd as the first pillar.
Albert Camus enjoyed making work plans, and filing his thoughts and writings under headings.
But we have truly to understand what Srigley means by Modernity.
The first understanding of his title and main concept might be different from what he intends, because Modernity does not mean the same thing in Literature as in Philosophy: it evokes almost the opposite in each.
Some look at the essays and draw on the myth references: along the Camusian trajectory they find Sisyphus, Prometheus and Nemesis.
Sisyphus rolled his rock with all his might to the summit of the mountain only to let it roll back down and endlessly start the same fruitless and obstinate move over again, which in and of itself represents the absurd.
Srigley comes at Modernity as it pertains to its close link to Christianity, as a successor to Antiquity: he perceives it the same way in Camus.
From the Greeks, Camus draws a love of life that is inseparable from the lucid acceptance of death, with no hope for an afterlife.But Camus defined himself as an artist, even though he is also a philosopher in a broader sense: his works of fiction examine the philosophical rapport between man and the world, and inversely, his theoretical writings are driven by a prolific artistic sensibility.Every successive position taken in the examination of Camus is well founded to a certain extent, and contributes to enriching our understanding of the famous author.The table of contents suggests a return to the thematic breakdown with the first two of the three chapters respectively entitled “The Absurd Man” and “A History of Rebellion”.In addition, the Introduction talks about the Camusian production in terms of cycles.It reproduces this configuration that comes from the writer himself and from which recent reviews distance themselves.However, the title of the third and final chapter, “Modernity in its Fullest Expression,” breaks away from conventional concepts.However, its originality comes to light as it is developed: unlike many others who, over the chronology of the work, discern an intellectual progression emerging from the light of Nemesis, Srigley states that Camus’ review always plunges to the darker aspects of Modernity.What is more, according to Srigley, this review provokes a growing desolation in Camus, through to and that which the latter prescribes to the journalist Rambert for his investigation.Aeschylus’ character appears in on an appeasing tone that allows love to blossom.In the 1970s, this breakdown of Absurd/Rebellion or Sisyphus/Prometheus/Nemesis leaves a few critics perplexed.