The Plague

Although the Plague is not my favorite Camus, that honor belongs to The Stranger and The Rebel, it is nonetheless a great allegory for the grinding nature of life under occupation by a foreign dictatorial regime.
Just as Camus experienced first hand the way in which the Nazi occupation of France beat down the spirit of the French people, in The Plague he parallels that with the way in which an isidious disease can beat down the will of a city's people to live life.
Perhaps, the way in which he dealt with the disease itself was rather cursory. Relying, on traditional bubonic plague of medieval vintage as the disease which wipes out large chunks of the city's population, but still I think that is rather irrelevant because in a sense The Plague is a story of evil and apathy. Evil and apathy that creeps into the hearts and minds of the residents of a city gripped by disease, or of the citizens of a nation thats been conquered by a fascist army. The novel may move a little slowly, but I urge anyone who starts reading The Plague to finish, and they will eventually gripped by it. Plus, the novel certainly has a lot to teach us in the twenty-first century and should be read if only for that reason.

The Plague is an allegorical novel that says a lot about life and a whole lot more about death. Here’s one of my biggest takeaways from the novel: before the plague the people in the town of Oran were like ants in an ant farm. When the plague infested Oran the living residents "woke up", looked around, and stopped going to church. The citizens of Oran weren’t totally “free” before the plague. I know this is some high school existentialist rhetoric, but since I live in NYC this metaphor really makes me think. NYC is a town of workaholics. With Trump being President I feel like this book is more relevant than ever. The habit of despair is worse than despair itself.

The Plague is a story about an outbreak of the bubonic plague in a city of about two hundred thousand people sometime around, as the author puts it, 19___. So we don't know the exact date. But since the book was published in 1947, I assume it occurred during the early nineteen forties. We do know were it took place. It was in the small seaport city of Oran, the capital of Algiers, which is located on the northern coast of Africa, just across the Mediterranean from Spain.

I liked this book, but to be honest, it was a difficult read. There's not too much excitement between its pages. That is, unless you're of those people who actively participates in the development and implementation of emergency response plans. In that case, this book should be required reading, because The Plague is a textbook example of what can happen during a major biological outbreak. Everything's in chronological order from the view point of a mysterious narrator. First, there was the trouble of indentifying the exact organism. And then, as the disease progressed, there was the problem of inadequate medically facilities, including doctors, medical staff, and the transportation system to get the sick to a clinic. Then there was the quarantine problem. And since the plague in this story quickly morphed into its more deadly form, pneumonic plague, special consideration had to be given to natural congregations of citizens. Places like churches, shopping centers, prisons and jails, and the list goes on. And if that weren't enough, there simply weren't enough workers, civil or volunteer, to help with the gathering of dead bodies and cremations and burials. And once the doctors and town leaders finally knew exactly what they were dealing with, there was the long wait for life-giving serum, and organized inoculations. Somebody had to decide who got what, when and where. Basically, for the citizens of Oran, the whole thing was a nightmare in epic proportion to anything they had ever experienced.

In 1957, the book's author, Albert Camus, was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. That tells you right there that the man could write, and write well. But like I said, other than just reading about the detection and management of an unexpected out break of plague, and it's nightmarish devastation of a medium sized city during the early nineteen hundreds, in a sort of ho-hum, day-by-day blow writing style--like listening to a monotonic speaker--I really wouldn't bother paying the money. In fact, I've known several people who just couldn't make it passed the first 150 pages of this 300 page the book. But if you're a student of hazardous threat agents and emerging diseases, or if you just like reading about this stuff, or if you've never read anything by Albert Camus and would like to tee for yourself what he was all about, this book would definitely be the ticket. I give the book four stars.

This book is not exceptional. But I can not can not blame it on Camus. I think some weight must lie on the translation. I previously read "The Stranger" -- the new translation, which was much better than the first translation I had read a few years back. I am inclined to say that the translation of "The Plague" that I read is not a good interpretation. One of Camus' virtues is his monotone voice when describing events with a sense od detachment. "The Plague" has a lot of good moments and is definitely worth reading, but it feels as though the translator, Stuart Gilbert, is placing flowers where there should be none. Camus' beauty is in its barren deserted descriptions. This book should be retranslated by Matthew Ward who did an excellent job with the Stranger. I will definitely write to the publisher suggesting this, and so should all of you who decide to read this version. Regardless of all this, it is a book worth reading.

In Camus' novel a compassionate and conscientious physician struggles against bubonic plague threatening his city of Oran Algeria, while a smug priest exalts in the seeming return to the faith by a populace cowering in fear before what they might perceive as the wrath of God. The author has the final word as to which of these two men finds favor in the eyes of the Lord--the omnipotent entity in this fictional world being, of course, Camus! Let me just say that the outcome was very much to my liking!

I enjoyed the Plague, because of its detail towards all that the narrator was addressing in the novel. The point I didn't like about the book, was the beginnings' difference from the rest of the book and its harsh descriptions of everything happening. The beginning is relevant, however, but the way its written and its context is so different from all the other sections. I liked how the author describes the setting so well that you can picture the little French town in northern Africa and its streets, and you can almost feel the weather that the people feel and their emotions throughout their time. When he describes the summer and the flowers for the funerals you almost want to smell the flowers and to feel the sun and the humid air.
I liked the plot of how the people want to get out of their captured town, but they realize that they should be happy with what they have and that they should try to help those who may not survive the plagues onset of pain and death. When the characters struggle with the local authorities to try and escape their dismal situation they are put through even more pain that's not caused by the plague. I liked the way that the main characters dealt with their losses and their gains, but they don't see their gains until the end of the novel. The narrator, in the beginning, is able to make you see and hear the rats in the walls of their town and able to see what happens over the time in the city. When the people die and they run out of places to bury them its sad to think how that could have really happened, and also how it has happened in our own history in the past.

Camus is not writing about the plague, as graphic as some of the descriptions of disease may be. He is writing about the human spirit and how it deals not just with adversity but with absurdity. The least appropriate response to the plague is the most common -- that of banality. For many residents, life just goes on but becomes infinitely boring. For those who strive with evil and death, life becomes infinitely valuable and infinitely interesting. Think of Rieux, putting in his 20-hour days. Even the miscreant Cottard finds meaning in the plague; for him, it means that all the inhabitants are in the same situation as he is.

Quite a remarkable work. A true classic.

The novel begins with dead rats found throughout the town, but the locals think nothing of this and just gather up the corpses and throw them away. When the first townspeople begin to get sick, the novel's protagonist, Dr Bernard Rieux and his colleague, Castel, conclude it must be plague. However, their fears are initially dismissed given such isolated cases. Not heeding the doctors' warnings soon causes dozens in the town to become ill. Beginning with a small number of deaths, the plague soon leads to Dr Rieux designating space at a hospital for plague victims. Then everything becomes overwhelmed. Camus' book is split into five parts and covers a period of many months from the arrival of the plague to its eventual passing, and a reflection on the consequences of the outbreak.

I know that I didn't get all the meanings from The Plague but I think it's one of those novels that you can read at many different levels. On the surface it's a story of a plague striking an Algerian town. At a deeper level, there is the allegory of France's occupation by Germany during the Second World War. Deeper still are all the complexities of existentialism. However deep you want to dig into the meanings I think the novel is one that can be read by many and still enjoyed.

I really enjoyed this book for its insightfulness and bringing a sense of reality to a fictional plague. The book is basically about the plague and the tolls it takes on a city and the ways that the people remain buoyant. The narrative is compelling and analyzes the ways in which different characters, but mostly what the whole town loses and gains in the plague. This is the third book I've read by this author, and they all explore the theme of dying a happy death if there is such a thing. Don't know what else to say but that its insightfulness into a fictional plague will keep you going.

The novel, "THE PLAGUE" isn't as important to read "for the story" (although there is one), but for the philosophy of how Albert Camus approached life in this world of overwhelming absurdities and destructive evils.

The "plague" which confronts the populace is symbolic of the tidal waves of destructive death and life devaluing realities we encounter from our conception, to when we first open our eyes to "the world" . . . and througout our existence "to the grave".

If it isn't indiscriminate sickness or diseases, then war . . . or the erosion of civil rights and freedoms . . .or a myriad number of indignities attacking "human dignity and worth".

What makes us "superior" to that existential absurdity and allows us to triumph over its pulling us into meaninglessness is that we can stand and face it . . . and stand in opposition to it . . . simply be "being better than it". Jesus said "if you have done it to one of these the least of my brethern, you have done it to Me" . . .

And so we rise and live the more nobel life, despite the culture of death and devaluation of human dignity on a one-to-one basis. We help who we can . . . in the way we are able . . . where we are . . . even in the face of seeming hoplessness. Camus' philosophy was that it is more important to live a real nobility, a real morality and be perhaps that one small light . . . that one tiny spark . . . no matter how dark everything else might be . . . because if our light goes out then who's will there be to shine? . . . if not us then who?

Albert Camus, as an existentialist philosopher who was a member of the French Resistance and saw the indignities of evil and of war didn't merely "talk the talk" but he "walked the walk" -- against all odds.

There is a term, "annonymous christian" . . . perhaps Albert Camus was one such person . . . his writings and "The Plague" expound a christian approach without claiming to be one. And people of faith . . . or of little or no faith . . . can all learn something from reading Albert Camus . . . and from reading "THE PLAGUE".

In light of the constant scare of chemical warfare we are faced with in this age where even the barbarians in the middle east have access to technology, this book still has much to offer.
There is one major theme in this novel and that is stay maintain a level head. Many of the casualties in the story are victimized by their own fear and irrational actions. From the rushed and fatal antidote to the brutallity inside the quarantined city.
This book also holds relevence to the fear that had gripped society in the 80's with the AIDS scare.

This is the first work by Camus that I have read. The subject matter is not pleasant reading, but it is engrossing. I appreciated the lack of moralizing in this work. It is good ocassionally to realize that the world cannot be neatly summed up by authors. The devastations that humanity faces in the form of plagues, wars, tsunamis and earthquakes are not to be reasoned away by mortal men. They are or they were and there is no deeper meaning behind their having been other than that they happened.

Camus's _Plague_ is that type of work, untidy perhaps because it refuses to follow the conventional author as omniscient being routine. I believe that you will appreciate this work. I do not give it full marks because this is not really my type of novel. Ocassionally however it is good to read 'mature' works such as these and I would encourage everyone to read this.

The suggestion that Camus's classic is as timely as it is timeless is not an expression to be taken glibly. At its core, The Plague is as much a tale of hope as it is about death. Amid its stark and grim descriptions of despair, lies the rediscovery of common purpose, of brotherhood, sacrifice, and above all, life. Yet, there is nothing in this story of redemption to imply a pivot of righteousness or god-willed forgiveness. No, the veritable truth of this account is the reconciliation of those uncontrollable forces that commandeer us, nature, God, death with those whimsical, human impulses that define us, love, desire, fear. In the end it is to guide us towards understanding significance and belief, both of our individual and collective selves, in the worlds that we create and that create us.
The story unfurls by recounting a morning like any other morning in the sleepy and listless town of Oran. Yet, this seemingly unconvential day is marked with the odd profusion of dead rats within the city. The harbinger of doom symbolized by these rodent corpses quickly turns from peculiarity to dread, and Camus's masterful reportorial passages landscape the cloud of panic and fear that literally and figuratively quarantine the town. At once both detailed and grandiose, Camus never loses focuses on his objectivity. His phrases are almost scientific when describing the physical ravages of the disease, and his honest and austere portraits of the psychology manifestations of Oran always retain the precision of the conscientious observer. Yet, even while constructing the setting with an eye of distance, Camus brilliantly juxtaposes them against his vivid character studies, ones that radiate their unflinching and, in many ways, life-sustaining humanity. From the devastating dedication of Dr. Rieux to the monumental heroism of the tongue-tied Grand, each individual materializes the many facets of morality and courage that emerge in the face of dire adversity. It is in these depictions that Camus's passion and pain thrive-tinted with the weight of his existential musings, these archetypes (as each can be reduced to an element of complete ethical composition) are men caught within a God-fearing, but Godless world, where their only respite is alleviation. In perhaps the most powerful soliloquy on compassion, guilt, and justice that I have ever read, Tarrou illuminates the plight of the "plague-stricken," of which we are all a part, and must somehow escape. It is an absolutely heart-wrenching and beautiful passage; the most sublime in a book replete with them.
Much more can be said about the uncompromising splendor of this novel-it is epic, in the most profound of ways, through its encapsulation of the ways in which we struggle and survive. Relevant for all ages, but conspicuously for ours, where empathy and understanding disappear regularly from our conscience, this is a living testament of perseverance. That truth is not beautiful, that pain will always be linked to us, these are our realities-but we cannot lose hope and balance in the face of them.

The book in general was an outstanding piece of how society faces horrible things, lives with them takes it all in to the point of breaking down and then rises up to overcome what ever has been thrown at them.
In a town of Oran, some would say they had a bit of a rat problem. At First they came out by ones and twos, but after a couple of days, it was by the fifties and hundreds. People started to get worried, not to mention sick at the sight of hundreds of rats dieing in the streets. At one point,There are truck loads of rats that are picked up in the street. The rats were then taken to a place to be burned. One can only imagine the smell of thousands of burning rats.
People wondered why all these rats were coming out and dieing in their streets. Well, they soon found out, because what was once a dead rat, became an epidemic to people. Whatever the rats had, people also got. The symptoms were pretty much the same. Fever, achy body, and other graphic details.
Dr. Rieux one of the main characters in the story tries to figure out why all this is happening in the town. Many people have different theries but in the end it comes down to one nasty bacteria. After they figure out what it is, they quarintine the town and lock the gates. Dr. Rieux and many other people go through alot of obstacles through the way trying to figure out how to end this epidemic.
In my opinion, this book was exciting in some parts,ecpecially when talking about the plague, rats, and people dieing. It gave great detail to what was happening. The author gives great detail to the characters and surrounding, but still lets your imagination run wild. I liked the fact that it was a book of fiction, but also could very easily happen to anyone of our cities. One thing I did not like about the book was that Camus(the author)jumped from person to person and went on and on about them, giving information about them that had no relavence to the story. Through the whole book there are many surprises that will attract you to keep reading. A big one is in the end, but to tell it would just be foolish. I suggest this novel to people to like goory details and a realistic plot. Enjoy the book, I know I did!

It isn't trivial that Albert Camus studied philosophy. In this book, the Nobel Laureate uses a "plague" to explore how different people react to the hardships and incomprehensible nature of what is thrust upon them. It takes place in the town of Oran, where one day the rats start dying off, and the people quickly follow. The town is sealed off, and the characters have to deal with the isolation and and the bleakness of their circumstance, among other things. This is an excellent book about humanity, but if you are looking for a horror story or something filled with obvious bestseller suspense, look elsewhere. Camus keeps the reader interested throughout, but the interest is in the character of the people he populates the town with, not necessarily with the disease itself. I'd highly recommend it, but just know what you're getting into.

This book, first of all, has a great theme. The theme of endurance and carrying through is a wonderful moral and is expressed very clearly. The problem I have with this book is that it is slightly boring at some points. It seems to go on and on sometimes and I think Camus could have written this in a lot less space. I had to read this for a class and I chose it because the plot sounds interesting. And to the book's credit, it is one of the few books that actually is what the summary says it is. The book is deep, but not so deep that the reader can't understand it. It is a good read, but dull at some points.

Camus made one of the best novels in the XX century with this merciless story . The plague appears and every human being in this bitter novel will never be the same .

The clear , superb and crude metaphor represented for this disease will live in your mind ever .

Camus told in an interview days after his well deserved Literature Nobel Prize that the Plague , far from all the given interpretations and subliminal messages given for many critics , meant simply the Nazi presence in France .

"The Plague" is perhaps the best novel I have ever read. It combines a searing indictment of man's relentless march towards self-destruction with Camus' personal love of life and recognition of the value of love.

I highly recommend reading "The Stranger" first, if only to appreciate the evolution of Camus' writing stlye and outlook. Whereas "The Stranger" was published in 1946 and was perhaps a pessimistic reaction to the horrors of WWII, "The Plague" (1948) has a much more reflective and philosophical feel to it and at offers hope through the inate goodness of many of its characters.

Certainly "The Plague" can be viewed as an allegory for man's never-ending brutality, and perhaps specifically, the ever-present prospect of senseless war. For that reason alone, the book is timeless and relevant and should find a place in any personal library as well as any concientious list of books that have the power to change the way we think. Based on this assessment, Albert Camus must be included with such profoundly influential and philosophical writers as Plato, Shakespeare, Voltaire, Thoreau, Kafka, etc,. Those not moved by the contents of this book should check their pulse.

The most striking theme in Albert Camus's The Plague is the connections and similarities between people strengthening and becoming apparent in crisis. As such it is not as fatalistic and depressing a book as it might seem. Even in tragedy people come through as loving caring people. As the plague hits and sets in Camus stresses how the town's population behaves as one everyone feeling similarly and acting the same. The journalist, Rambert, greatly misses his wife but is in the end conflicted about escaping the town quarantine. He begins feeling he should be allowed to leave since he was only a visitor with a badly timed visit. Many months later, "

Tarrou...remarked,...if Rambert wished to take a share in other people's unhappiness, he'd have no time left for happiness. So the choice had to made.

"That's not it," Rambert rejoined. "Until now I always felt a stranger in this town, and that I'd no concern with you people. But now that I've seen what I have seen, I know that I belong here whether I want it or not. This business is everybody's business."

It shows the strength of people to hang together as people because they should even if they do not want to. In the beginning the town had many people acting somewhat the same but individually and without it being as obvious. By the end, after the affliction of plague, the people of the town visibly act as one connected as it were by the pain they had to survive. It is a reassuring and well conveyed theme in a book so filled with pain.

Of course there have been more than enough positive reviews of The Plague to make any effort on my part sound rather like preaching to the choir. What I would like to add is that, reflecting what another reviewer mentioned, this book is radically different in both its message and delivery from Camus' other masterwork, The Stranger. While I think the latter is ultimately the more effective and groundbreaking of the two, Meursault and the 'absurdity' which governed the context for his execution never reached me with the kind of explicit emotional honesty we see here displayed in Dr. Rieux. The Stranger is a thinly veiled philosophical treatise on man's powerlessness while The Plague is a book which recognizes other, more crucial, aspects of man: namely, empathy, compassion, fraternity and bravery. I found each of these characters, from the deeply conflicted Rambert to the frighteningly psycopathic Cottard, intricately sketched and almost tangibly real.
As a side note, and to finally address why this book is given four stars instead of the full five, I would just mention that Camus' fictional style has always seemed a bit bloodless and guarded to these eyes. He is a master philosopher and an utterly engaging social phenomenon, but as a writer of prose he pales in comparison with people like Faulkner and Graham Greene.

Albert Camus's The Plague is set in the 1940s in Oran, a small city on the Algerian coast. Camus's style consists of a moderately complex writing style. Camus's entire novel is centered around the following conflicts: the men's fights with one another, each man's fight with himself, and the town's fight with the plague. Camus also uses the unique approach of concealing the identity of his narrator until the closing chapters of the novel, which allows the novel to close more entertainingly. Camus frequently uses figurative language such as similes and metaphors throughout The Plague. These devices are used by Camus to enhance his vast amount of imagery. Camus's motifs of love, suffering, and exile are apparent throughout the action of the novel. The use of these motifs allows the reader to relate his own life to that of the characters in The Plague. The theme of The Plague is the message that it is possible to find love and hope in the worst of situations.
In conclusion, I believe that Albert Camus did a superb job in writing this novel. He touched every emotion of his audience when he published a novel that centered on love, death, tragedy, and hope.

Saramago cannot help but to be compared to Camus, because human nature in extremis is also a strong concern in The Plague. The main character: a doctor by the name of Rieux, experiences the plague first-hand in his hometown. Rieux, like his neighbors, is ignorant to his surroundings. Throughout his experiences, it is obvious that he never looks into the eyes of reality until it is shoved in his face forcefully. He walks out of his door to step on a bloody rat, and instead of blaming infection he questions the waste management of the town. François Mauriac, upon exchange of editorials with Camus commented on the history behind the novel as an allegory for the German occupation of France: Controversy has put me up with one among you-certainly not the least formidable. The fever of your novel has reminded me of the pain of those years, the painful memories of my murdered friends, are what led me to the position I took: the Nazis, like rats are they! (30 November 1946) Camus, like Mauriac, took the same position , for he had actually been in the town of Oran when the German invasion took place, and his ties were severed from his wife and child. When he wrote his novel, The Plague, he portrayed himself as a essayist trying to reunite with his family: who is trying to fit in amongst a population who refutes his ideas as a rallyist, and an existentialist. His character: Rambert is a star shining amongst the haphazard and banal of his surroundings. His concerns are valid, and he is a little impatient at times, but as Camus writes: "you can get through the days there without trouble, once you have formed habits. And since habits are precisely what our town encourages, all is for the best" Rambert's first contact in the town is the concierge: M. Michel, the know-it-all of the town, the closest thing the town has to a mayor. M. Michel, as providence would have it is the first victim of the plague, very fitting that this metaphor for Nazist evil has cut the head off the town's leadership, and installed its reign of terror. A major component of this moving book is the longing for the outside world, and the people that live there, that the inhabitants of the stricken city experience. As a result of these feelings, the inhabitants find themselves understanding each other better, as does the reader. And when one day Rambert told him that he liked waking up at four in the morning and thinking of his beloved Paris, the doctor guessed easily enough, basing this on his own experience, that this was his favorite time for conjuring up pictures of the woman from whom he was now parted. This was, indeed, the hour when he could feel surest she was wholly his. Till four in the morning one is seldom doing anything and at that hour, even if the night has been a night of betrayal, one is asleep . Yes, everyone sleeps at that hour, and this is reassuring, since the great longing of an unquiet heart is to possess constantly and consciously the loved one, or, failing that, to be able to plunge the loved one, when a time of absence intervenes, into a dreamless sleep timed to last unbroken until the day they meet again." this novel has been beautifully translated and it was enjoyable to the end.

The Plague by Albert Camus merits recognition because it illuminates two universal truths, one that is still present today and one that will always exist. In this seemingly completely existentialist novel, Camus forces us to realize that, however difficult it may be to admit, most of us go through life exiled from the rest of the world. When given a second look, The Plague can be revealed to identify the enemy to which, according to Camus, humankind must never surrender.

One thought-provoking topic that can quickly be discerned from the novel is isolation and exile. As soon as the city of Oran, Algeria is quarantined, its residents find themselves alone and yearning for contact with the outside. Although the citizens of Oran do not leave their homes, they realize they have been exiled from the world: "it was undoubtedly the feeling of exile--that sensation of a void within which never left us, that irrational longing to hark back to the past or else to speed up the march of time" (part 2 page 65). But, tragically, the citizens of Oran are not strangers to this overwhelming emptiness.

Even before the town gates were closed to contain the plague, the townspeople already isolated themselves from each other. They did not lead fulfilled lives and, according to the narrator, "everyone is bored... their chief aim in life is, as they call it, `doing business'" (part 1 page 4). The citizens of Oran took their families and friends for granted, and concentrated instead on money, as though peace of mind was a given and not something for which one would need to be grateful. Such an attitude has become more prominent than ever in our fast-paced material-driven society, with a staggering number of people pointlessly going through the daily motions without ever stopping to make time for others. This striking similarity makes the novel extremely relevant in today's world.

However discouraging this portrait of a discontent city may seem, Camus whispers a secret message over the loud drama of the story, and this contributes to The Plague being a noteworthy novel. Camus portrays characters like Raymond Rambert who join plague-eradicating efforts, such as sanitary squads, in a favorable light. In addition, Dr. Rieux, a main character throughout the story, works tirelessly at relieving the suffering of the diseased. Both men are on the frontlines of the chief conflict in the novel: humans versus human suffering.

Although Camus believes suffering and death are the meaningless results of life, he does acknowledge those who at least make an effort to fight these pestilences of the human race. For Camus, surrendering to the inevitable pain and loss in life is not an option, and his characters reflect this ideal. To fully appreciate the undeniable value of The Plague, one must look past the obvious and discover how Camus depicts lifestyles similar to ours and how he cleverly conceals an undercurrent that runs through the novel and supports those who battle against the affliction that plagues all of humanity.

Being in an honors high school English course I chose to read this novel. Although some may find it hard to read, I found it very enjoyable. Camus makes an excellent point using existentialism, symbolism, and desript writing. His book tells of the past, present, and future. It will make you realize what life could be like in hell, and how it might somedaybe in our lives. The Plague will make you think about how your life is now, and how with a blink of an eye it could change.

This book will always feel hyper real to me because I had to read it for an AP Honors English class in high school during the week my grandfather passed away. I felt this book like I have only felt a handful within my life.

On the surface, this is a story of a plague outbreak in colonial Oran, Algeria, but Camus is actually giving an extended allegory to the Nazi Occupation of France while reiterating his idea of the Absurd.

The good Dr. Bernard Rieux is comparable to Charles DeGaulle in his constant effort to battle against the forces of oppression. Rieux along with Dr. Castel warn the city government of the dangers of the plague, but the government drags its feet. This is comparable to the feet-dragging and mismanagement by the French government in response to the German Blitz of World War Two.

The worst characters in the novel could also be considered the most colluding members of French society to the Nazi occupation. The character Cottard seems to revel in the new "occupation" by the plague. It makes him feel less alone and that everyone is suffering through the personal struggles he must deal with constantly. He greedily excuses himself from responsibility to fight the plague at all. Camus is probably comparing Cottard to the fascist Vichy Government set up by the Nazis after France's fall. Cottard, because he is a fascist, is delighted that everyone must now conform to his sick ideals.

The public itself represents the general French public during the occupation. They try to escape the plague by going to movies and plays, but soon reality stops them from enjoying even that when the actors all start dying from plague. This demonstrates Camus's belief that most people were indifferent and chose to be helpless during the occupation (Camus founded the left-wing Resistance newspaper Combat).

I quite enjoyed all the allusions made in The Plague. A good novel for all readers and a definite must read for fans of existentialism.

"...and then you found twenty dollars." This phrase usually accompanies dull, predictable, stories that lack an original plot or purpose. It also reflects the intellectual caliber of the person who says it. Either way, narration is an important part of a story, and the effect of a good narrator is seen in Albert Camus' The Plague.

What benefit is there in having a narrator relate a story? Well, Camus tells us in the beginning.

"...a narrator cannot take account of these differences of outlook.

His business is only to say: `This is what happened,' when he knows

that it actually did happen, that it closely affected the life of a whole

populace...This is justification for playing the part of a historian...

narrator has three kinds of data...himself...eyewitnesses...documents..."

A narrator can give more than one point of view to give the story a complete, three dimensional feel. Camus' narrator did exactly that, it put the plague in different levels creating a universal dilemma that even relates to the reader. Camus' narrator at the most basic level is a storyteller. The next level is to bridge the gap between his world in Algiers, and to the readers' world. The third purpose is Dr. Rieux as the narrator symbolizing existentialism.

"...this seems to be the moment for Dr. Bernard Rieux to confess that

he is the narrator."

Like Camus, Dr. Rieux has taken himself out of the issue at hand to take on a role of historian/narrator in an act of awareness. He can do nothing, but recount life in a complete truth to show the vicious cycle of life.

Camus utilizes the element of narration to create a very intellectual, but slightly dull story of human reaction to problems. In short I hope Camus found twenty dollars, because the story is quite dull.

This is a very fine novel that explores the effect of suffering on human beings. It is both philosophical and plot-driven (to a degree). A very insightful book that, if it doesn't exactly shove optimism and hope down the readers throat, at least leaves the door open for the reader to choose to be optimistic if he or she chooses. "There are more things to admire in humans than to despise." (Or something like that.)

There are different ways in which this book registers with the reader. The metaphor of the plague did not represent war to me at all when I read the book, but rather other things, like the way societies can become "quarantines" of their own volition, how this particular society had "quarantined" itself long before the plague arrived; the fact that nothing the "authorities" do to deal with the plague really helps, but in fact, in contrast to the plague, are revealed as being empty systems, and who, I think Camus seems to imply, are rather deserving of the plague, not so much because of any outward travesty they have commited, but because merely they have forgotten, neglected something: which is LIFE. They have been suiting themselves up all along to receive the plague; they have tailored themselves to receive nothing else. So what do we expect?

That is a little of what I got from this book. Which is to say that one can get quite a lot from this book. Yet the reason I give it four stars and not five is not so much because of the writing, which does actually seem to lack a substantial middle section, but rather because of Camus's philosophy. His existentialism presupposes things in order to maintain his "heroic despair" (the practise of the doctors in the book and their volunteers), and thus, in a way, ceases to be existential. That of course doesn't negate it altogether; the doctors perpetually pluck away at their work, without trying to figure any "ideal" that would reassure them of what they are doing, other than to keep doing, the doing being their testament as it works itself out, a sort of animal hatred of the plague simply because it is a plague; and that is their stamp of life. This is great, but it is not all. His "heroic despair", while definitely admirable, is not truly existential after itself, and does not completely satisfy by itself. It does not end there.

"All I maintain is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims, and it's up to us so far as possible, not to join forces with the pestilences." The Plague, by Albert Camus. The citizens of the town Oran are wrapped up in themselves. "The truth is that everyone is bored, and devotes himself to cultivating habits. "Our citizens work hard, but solely with the object of getting rich" (The Plague, 4). Camus uses the plague upon the town to address the indifference among man. He also uses the concept of existentialism to fight the indifference with regards to the society's suffering. This is shown by the citizens of Oran uniting to fight that which is inhuman. "The plague had swallowed up everything and everyone. No longer were there individual destinies; only a collective destiny, made of plague and the emotions shared by all" (The Plague, 167). Tarrou, an important character in the novel stated, "That, too, is why this epidemic has taught me nothing new except that I must fight at your side" (The Plague, 229). He himself is a visitor/outsider. He helps play in the development of Camus' values throughout the book. He at first does not care or aid the citizens of the town. He ultimately becomes aware of his responsibility to the citizens of Oran. He learns to act upon what he knows to be right Tarrou is represents what man can be and do. His actions demonstrate conforming to existentialism. This novel is not for everyone; it is not an easy read. The novel lacks action but has great imagery. The Plague by Albert Camus is pretty good on many different levels and is worth reading is one is interested in existentialism.

As compared to The Stranger, Albert Camus' The Plague also deals with a harsh outside world that imposes upon the main character, or protagonist. Published only five years after Camus' additional existiential/athiest novel The Stranger, The Plague is a much more developed context that deals with Camus' perspective on life, humanity, and our existence/purpose on earth. His perception on pursuing a normal life in a mad world are much more apparent and noticable than his perceptions in The Stranger of a man that has "gone mad" in a normal world.
The Plague is an excellent, graphic novel that, like all of Camus' works, deals with one basic principal: atheism. While untimely death and disease- in addition to the absence of a wife, he notes that he does in fact have a job. He is a doctor, so he must do his job as a doctor with no questions asked. A reader may observe the manners in which Dr. Rieux, his companions, and prominent men of the community react to the worsening plague that is spreading throughout the city of Oran. Dr. Rieux's conclusion that there is more ot admire in humans than there is to despise significantly impacted my outlook on life; positively, of course.
I would recommend this book to young adults, and people that are going through rough times within their lives. Like the many novels of Albert Camus- The Plague is not another one of your "happy ending" novels. A reader must be able to draw their own conclusions and accept that life is a challenge that should not be taken for granted. Because this book deals with the concept of Atheism, the absence of religion may turn certain readers away from reading this novel. I challenge these readers to look past their passion for religion, as this novel is a touching, refreshing, and a most excellent example of how any town in the world may react to an outbreak of disease, or epidemic.

Albert Camus never fails to shed light on the stark being of the human condition. The Plague is a thought provoking, page turning, mind boggling, and philosophically-laced novel. If you're looking for a book that creates an existentialist vibe and evokes drastic change in society during a period of turmoil, then The Plague is for you.
The Plague begins with a gruesome and unexplainable observation of rats coming out of the woodwork and dying in some of the most painful ways possible. From the deaths of the rats stem a series of similarly bizarre human deaths in which the protagonist, Dr. Rieux, is assigned to investigate. Rapidly and unmercifully, the death toll rises and no effective cure is available. The city becomes quarantined and Dr. Rieux enlists the help of some of the unexpected characters. Soon enough, the society evolves into a more pacifist state that comes to terms with the plague that ravages what they once knew and loved the most.

It is July, I am in my forties, and I have finally begun reading Camus. First, I read The Stranger. Today, I just finished The Plague. Unlike some reviewers who "had" to read the book, I have had the pleasure of voluntarily escaping into both of these masterful classics, which were apparently not required reading for me in high school or college. I did not select them for a summer beach read, but read them after my husband brought them home from the library. Suffice it to say, our dinnertime discussions have had a little more depth of late.
One of the eeriest qualities of Camus' writing is how the applicability of his timeless writing gives one pause: in a post 9/11 society, even one of his last sentences in The Plague takes on new meaning: "...in the never ending fight against terror and its relentless onslaughts..."
My husband worked on a project in Shanghai during the SARS epidemic there and noted that he could identify with some aspects of the book, especially as he went about the town as a tourist and saw the shopkeepers manning virtually deserted stores. I recall helping supply his suitcase with Purell and dustmasks and wondering if he would wind up being quarantined.
I recall shuddering some years ago at a newspaper account of nurses faced with the fear of encountering an unknown, lethal disease at local New Mexico hospitals. The disease was eventually diagnosed as Hantavirus but the nurses at the hospital were merely given ice cream in the employee lounge as some sort of comfort-measure. At the time, I was glad that I had not pursued a career in nursing.
Nevertheless, I am in total admiration for the characters of Dr. Rieux and Tarrou and the book has somehow, hopefully, ennobled me, in a way that motherhood and maturity have not completed. I have a much greater admiration for those in the medical profession and much more sympathy for humanity and the plight of being human than I did before reading this book. Would that I aspire to being like Tarrou...siding with the victim in any situation, "...so as to reduce the damage done."
"Hats off" to Camus for changing 21st century lives!

The events occurred at Oran. An invalid feels out of place in Oran because it is a place of business, of commerce. One day Dr. Bernard Rieux feels something soft underfoot. Townspeople show uneasiness. Rats are coming out to die. Jean Tarrou is a visitor. He find the town ugly. Tarrou's diary entries describe a curious fever that is overcoming some of the occupants of the town. An older colleague, Castel, tells Rieux that the fever is the plague. Plagues and wars take people by surprise.

Pursuant to Rieux's urging, a health committee convenes at the Prefect's office. Disease is spreading rapidly. Rieux has a dazed feeling. He comes to realize he is afraid. Instructions are received to declare a state of plague and close the town. It is hard to grasp what is happening. Measures are taken regarding traffic and food supply. Rieux is reproached by a journalist, who is looking for a way to get out of town to be reunited with a lover, that he lives in a world of abstractions. After a time he does not have to steel himself to not feel pity because he grows out of pity during the crisis of the epidemic.

A Week of Prayer is organized in Oran. A priest gives a sermon that if the plague is present, the hour has come for taking thought. The town itself is under a sort of incarceration. Some people adapt to the state of affairs and others do not. Realizing their peril, people give their thoughts to pleasure. Tarrou approaches Rieux. He wants to develop a plan for voluntary assistance in coping with the plague. Tarrou says his job in life is giving people chances. Rieux finds the only way of fighting the plague is common decency.

By August it seems the plague has eliminated free choice by swallowing up everyone and everything. There is a sense of exile and deprivation. The striking feature of the funerals is the speed. In the end men and women are placed in death pits indiscriminately. When there is no longer romm for burial the victims go to a fiery end. The real plague has nothing in common with grandiose imaginings. The people of Oran develop a habit of despair. Through September and October there is nothing to do but mark time. Rieux is exhausted and has no emotional resources.

Tarrou's father was a lawyer, a functionary of the legal system. Tarrou assists in the sanitation work of the plague outbreak because he opposes the death penalty. In winter some of the patients survive the plague. Others are helped by a serum. In February the gates are opened. Tarrou loses the match and dies. Rieux prepares an account to honor the plague-stricken victims.

Compared to The Outsider, The Plague is a very beautiful novel about life. All the important questions about life and death are asked in The Plague, although they are not answered so readily. The Plague is deeply moving and will make you question your own life and values. The Outsider also asks the big questions, but The Plague handles them with beauty and sadness. A wonderful book to read.

Set in North Africa on the Mediterranean in the 1940's, the town of Oran becomes infested with bubonic plague, at first the authorities pursue a path of denial, finally the town is put under total quarantine for months until the disease has run its course. People are dying by the hundreds each week, some trying to escape or smuggle, some engaged in the most heroic acts of their lives, no one can leave and no one can come into the town as though under a siege.

Unfortunately, I found this to be the dullest thing I've read since Naipal's "A Bend in the River". In spite of the horrific events continually taking place in the book the story went on in the same monotone, passionless style from beginning to end. There is much philosophical insight in the behavior of humans in times of exile and stress from continual fear, but I think this author should have stayed away from fiction and stayed with philosophy or perhaps documentaries.
This book was like reading an extremely well written composition but it never engaged my emotions.

A compulsive and very enjoyable read. Camus' novel is a very genuine and detailed study about the onslaught of disease and how it affects an unsuspecting community. Filled with lots of human drama, political commentary, and medical intrigue. Some parts of it drag for a little bit, but when it's good, it's really good and very much worth reading to the end.

This book isn't overly engaging, it is somewhat shocking at times, and its prose is probably too dry. Despite that, I highly recommend it to you... Why?. Well, the reason is simple. The plot of "The Plague" is merely a way of understanding something that has to do with our everyday life, and the way we live it.

Succinctly, the story begins when a plague strikes the North-African town of Oran. People at first try to ignore the clues that show that something bad is happening. When they cannot help but recognize that things are seriously wrong, a quarantine is declared. For those inside the walls of Oran, reality changes: death is omnipresent, and loneliness and despair, feelings they must confront. Different people react in diverse ways to the same reality, and we get to know about them through the narrator of this book, that also happens to be one of the protagonists. The real question that most of the persons in Oran ask themselves sooner or later is whether is it worthwhile to fight against the plague, when the outcome in that unfair war is almost certain death...

I won't give you the answers they find, if any. For that, you need to read the book... However, I can tell you Albert Camus' opinion. Camus (1913-1960) thought that it is in the fighting against evil that mankind finds its greatness (and maybe justification, who knows), even if we face what might seem at first sight a desperate situation. In a way, I think that for Camus the plague was in this case an allegory of evil, and our attitude against it. That evil changes faces, but always reappears, and it is again time to make choices, and decide what kind of attitude we will take. It is only in the right decisions that we will find the meaning we were searching for.

Again, recommended...

Belen Alcat

The plague by Albert Camus can be a very difficult piece to read. The most common complaint I have heard about it is how long the descriptions are. To appreciate this book you need to read it while thinking about what a brilliant allegory it is to the holocaust. Albert Camus identifies civilizations biggest problem, our omnipresent ego. It reminds me of a poem I read once, I don't remember it word for word but I will do my best. First they came for the Jews, but we were not Jews so we said nothing Then they came for the homosexuals, but we were not homosexual so we said nothing Then they came for the gypsies and the blacks and the Asians and the old and the handicapped, but we were none of these so we said nothing Then one day they came for us, and no one was left to say anything
I definatly recommend this book. By the way, if anyone who reads this knows who the author is or the exact words please email me.

I've read this book twice now, and each time it seems richer and more relevant to life in the modern world. It has something to say about disease, about world war two, and even about what it means to be human.
The different characters of the novel are fascinating, and their situations stick with the reader long after you conclude reading. Perhaps the most shocking scene, the death of a child in the middle of the novel leaves a big impression. This event itself almost sums up Camus's views of human nature and the random, meaningless nature of existence.
This is a classic and a great read. It will make you think about "big issues" for a very, very long time.

This masterful work portrays with elegant simplicity the existential condition of man. Suitable for readers who have never read an existential Camus novel or for experts in metaphysics, this book is a must for any person who has ever wondered about the condition of man. Camus derserved his nobel prize just for this book alone. This novel is the apex of camus' writings in this readers opinion and provides clear insights to every reader. Buy this book!

We have witnessed a resurrection. The inhabitants of Oran were the living dead. They were not living, they were existing. The plague taught them how to live.
The clergy referred to it as a purge for sin. It was a purge but not in terms of good and evil. The plague purged the human spirit.
After the nine month gestation period of the plague, there was the essence of a live worth living.

The story that Albert Camus wrote is wonderful. It shows what happens when a society is under stress of a uncontrolled medical disaster. But besides from the story, I didn't really like it. I'm not sure if it was because it was translated from french, or if it was written this way, but the book was very confusing because the narrator would jump from person to person without warning. One person would be telling the story, then another person would be, and then at the end you found out that only one of the main characters was the narrator. Very confusing!
But... If you're like me and you have to read this book for a school research paper, I would reccomend it. As soon as you get over the whole character/narrator thing, it an easy read that goes by fast. There is also plenty of academic information in reference books and online for doing a research paper on the book.

Everthing written about how wonderful this book is is true. This book is hard core. But one thing I don't see is that this book shows that Camus could possibly rank as if not the greatest but one of the most talented writers of the 20th century. I read a lot of books, and I can't think of anyone besides Dostoyevsky that writes more powerful than Camus.

I wasn't blown away by The Plague. The characters were well developed and the story was overall interesting. The book sometimes lost my interest making it difficult to read. I would have to put the book down at times to be able to continue reading through it. Camus likes to use the same types of symbols and themes in all his novels, making it somewhat difficult for someone who is just reading one of his books to understand what everything means without looking into it. I did enjoy Dr. Rieux as a main character, his perspective on things made the novel very interesting.

While I thought that the story was interesting at times, other times it got quite boring and was difficult to read. This book could do a better job of telling more interesting tales within the city of Oran while still getting the overall message across. That is why this book received three stars out of five instead of receiving more.

I found this book to be a rich account of human nature, and his struggle for meaning... and an interesting ethical text questioning the relation of goodness and religion. I understand that some find this a slow-paced, dark read but after reading The Stranger, witnessing Camus' main characters reach for hope in friendship and solidarity in this novel is almost refreshing. And it is well worth reading for the masterful character study alone.

3-1/2 out of 5 stars. Translated from French.

I purchased this audiobook because I'm into apocalyptic/dystopian books and thought from the cover that this is what the book would be about. It's slightly like that. There's an outbreak of the bubonic plague in a town in Algeria which ends up being cut off from the outside world until it ends. So, an American book would have mayhem, bad guys trying to take over, love in the middle of the plague, starvation - this book had none of that. There was some discouragement but even the camp where people were stuck for months wasn't bad. The American version would have the camp be a hell on earth. There were a lot of speeches by different characters - a couple were actually moving. The book ended very mildly too. I'm just not used to this type of non-dystopian book.

Rarely in the history of literature has a work of art risen beyond its time period, beyond its own temporal moral lessons. Camus writes of the "rats," the metaphorical Nazis, that infect an empty city, rip it apart, plop it on its head, expose it nude. And he shows us those who fight back ("two plus two equals four") and those who wimp away. Camus wrote the novel in a small town called Le Chambon in 1944, where 5,000 Christian saved 5,000 Jews. And today, do we not witness those who slink from confrontation? those who carry forth Cicero's duties? those who profit? those who die? And is it not best to ask, in the end, where is the meaning? Camus answers.

re-read the second time and the only conclusion I have is: Plague is everywhere, in every minds, and souls..the only care and cure are empathy.Complacency is the plague, hatred is the plague...ignorance is the plague...

nature of destiny and the human condition was written very well by Camus in this novel. It touches Absurdism, human nature and fate in a very good way.

I think the book should have been shorter but nothing is perfect :)

I wasn't as taken by the Plague as others. The story raised some strong ethical questions had any of us been put into the same circumstances. Unfortunately for me, the plagued itself lingered a bit too long. I never felt a sense of attachment to any of the characters. On the other hand, Camus offers short bursts of great insight regarding the struggles of being human.

For potential readers and previous reviewers who are reading this book literally (i.e., as about a real plague), try instead reading it as an allegory. An allegory is something that can be read on various levels. As such, it can have more than one meaning: a surface meaning and a deeper meaning.
The surface meaning is about a plague, but remember where and when Camus lived. Perhaps Camus is trying to say something about living in Nazi occupied France. Maybe the plague acts as a symbol for the Nazis. See if reading the book this way changes your opinion or deepens your appreciation.

I picked this up simply because I like reading good epidemiology/medical horror stories. I was surprised to find that there is much more to this book than that. This is a really great novel, whether you read it quickly and superficially, or take the time to think about the deeper meanings and morals that really set this book apart from most "hot zone" style books. I highly recommend The Plague to anyone interested in learning more.

This book may be one of the best books you'll ever read! It gave me chills as I read it the first time. As soon as I was done I turned right back to the first page and read it again. I love all of Camus work (The Stranger is another good one)! This book left me awestruck!!!!!

Extraordinary! I can't remember loving a book as much as this one--for the way it's structured, for it's sweeping themes and philosophies, for the poetry of the sentences, and the way it moved me emotionally.

Camus' The Plague is one of the most profound and important literary achievements of the last century. It is an allegory for the human capacity to inflict the ultimate iniquity, taking one's life. If you know anything about the WWII and especially the death camps you will have a clearer understanding of this work, for that is what The Plague is really about. Suffering and random indiscriminate death, utmost lack of compassion and yet somehow survival of all that is good about the Man. It is a book that is not easy to understand if you're reading it and thinking that boubonic plague is an actual threat to the people of Oran (an allegory for mankind). Mankind is the greatest threat to itself. I wasn't supposed to tell you that. The book is self-explanatory. Camus didn't want the reader to delve into The Plague thinking that it was about the holocaust. He gradually and brilliantly makes it clear by his amazing use of descriptions (which are the apparent source of trouble for all the readers who don't quite know what the book is about). I had tears in my eyes at the end of the book just when Camus seemed destined to pronounce the inevitable human downfall but he left us with a ray of hope. Camus was a genius. It is not easy to understand his work, especially when he chooses not to be easily understood. It is not a work of existentialism. It is a loud plea for existence and the consummate triumph of life. This is not a book for everyone. It is a must read, however, for people whose IQ's are in triple digits.

Anyone who dares struggle through this book must be in search of some life changing insight like I was. But insight can not be sought after, it is a gift. I spent too many hours dozing off during this long read only to come away with one life lesson - ENJOY LIFE as Rieux and Torreau did during their friendly swim! And if you want to enjoy life then don't struggle through this book like I did.
I must admit though, I began the book sympathizing with Rambert - wanting to flee. My views haven't changed, but now I realize the value of perseverence, determination, and love.
If you have the time to persevere through a long and sad book then give this one a shot.

I have to agree with what most reviewers say about Camus' THE PLAGUE: it is definitely not an easy book to read. If I had to describe the book in a simple phrase, it would have to be something like: an existentialist account of a series of profound Dostoevskian characters facing the utmost adversity, a relentless plague, which is an allegory of the evil mankind faces on a daily basis.

It is absolutely inevitable for me to compare THE PLAGUE with Jose Saramago's BLINDNESS, and the latter is, in my humble opinion, a much better novel. Saramago's book is much less existentialist and in exchange provides a huge dose of magical realism. It deals with a nameless and timeless city, where all of a sudden the population starts going blind, for no apparent reason whatsoever.

Dr. Rieux, Camus' main character, is an atheist who apart from that lacks all type of passion and feeling. He faces the plague in a cool and heartless manner, which simply does not touch me as a reader. Rieux represents a heavy combination of character complexity with an existentialist view of life. He is the absolute anti-hero by definition. Even though he is the one that takes the bull by the horns, he does it simply because he has to do his job. There is absolutely no room for hope in this poor man's soul.

As a Nobel laureate, one cannot ignore the fact that Camus is an excellent writer, but he also the type of writer which some people love, and others, like me, do not enjoy that much. I guess one's opinion regarding THE PLAGUE has a lot do with the reason why one reads. I read to enjoy myself, to be transported to other places and times, to feel, love, hate and hope with the characters. I guess if I read the novel, rereading every single page and profoundly analyzing each thought and sentence, I'd have a more positive opinion of THE PLAGUE, but that's not the way I like to read....

I like books which transmit passions, both positive and negative. THE PLAGUE simply fell very short...

Few authors can deliver such a strong philosophical message through the form of a novel as Camus did with The Plague. Those who appreciated this level may also find Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov to have a similar effect. The Norton Critical Edition with the C. Garnett trans. (ISBN 0393092143) is especially comprehensive.

Susan Neiman's Evil in Modern Thought (ISBN 0691117926) is a great companion to either of these works, as it confronts in particular the subject of evil in the context of history, philosophy, and such literature as these works represent.

May be Camus's finest novel, displaying as it does both the best and the worst of human nature. "The good man, the man who infects hardly anyone, is the man with the fewest lapses of attention." Yes!

This book is truely a masterpiece, but no one should be made to read it until they are truely ready. It asks questions of each reader that challenge beliefs one may have based one's entire life on. Good luck.

I thought this book was an easy read. A good addition to the "War Never Changes" section of my library. He seemed as detached from this book as his plague-stricken town. So at times I found him to be entirely too obtuse but overall, pretty solid read.

I found the book extremely dull and boring. I can on the other hand understand and apprecitate why it's regarded as a classic. Camus'es style of writing conveys emotions very well and is more suited for a people who are very much into philosophy.
Camus used the word "abstract" in a way I never thought of using it and found that very interesting. The plague represents an "abstraction" because it is so difficult to comprehend. The plague kills many people and forces everyone in the city into internment camps. The book centers around three characters one of whom is a doctor. The three characters are unusually contemplative and philosophical. This is what dulled the book for me. The characters simply didn't seem like real people and I could not see them as anyone I'd ever meet. Another thing about the story that bothered me was the fact that the events described was a fictional account of events taking place in an Algerian town, yet Arabs are seldom mentioned. There is no mention at all of the Arabic language or Islam. There is no trace of Arabic or Islamic influence anywhere. No one in the book has an Arabic or Islamic name, there are no Muslims anywhere. There are many parts of the book however that mention Christianity and churches. So it's also very culturally biased.

Life is hard and then you die. In this story, that view of life is concentrated. We are all on a conveyor belt relentlessly moving to death. Camus speeds up the belt dramatically to force the reader to think about the meaning of life.

With the exception of The Myth of Sysiphus this is Camus' best work in the field of existentialist thought. The Plague provides rich characters who demonstrate "authentic" living in the face of adversity and danger, and shows the reader that life, real life, can only be realized by looking danger in the face and thumbing your nose at it. Camus does a magnificant job of integrating the often impenatrable philosophy of Heidegger and Sartre into a wonderfully woven work of literature.

the store customers: Don't be like me. Don't wait until you're 51 to read "The Plague" It's a rarity: a real page-turner AND a moving meditation on staying human in a world of fear and suffering. Great stuff.

The Plague by Albert Camus is neither his greatest work nor a breakthrough piece of literature. This book was just an extremely bland allegory of some parts of the Bible.

In the beginning of the book, we see that the town of Oran is absorbed in itself, not really concerned with outside issues. The town is even built so that it faces away from the sea almost as to close itself off from the rest of the world. The town's citizens blindly go about each day just trying to gain monetary success and riches. They are in a self-absorbed ignorant bliss.

A plague descends upon this town and their everyday lives are disrupted. Father Paneloux gives a sermon to the frightened town saying that the plague is a sign of God's discontent with the sins of the town. This is of relevance to the biblical flood, which was caused by the people's losing touch with God, and a life of deeper purpose and meaning. As the plague progresses, Father Paneloux changes his view of the plague and calls it an "ultimate test of faith". Obviously this resonates strongly with the story of Job and how was he was tortured by Lucifer to prove that if indeed Job had full faith in God. Camus describes these incidences with the least amount of care or interest. One might as well read straight from the source of the "teachings" of The Plague, the Bible.

This book had very dry prose that was difficult to get through. Camus's trademark existentialist flavor and intrigue was also sorely lacking, in my opinion. There is nothing in this book that one can't get from elsewhere. Spend your money and time on Le Etranger (The Stranger).

To put it bluntly, The Plague is not the best example of Albert Camus' writing. The Plague was written after The Stranger and before The Fall and acts as a transition state between his other two major works. Somehow though, it is less effective than both its predecessor and its successor.

The story is told through the narrative style that Camus favors, but in a more formal and impersonal style than what his readers would be familiar with. There is a noticeable lack of dialogue as the reader is lead through the events surrounding the outbreak of bubonic plague that Camus chronicles, leading to the problem of overly drawn-out passages. Overall, the structuring of this version is honestly very poor with seemingly minimal attention paid to syntactical continuity.

Content-wise, The Plague is centered around existentialist ideas and explorations like the rest of Camus' work. Like with every one of his novels, he pursues a different aspect of existentialism by variation of plot and presentation. The Plague explores the meaninglessness of human life aspect of existentialism, through the preoccupation of the villagers of Oran with their "business" and the meaninglessness in the way a plague begins to wipe out everyone. The intention of this is to prove the common conception that "In fact, it comes to this: nobody is capable of really thinking about anyone, even in the worst calamity" (241), but the opposite of this is shown by a few select characters. One of the few shining points of this novel is that Camus effectively conveys through his characters the key existentialist idea that while life may be meaningless, man can give himself meaning by struggling against the very meaninglessness he is condemned to.

The Plague is not a book for neophytes to the work of Albert Camus. It is neither a well written book nor a shining example of existentialism at its best. Sadly, the story is a wall in and of itself to get over in order to arrive at the point Camus was trying to make. The Plague is the least developed novel of Camus' three, and is definitely not a "must-read."

The Plague is easily one of the best ten novels ever written, far surpassing even the erstwhile classic The Stranger. Whereas we examine an uncommonly cold-hearted man in a normal world in the pages of The Stranger, in this novel it is a harsh outside world which closes in on a group of fascinating characters. It is in this much more developed context that Camus' most remarkable notions of humanity, life, and existence can be fleshed out and communicated more effectively. The lessons of good, normal lives in a world gone mad are much more instructive and meaningful than the observations in The Stranger of a man gone mad in a normal world.
A word to the wise: when large numbers of rats come out of the woodwork and commence dying nasty, bloody deaths in the streets and houses, something is definitely wrong. In the port city of Oran, the population ignores the signs of danger and only grudgingly admits that an epidemic, a form of the bubonic plague to be exact, has taken root in their city. The protagonist, Dr. Rieux, is a doctor who finally helps convince the authorities to take extreme measures in the interest of public safety and to eventually quarantine the entire town. Over the course of the novel, we get to observe the manner in which Dr. Rieux, his companions, and prominent men of the community react to the worsening plague and its social consequences. Dr. Rieux has just sent his unhealthy wife off to a sanitarium before the plague breaks out, and he must suffer her absence alongside the stresses of working 20+ hours a day trying to save people's lives while accomplishing little more than watching them die horrible deaths. Dr. Rieux's attempts to make sense of everything is a basic pulse of the story; an atheist, he cannot find happiness but goes on day after day fighting the disease with all his might because that is what he as a doctor is supposed to do. His friend Tarrou supplies much of the knowledge we glean about the reactions of society as a whole as month after month of isolation continues in the face of death's greedy fingers. His journal records small but important facts about all manner of men, yet he himself cannot be said to find ultimate peace. We first encounter M. Cottard after he has hanged himself and been saved before death. A criminal type yet not a bad man, his initial worries over inquiries into his suicide attempt fade away as the plague's grip on Oran tightens. He emerges from a self-imposed exile to actually become a communicating member of society; he alone seems to enjoy the plague because it makes everyone else like him, forced to live each day with the fear of a brooding, horrible fate. Then there is M. Grande, one of my favorite characters in all of literature. A simple civil service employee, he devotes himself to volunteer work computing plague statistics and the like while still continuing his fervent efforts at writing a novel. Grande's wife left him years earlier because he got too wrapped up in his work and lost the words to communicate his love for her; he began writing a novel in an attempt to find those words. With great devotion and commitment he works on his writing, determined to produce a perfectly crafted novel, one where each word is meaningful and necessary for the story--in short, one that will inspire the future publisher to introduce it to his publishing house cohorts with the phrase, "Hats off, gentlemen." After untold months of dedicated effort, Grande has yet to get the first sentence to sound exactly right; he engages all of his efforts into perfecting this one sentence, sure that the rest of the novel will fall into place after it is perfected.
These main characters are all fascinating character studies. Not all of them live to see the plague's end, but each of them struggles to find meaning in his own experience--e.g., one character continues living because that is what is required of human beings, to go on fighting for life in a meaningless world; another character seeks to become a saint of sorts by helping his fellow man fight the pestilence. The overriding message I was left with at the end is that life is worth living despite the arbitrary cruelties of an unforgiving world because there is more good in man than there is evil. I found that the book delivered in fact a rather darkly uplifting celebration of the human spirit; one's loved ones give life its meaning in a hostile world. The Plague succeeds in ways The Stranger never could because the characters in this novel are utterly human and represent diverse aspects of the lives of each of us.

A review of a book,that is this profound in nature ,does not deserve the muck of words. it on the otherhand is worthy of sheer brevity. Excellent ...i think sums it up, mind you rather weakly though. The imagery is awesome, perhaps only matched by Dostoyevsky..Read it. Recommend it to others. For everybody deserves a first hand experience of genius, in its purest form.

A tremendous work that reads like a "relaxed" thriller. This is a must read for style, content, imagry, etc. Lots of meaning on several levels. I leave it to other reviewers to dissect it in their egotism, but I do want to mention that Camus was in Oran at the time of the plague.

So many stories are about Joe or Eva or Ricardo. This is a novel that elevates itself beyond the personal to the social; it addresses how Joe or Eva or Harry will behave themselves regardless of who they are, dependent on the social circumstances in which they find themselves; and in the social circumstance of The Plague, they generally rise above who they might've been elsewise. Probably one of the best I've ever read.

I was incredibly taken in by The Plague. The languaga is so ,agnificent that I imagine the original French must be even more so. The way Camus conveys the mindsets of the townfolk serves as a perfect example of the hu,an condition.

I was incredibly taken in by The Plague. The languaga is so ,agnificent that I imagine the original French must be even more so. The way Camus conveys the mindsets of the townfolk serves as a perfect example of the hu,an condition.

I have to say, I did not understand this book. I am probably one of the top english students in my high school class, one of the most capable of staying open minded while reading any book.

But this book I simply could not understand. There were brief moments throughout the book where I would understand and I could tell what an incredible writer this man was. I can't tell you what translation it was that I did read, but maybe it was partly that...maybe it was because I was also reading an extremely poor translation of the Death of Ivan Ilyich at the time, but for whatever reason, I feel as though I missed the big idea of this book.

To me, the only thing that is memorable is the amount of death.

However, I am extremely willing to give it another go-- but it will have to wait until I get through my Russian kick and until I read a few pages of several different translations.

This book was remarkable. Readers who think the descriptions are 'too slow' need to have some patience and tolerance while reading it. It answers some of the fundamental questions of human existence and should give all readers some new questions to ask themselves.

After finishing this book I look back on it and feel as though not much was actually said. I enjoyed the perspective on people reactions to such awful conditions, but, to me the book seemed very wordy.
Perhaps this was just due to personal taste and this is not my type of read.

The book is alright, but jeeze how much salvia does the guy reading has in his mouth? I can't tell if he's eating or has piece of hard candy in his mouth or eating ice cream or just has an abundance amount of salvia in his mouth.... I couldn't finish the audio book because it was just so gross to listen to.

I was absolutely blown away by the 5 star reviews of this book. Some people loved it so much they said it changed their lives.
I was so utterly bored by this book I wanted to cry.
It was long winded and the characters were not at all interesting. Pages and pages and pages and pages of description and thoughts by the good doctor Rieux who was not very interesting.
And the struggle between man and god; good versus evil was all fine and well but the plague is the plague not anything evil or wonderful just the plague.

I guess this should be more like 3 stars, but I am baffled by these rave reviews. I started this in high school and abandoned it after about 100 pages because it seemed to be going nowhere.

Last year I read The Stranger and loved it (although it's a much quicker read), and figured my immaturity and impatience had made me miss some important underlying themes and developments in The Plague.

But nope, I was totally correct and wish I hadn't just wasted these hours. You can literally read the first 100 pages of this book (maybe less), and the last 20 or so, and you haven't missed a beat.

There are two types of people in The Plague: those that are separated from loved ones, and those that are not. How much time can you spend recreating the exact same descriptions of the emotions of these two groups, which rarely (if ever) changes in a way that isn't painfully obvious or expected.

Seriously, if you DO read this and get past the 100 page mark and start seeing how painfully stagnant this novel is, just know that it continues to the last page (with the exception of the very mild and sloppy cessation of the plague, and the even MORE painfully obvious confession of the source of narration).

In Albert Camus' The Plague, the very efficient town of Oran seems to deny the very definition of humanity as it forgets itself in its dealings with business and commerce, its preoccupation with cultivated habits, and the strict routine of its residents. The plot is intense, frightening, yet at the same time, seemingly distant as the people of Oran refuse to accept the reality of the plague and continue to exist within their own worlds. Indeed, Camus uses the plague to tackle multiple ideas and themes, of which I have only skimmed the surface. Reading this novel specifically from a perspective on global health ethics, I realize that Camus masterfully captures the spirit of solidarity and freedom, or the lack thereof. His plot, seemingly repetitive as each day passes by with more death and more death and even more death, gains meaning only from a deeper reading, and that is to be expected of Camus. In my opinion, The Plague is a necessary read for any person with an appreciation for literature, and it may even possibly be one of his best works.

Rating: 5/5, definite buy.