tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33019812.post5241152242934265251..comments2024-01-15T05:26:06.518+00:00Comments on THOUGHTS OF XANADU: The Politics Of The OutsiderKubla Khanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11973223751363547679noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33019812.post-33665280032991279522007-03-05T00:06:00.000+00:002007-03-05T00:06:00.000+00:00well this is always easy to say, armchairphilosoph...well this is always easy to say, armchairphilosopher and such things<BR/>and it is not exactly so that he never was politically active, no?<BR/>My theory about Camus is that after he had reached this indifference point, or this is much better, not indifference, but the experience of the absurd, it is impossible to engage in political activities anymore, at least not so-called radical ones. And then the next step, and this is why I mentioned the Faulkner-book, is 'The Plague', in which you get over this indifference and operate in small areas, to develop feelings or care or solidarity for the people around you, whoever this will be, arabs, could be anyone. Principles are not everything.*https://www.blogger.com/profile/05680450955867041830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33019812.post-41922628388912521492007-03-04T23:37:00.000+00:002007-03-04T23:37:00.000+00:00thanks antonia for your remarks. HEART OF DARKNES...thanks antonia for your remarks.<BR/> HEART OF DARKNESS, by joseph conrad and the outsider seem to me two books, by two great thinkers, with exile' backgrounds, to simmer and leave a sour taste. both books, after many readings, seem indefensible as critiques of anything.<BR/>the heart of darkness is an adjectival insistence on evading the basic monstrosity of slave trade.alongwith the outsider, the fundamental flaw, please permit me to say, is in the presumed intellectual, moral, physical and cultural superiority of the civilizing western white man.<BR/>the mounds of skulls in conrad or the arab man in the outsider reflect the same malaise.<BR/>yes, there is indifference as a theme but indifference to what?<BR/>Camus had already chosen to live in France permanently when he died so tragically, and refused to be a party to any overt freedom from France for the Algerians.<BR/>Camus, like Sartre, became an armchair philosopher, participating in token civilized protests against furious atrocities.<BR/>It is in these new contexts that the outsider must be read.the outsider, i still feel, is an important work, albeit, in shadow now, in doubt.Kubla Khanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11973223751363547679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33019812.post-22406719498878947702007-03-04T22:53:00.000+00:002007-03-04T22:53:00.000+00:00oh I think it makes perfect sense that Camus 'negl...oh I think it makes perfect sense that Camus 'neglects' the death of he Arab. Of course he does not meniton him further, not because it is an arab, it could be anything, anyone. He just only describes the imperial system in its advanced lockedness. The main topic of the book is indifference. Indifference to the world, to arabs and not to mention how he treats women, so if we summarize now and apply political correctness at last, we will necessarily end up with Camus as a right-wing which grossly mischaracterizes in general his writing and life. You say he is not sensitive, on the contrary, he is very sensitive to all these powerrelations, what really imperalistic would be if he had written oh the poor arab, and now lets raise awareness and read this all as a pamphlet against colonialism. Then better one should go ahead with Frantz Fanon. <BR/>Of course does the Algerian have to die unannounced. That's just like it is in general unfortunately the real world. But at least he is honest about it and indifferent - and I would think it could have been anyone, it was the Algerian by accident, some minutes later it could have been someone completely else. It is really the question whether one doeshimjustice when one reads him as the evil colonialist who feared the evil arabs.<BR/><BR/>Faulkner's Requiem for a Nun is a good one in this respect, too. How things look like on the surface and what they describe in the background.*https://www.blogger.com/profile/05680450955867041830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33019812.post-46860031169808195432007-03-02T06:26:00.000+00:002007-03-02T06:26:00.000+00:00I had similar reservations about camus too when I ...I had similar reservations about camus too when I read this book. And I could not swallow it, thinking camus was copping out or taking sides. But, per my *hazy* recollection of the plot, I think Mersault took up the knife in the 1st place as a means to defend himself from the threat posed by the Arab. The heavy glare numbed his senses resulting in the activation of his defensive reflexes to kill the arab for guaranteeing his own safety, something which the law does not distinguish with an actual cold-blooded murder.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com