Talk:Albert Camus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.7
 This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Archive questions

Hmm, I was searching Google and stumbled across this site: http://www.biblio.com/authors/641/Albert_Camus_Biography.html I see "a few" similarities to this article :) Who's copying who? Hopefully someone didn't cut and paste this whole article from that site...

Any ideas? --Smileyborg 04:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

re The Outsider: Should this not be The Stranger?

Good question. Literally "L'Étranger", translates as the stranger, but the outsider is the usual accepted translation of the name of this work, and it does so much better seem to sum up the condition of Meursault, the novel's protagonist. sjc

Apparently, the old translation by Stuart Gilbert was called The Outsider. The newer translation by Matthew Ward is named The Stranger. From what I have read, the difference in wording is the subject of some dispute.

This issue is preceisely why these books should be entered under their original titles! Eclecticology

It would be great if someone who has read The Myth of Sysiphus could elaborate on Absurdism (and the boundaries between Absurdism and Existentialism).

There's more to this topic than just the one Camus work.

I don't know what this means, but I've moved it here from the limit article, which I'm about to change a good deal:

Albert Camus wrote about the philosophical concept of limit especially as it plays out in politics.

Hey... Look at this line: "Camus joined the French Communist Party in 1934, apparently because of the Spanish Civil War, rather than support for Marxist-Leninist doctrine."

This can't possibly be right. The Spanish Civil War began in July of 1936. If Camus joined the French CP in 1934, it would have nothing to do with Spain. Can someone correct this, somehow? - micahbales 28 May, 2004

Does anyone havve more information on the short story "Guest"? It's typically used in college english courses. - DNewhall

Agree. — flamingspinach | (talk) 19:20, 2005 Apr 14 (UTC)

One of Camus's daughters was called Jean? Shouldn't it be Jeanne instead? Jean is a male name (in French). --Tamas 20:40, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The name is spelled Jean in the biographical sketch section of Notebooks 1935-1942. I guess he has a son & a daughter. -- llywrch 20:48, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Would it be worth adding a note that his first name is pronounced Alberr? If some people thought his surname was pronounced Cammuss (evident by the "kamoo" note in the first paragraph) then there might well be people who think his first name is pronounced like the English Albert. rob 06:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

After some fooling around, I embedded a OGG audio clip. Cgmusselman 07:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link suggestions

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Albert_Camus article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Albert_Camus}} to this page. — LinkBot 00:35, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Writings

[edit] Sisyphus

at the end it says: " Each of these people finds meaning in his or her own pursuits and thus lives up to the example of the Greek mythical figure Sisyphus, who was "condemned" to push a boulder up a hill for eternity fully aware that the boulder would simply fall down the hill as soon as he seemingly finished his task."

What Camus wants to remark in that myth is not the absurd in the "condemn". Instead, he shows that, not regarding of why he've left the Hades, Sisyphus sit at the beach to contemplate the beauty of it.

[edit] Mersault as a hero

I take some issue with the explication of L'Etranger, particularly the indication that Mersault is a hero in Camus' eyes. I would argue that he is just the opposite; Mersault is guilty of his crime and deserves to die in the absurdist sense, not because he is insensitive, but because he failed to recognize the absurdity of his life and wrest what little control he might have been able from it. In other words, he is guilty for his passivity, which Camus understandably dispised as a member of the resistance in Vichy France. Even Sisyphus, for that one hour that he is walking back down his mountain is free. On the other hand, Caligula is more the hero for following his absurb logic all the way through; at least he does so consciously and willfully.

In a 1955 afterward, Camus makes it pretty clear that he views Mersault as a hero (at least, as much of a "hero" as The Stranger allows for). Moreover, in Camus' eyes (or so he says), Mersault's only crimes are loving the truth and not crying at his mother's funeral. -Seth Mahoney 20:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Camus' The Fall

I'm currently working on a major reconstruction/expansion of Camus' novel, The Fall. I'm attempting to move it from stub status to a complete overview + analysis. If anyone on this page is familiar with the work, the help would be much appreciated! --Todeswalzer | Talk 20:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reflections on the Guillotine

I'm after some input from the other people on this page -- does Camus' extended essay, Réfléxions sur la guillotine deserve its own page? This was, of course, the piece of writing (officially, anyway) that earned him the Nobel Prize; for that reason it seems to me to be a curious omission. Any other opinions on the matter? --Todeswalzer | Talk 02:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


I'd say the piece deserves its own page. It did earn him the Nobel prize and fighting against the death penalty was an important part of Camus's life. It should at least be mentioned on the main page, right now its only listed in the bibliography section. Windmillchaser 22:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A perhaps unimportant note on French titles

I hate to imitate in any way that cruel grammar teacher that everyone had at some point in school, but -- I've noticed a consistent error when citing the French titles of Camus' works. Unlike in English, French titles do not capitalize every word, just the first one as though the title were itself a sentence. (Proper names are, of course, still capitalized.) The only exception here is when the first word happens to be a preposition (i.e. "Le", "La", "Les", etc.), which actually isn't much of an "exception" since virtually every French title will have such a word before it. In this case, the preposition is capitalized along with the "first word of substance". So, in English we would write something like, "The First Man"... In French this would be "Le Premier homme". Or, for a more ridiculous example,

English: "The Camus Family's Grammar Lessons"
French: "Les Leçons grammaires du famille Camus"

Don't ask me to explain why this is done in French: it's just one of those crazy subtleties of the language.

This is probably irrelevent to most people on this page, and probably considered unimportant by even more. However, it makes sense to me to write the titles properly if they're going to be written in their original French. In any event, I'll still keep an eye out ;) --Todeswalzer | Talk 22:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


I DONT KNOW WHERE TO PUT THIS, BUT I BELIEVE THAT ITS FALSE THAT ALBERT CAMUS WAS THE SHORTEST LIVED RECIPIENT FO THE NOBEL PRIZE, I THOUGHT IT TO BE PABLO NERUDA HE DIED TWO YEARS AFTER HE WON THE NOBEL PRIZE FOR LITERATURE, CAMUS DIED THREE YEARS AFTER.

Pablo Neruda was like 69 or 70 when he died. Camus was 46. What's the problem? Faithlessthewonderboy 05:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Also, you could consider not writing in bold caps. --Todeswalzer|Talk 02:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Camusian Consolation

I owe a great debt of gratitude to Albert Camus for writing "The Myth of Sysyphus," wherein he shows that even in the worst of circumstances, in the pits of hell, one can still have a little fun, win a little moral victory. Hope you're in Heaven, Albert. Das Baz 17:03, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I guess that's one interpretation.... And to think I always thought it was about the meaninglessness of life. 208.4.152.130 23:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC) → —The "knowing" smile of Sisyphus was all that Camus had to give us in the middle of all the absurdities of this life. That's how it is to really learn something. We may cover 99.9% of all our travels with total ignorance, but then in an instant--a glimmer of something, an unknown, a point of contact with a reality which we cannot put into words or give away. Emptiness...Camus lived it the best way he could, he didn't just talk it like the existentialist philosophers, the academics did. He's my Man.

[edit] Existentialism

"one of the principal luminaries (with Jean-Paul Sartre) of existentialism". I don't think Camus wanted to be called an existentialist or compared to Sartre. Maybe someone could elaborate on this. Piet 13:23, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

My understanding is that Camus and Sartre agreed about existentialism for a while, but Camus started disagreeing when Sartre got too optimistic and political. I don't think Camus really considered himself a philosopher anyway, so maybe it's misleading to say unqualifiedly at the start of the article that he was a philosopher. That said, some of his essays probably are philosophy. Michael Keats 13:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Although I'm not an expert on the matter myself, my understanding is that they both agreed on the basic starting points of existentialism, but disagreed on how we ought to respond to them. --Todeswalzer | Talk 02:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Camus was better oriented... 84.250.51.205 17:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philosopher's box

Should there be a philosopher's box here? If so, does anyone know what should go in the boxes.

I put on one of the boxes, but as you can see someone needs to edit the main interest through to notable ideas sections. Horses In The Sky talk contributions
It now looks like this at the moment - Horses In The Sky talk contributions
 region          = Western Philosophy |
 era             = 20th-century philosophy |
 color           = #B0C4DE |

 image_name      = Albert Camus.jpg |
 image_caption   = Albert Camus |

 name             = Albert Camus |
 birth            = November 7, 1913 (Mondovi, Algeria) |
 death            = January 4, 1960 (Villeblevin, France) |
 school_tradition = Existentialism, Absurdism |
 main_interests   = |
 influences       = Søren Kierkegaard, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Franz Kafka |
 influenced       = |
 notable_ideas    = "The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth" |

[edit] Studies

Is it necessary to attempt translation of his education into the modern day BA/MA ??? This is not very usefull and misleading as the education system in colonial Algiers was not directly comparable to modern day anglo-american degrees!!

--Hurkummer 08:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "His mother was of Spanish extraction."

This is not very professional to say. Does anyone know how his mother was Spanish? By this I mean I think the sentence should read something like "His mother was Spanish born in ____" or simply "His mother was Spanish." Perhaps also, "His mother was of Spanish descent."

[edit] George Bush

Someone might want to scribe regarding George Bush & Albert,...

The France angle is especially noteworthy.

< http://google.com/search?q=%22we+discussed+the+origins+of+existentialism%22+%22%22+%22%22+%22%22++george+bush++albert+camus++existential++stranger++fiction++truth++iraq++french+france++ >.

Hopiakuta 23:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Please leave this out of the article. Piet | Talk 11:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

This is really a great article. Indian Literati 16:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Algerian writer

Albert Camus is a Algerian-French writer, not a French writer as stated in the article.

  • he was born in Algeria, but at that time it was a French colony. He is thus considered a French writer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.113.100 (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

But there is a good point here. This article very much neglects the significance of Algeria in the life of Camus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.90.217.68 (talk) 00:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Professional Issues

Camus was really an philosopher? Some biographies states he quits his philosophy graduation in order to began his carrer as jornalist.

[edit] Picture?

Why is there no picture of Camus on the article? Here's a small one I found on another article:

.

I agree, the lack of a photo seems a bit conspicuous. Google shows an estimated 12,000 related photos, is there are a reason for the omission? --Todeswalzer | Talk 02:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Some retard added some scribble drawing of him for some reason...
A bunch of wikipedia nutcases are going through en masse and removing non-cc images even though the existing images are of public figures and are covered under fair-use. This includes replacing press photos with awful camera phone images and, as in this case, TERRIBLE sketches of the person in question. These nutcases are lowering wikipedia's usefullness to pretty much everyone because of a bee in their bonnet (babies pun intended) towards CC content. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.59.28.103 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
The sketch is back, and holy hell is that terrible. Has anyone tried talking to the people who are doing this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.229.140.95 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
The fact that they're not even bothering to enter into discussion about this makes them incredibly arrogant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.166.229.13 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Get someone who can DRAW at least.

They aren't going to go away, which means we really need to find what they've done and change their horrible camera phone pictures and awful sketches back to actual photos.

[edit] Picture Madness

To the group who is going through the Biographical pages and getting rid of good photos and replacing them with terrible camera pictures, sketches, or other such nonsense: STOP. You're sacrificing the quality of the articles in your quest to make everything perfectly compliant. This is absolutely the stupidest thing I've seen anyone do here in a while. STOP STOP STOP. Manfrin 11:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I call them Wikipedia-Nazis, and apparently they've struck again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.227.118.157 (talk) 02:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC).
I agree and I'm not one of these "wikinazis".
However, the sketch is still better than nothing. I restore it and hope you'd find a better one... cc, of course (and unfortunately)... thanks for your comprehension. Alaiche 20:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I really don't understand this. Who keeps replacing the photo, and why? That photo worked just fine; and this sketch is just absolutely ridiculous -- in fact, it is entirely absurd. --Todeswalzer|Talk 23:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
After posting my previous comment, I went through the rest of the comments about this nonsense and decided to put the original photo back myself, as it seems there really is no serious reason for removing it from the page and replacing it with that infamous sketch -- as one person mentioned above, the people involved in this nonsense don't even bother to post comments on this discussion page explaining themselves. So, from this, I would conclude that they aren't even "wikinazis" but petty vandals. I went through this page's history for the past month, hoping to find a pattern; but, alas, there was none -- except that the edits were all done annonyously through different IP addresses, so I would suspect whoever is doing this (probably one or two people) are doing so through public internet access. I'll delete the sketch from Wikipedia and hope that that at least makes it more difficult for them. --Todeswalzer|Talk 00:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
This is really just ridiculous that people keep changing back to the sketch without even a single comment on this page. I've reverted and semiprotected the page until we can figure out a way around this nonsense. --Todeswalzer|Talk 20:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Ad Todeswaltzer: Why do you say: "the people involved in this nonsense don't even bother to post comments on this discussion page explaining themselves". It's not one group who does everything. There are too diffrent "people". One is erasing the photo maybe from some "metareasons" (licence etc.) and another one (like me) want to place into this article some cc image (because evidently it's not possible for some reasons - which I don't understand - to put there the photo). To see my reasons, just look on my comment few lines above.
What is essential, it's that I did not replace the photo by the sketch. There was no photo before because someone just erased it (because of its licence), do you understand? The only thing I say it's that the sketch is better than nothing! By deleting the sketch you just make the same nonsense like they do. (when you said "I'll delete the sketch from Wikipedia and hope that that at least makes it more difficult for them.") So keep the sketch there please if they erase the photo again or draw a better one (if you are such a art guru), unless we find another cc image.
I hope it was clear... 194.108.188.10 18:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC) (fr:Utilisateur:Alaiche)
Thank you for the comments; they are much appreciated and it is unfortunate that no one besides you would take the time to explain their position sooner or more clearly. In absence of such explanations, the repeated removal of the photo appears to be petty vandalism -- hence my (and others') reversions to the photo. One point that I would like you to clear up, however: it seems that you're overlooking the fact that the image that was on the page counts as fair use. Furthermore, it looks as though there is widespread agreement that the photo is infinitely better than the sketch. What, then, is your issue with the photo being on this page? --Todeswalzer|Talk 22:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Its pretty clear from the history and the responses above that Alaiche added the drawing in good faith some time ago when there was no image at all - replacing it again when there was no image to speak of in good faith. These kinds of positive acts are what keeps wikipedia alive. The various negative comments surrounding this act of good faith are what makes wikipedia stink. --Mrmusichead 03:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Mrmusichead, I think you are being unfair to the people who have been discussing the photo/sketch issue here -- and who have been doing so in good faith as well. As I pointed out above, no real explanation had been given as to why the sketch was continually replacing the photo (note that this was after a suitable photo was found) and so, as I also pointed out above, it appeared to be a case of ongoing vandalism. In this light, the actions taken by a number of people on this page were appropriate and their anger understandable. Your comments don't seem to take this into consideration and I don't find them terribly constructive. --Todeswalzer|Talk 17:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
It is hilarious that some dimwits are generating their own illustrations! Here is a link to the sketch, plus some other hilarious borderline-Aspergers illustrating. [2]--Iacobus 00:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the pronunciation of his name be 'kamy' in the IPA? 'kamu' would be Camou or Camous in FrenchRothorpe 00:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meaning and the Absurd

I have a couple points of contention with the article, and perhaps someone can defend it before any revisions are contemplated. First, the article's summary on the Absurd states, "If we accept that life has no meaning and therefore no value, should we kill ourselves?" This is strictly incorrect; in his essay, Camus does not assert that life has no meaning, simply that reason cannot lead us to the meaning. We ask the universe for meaning, but it responds only with indifference. We ask the universe for values; it offers us only facts.

Also, in this section it states that "Meursault, the Absurdist hero of L'Étranger, is a murderer who is executed for his crime." However, Mersault is not executed in The Stranger. In fact, near the end, the priest with whom he has his final encounter suggests that his appeal is likely to succeed.

As for your first point, the claim that Camus saw life as without meaning is quite "strictly incorrect" -- but in a broader, more inclusive sense, I believe it adequately gets the message across to people who are unfamiliar with Camus. In every practical sense, Camus sees life as having no inherent meaning -- as opposed to no meaning whatever -- and his writing advocates that we need to find meaning for ourselves instead of expecting an uncaring universe to bestow it upon us.
As for your second point, I don't understand this interpretation. When I read the novel, it seemed quite obvious to me that Meursault will be executed. Even if the story itself didn't lead up to this inevitability, philosophically, he must be executed if we are to view him as accepting responsibility for his own existence. And in any event, he rejects the preacher most violently, along with any "salvation" he might offer. --Todeswalzer|Talk 04:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

You're completely missing the point. Mersault isn't accepting responsibility for his own existence. He is simply recognizing the absurdity of his situation and beginning to how he is able to exist in it. In a sense, he is really indifferent to whether he lives or dies by the end of the book. The irony is that Mersault has resigned himself to the fact that he is going to die when, in fact, his appeal might succeed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.174.17 (talk) 03:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Was Camus an atheist or an agnostic?

Some say Camus had been an atheist, some say he had been an agnostic. What was he? Does anybody know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.196.226.86 (talk) 03:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

It's really hard to tell, although to be safe I would lean towards the agnostic side. It seems like he had strong reservations about proclaiming a God, or at least if Camus were to ever meet God, I think that God would be hard pressed to answer some of the questions Camus has lined up for him! c.f. The Plague for a few on human suffering. It would perhaps be best to look for an answer in interviews rather than in his literature. Qzxtvbzr 14:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. In The Fall Jean-Baptiste goes as far as to ridicule "Coffee House Atheists," so I don't think you can really look at his fictional work for answers to that question. I believe many philosophy professors refer to the likes of Camus as "Meditative Atheists." That is to say that while they don't believe in God, they don't mind looking at things from religious perspectives. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.53.239.37 (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

I don't have the quote handy but I've read and re-read many times Camus' "Resistance, Rebellion, and Death" and he clearly states in one paragraph that he is an agnostic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 98.197.243.24 (talk) 23:24:18, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

You can actually find agnosticism in much of his work. He often implies that a God could very well exist, but humans will never understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.174.17 (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not a registered user and this article is protected. Could someone please add Camus to the category of French agnostics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.247.166.29 (talk) 03:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural Influences

I have gone over the cultural influences section and changed it from a list to a writeup format, it looks more like an encyclopedic entry, but are all the references notable? I think maybe the songs should be limited to singles or significant mentions or something along those lines, as I don't think this article should list each and every song that mentions Camus or has lyrics that contain themes or words related to his writings. What do you think? darkskyz 14:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested article restructuring

I suggest restructuring the article into the following sections:

  • Personal Life - including info on his birth, family, and death.
  • Political Career - including all the info on his membership in various political organizations and political writings.
  • Literary Career - including info on his various publications.
  • Philosophical views - including info on his views on matters such as the absurd, totalitarianism, the death penalty etc.
  • Complete Bibliography - no reason naming the section selected bibliography if it is a complete one... If this is too long, maybe split into a separate article, but it seems to me like this isn't too long.
  • Cultural Influences - only those of notable significance, not every song mentioning something that sounds like absurd.
  • Further Reading
  • External Links

Any suggestions?

P.S. This talk page should also be cleaned up, preferably by refactoring.

darkskyz 14:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree. I've changed the order according to his impact on the fields and offered some subheadings.

  • Personal Life
    • Early Years
    • The War (new section)
    • Football (move section Camus and Football here, though I don't know that it warrants a full heading)
    • Death (move section Albert Camus' Death)
  • Literary Career - including info on his various publications.
  • Philosophical views - including info on his views on matters such as the absurd, totalitarianism, the death penalty etc. (move sections on the summary of Absurdism, Camus' Ideas on the Absurd, and Opposition to Totalitarianism here)
  • Politics (remove term 'career' as it suggests he was a politician)
    • The Revolutionary Union Movement and the European Movement
    • Additional (need to expand this section, or combine previous subheading on the Rev. Union into a more general section on his political involvement)
  • Complete Bibliography
  • Cultural Influences
    • Film
    • Music
  • Further Reading
  • References
  • External Links

The sections "Camus and Orwell" and "Camus and Solidarity" should be removed or incorporated into the literary career section. Laura schnak (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Influences and Influenced

I have started a discussion regarding the Infobox Philosopher template page concerning the "influences" and "influenced" fields. I am in favor of doing away with them. Please join the discussion there. RJC Talk 14:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sartre

According to the page "it was there that" Camus and Sartre met." I take "there" to mean at Combat, Camus' resistance newsletter. According to the book "Camus and Sartre" by Ronald Aronson, these two met at Sartre's play "The Flies" in '43. Not sure if they collaborated previously or afterwards in Combat or whether the book is altogether incorrect. Anyone mind clarifying/correcting? Neutralitybias 04:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The Olivier Todd biography agrees: "...he had met [Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir] at a dress rehearsal of Sartre's play The Flies in June 1943." Actually, the entire beginning of the 'Literary Career' section is misleading, it suggests that Camus met Sartre after the war, and after he resigned from Combat. I agree with a previous commenter that the whole article could be rewritten and reformatted. Laura schnak (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Moreover, the disagreement between Satre and Camus is framed in terms of the opposition of Camus to totalitarianism. This is a gross oversimplification. Their differences were much more complex. For example, Camus never accepted Algerian independence, Sartre argued passionately in favor of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.90.217.68 (talk) 00:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Novak?

I'm not sure who this guy is, or why he's listed in the 'influenced' section, but no mention of Camus is made on his page, and I found no citation that could provide any evidence for this insert. Further, I can't even understand how it makes sense that a Catholic advocate of Capitalism could be influenced significantly by Camus - a man who, arguably, was against both of these things. Provisionally, I'm removing this. But if anyone can find any evidence that it shouldn't be, please replace it, but alphabetise it, like the rest. This guy, at best, shouldn't be listed above Sartre, if you don't.--Soonlaypale 14:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speeches

What's wrong with adding a "Speeches" section and mentioning the "Address at the Nobel Academy of Stockholm 1957"? --Richard 17:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Enlightenment

I think Camus was influenced greatly by the thinkers and philosophes of the Enlightenment. What do you think? -68.224.117.152 (talk) 23:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Um.... Who in the twentieth century wasn't? --Todeswalzer|Talk 20:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Camus and Metaphysics

Can, possibly, anyone answer me why the scholars of Wikipedia have totally deleted any mention in the book Christian Metaphysics and Neoplatonism by Albert Camus, a book which has been in circulation from this February in translation of Ronald D. Srigley? Can someone tell me why Wikipedia deletes the resume of the text of Camus that I wrote, since I have the book, and also has deleted even the title of it??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.90.156 (talk) 09:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plagirism

I wanted to point out that large sections of this article were taken from the website http://www.biblio.com/authors/641/Albert_Camus_Biography.html --Stronghold1245 —Preceding comment was added at 14:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Corrections/proofreading

Albert Camus founded in 1949 the Group for International Liaisons in the Revolutionary Union Movement, according to the book Albert Camus, une vie BY Olivier Todd, a group opposed to the atheist and communistic tendencies of the surrealistic movement of André Breton. (Books are stated to be 'by' an author in English, not 'of' - as in French.)

Got it. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)