4 ms·
I haven’t listened to the podcast and it’s been years since I read The Fall — but in what sense is Clamence overtly terrible? My reading was that his feelings o
by jorgesborges 3y ago
I haven’t listened to the podcast and it’s been years since I read The Fall — but in what sense is Clamence overtly terrible? My reading was that his feelings of guilt and pathological impulse to confess to minor wrongdoings was part of Camus’ critique of society.
He basically destroyed his life in a pouting fit over minor infractions — e.g, dwelling over the fact that he heard a scream on a bridge and didn’t call the police. He then ruminated over it obsessively.
Another example — he’s involved in a fairly relatable road-rage incident on a bicycle and lost face after the person slapped him and ran away. Again he tore himself up over it.
I had no idea any of these things made him guilty (what I thought was the point of the novel, that these feelings are absurd or something), let alone make him “terrible”.
- pram 3y agoI don't think Clamence is terrible, but I think his narrative ties into Sartre's concept of living in "bad faith." He was putting a lot of effort into an artificial persona: a very morally and ethically upstanding member of high society. This didn't really reflect who he was on the inside, the events he experienced created the neuroticism that chipped away at the facade. He's kinda like a less psychotic Patrick Bateman.
- steve_adams_86 3y agoYes, I think you nailed it. There are much worse people in the world than Clamence to be sure. By terrible I mean both his manner and his experience, too. He’s a miserable person, and how relatable he is makes him seem more tangibly undesirable than someone grotesque and unfamiliar like Bateman. That interpretation will vary wildly across individuals of course. Perhaps Clamence wouldn’t be remotely relatable to some people.