On the Myth of Sisyphus

It should go without saying that this is a modern classic, and Camus nails the modern predicament on the head. We all live believing we have control over our own fates, and eventually we realize we’re little more than drones: wake up, work, spend time with friends and family, sleep, repeat — and eventually realize it’s all meaningless. Camus takes that as his starting point and turns to the question of suicide. What options do we have for dealing with the meaninglessness? Traditionally there seem to be two: take the “leap,” hoping something will give life meaning, or kill ourselves. Camus finds the first little more than denial. So that leaves suicide, right? Wrong. He proposes instead that we embrace the absurd, which requires three things:

• Revolt. Don’t accept any answers or explanations; there are none in reality.
• Be free. Our thoughts and actions are our own, and anything imposed by a master — family, friends, employers, God — entails a loss of freedom.
• Be passionate. Engage always with the diversity of life and live it to the fullest.

Do these, and it’s possible to live as the “absurd man” (or woman). In the second part, Camus describes three archetypes of the absurd man — Don Juan, the actor, and the conqueror — and concludes with a reading of Sisyphus as the absurd man. Camus is essentially right, and I’m not sure how much there is to add. My one critique is that the first part is so philosophically technical that it reads almost like a literature review; it was brutal going, and I wish he’d reached the point sooner. Still, it’s necessary reading.