The Plauge

"The unusual events described in this chronicle occurred in 194 - at Oran." From the first sentence of Albert Camus' critically acclaimed novel, The Plague, you can tell narrator participation in the story will be crucial to convey central facts, events and character descriptions. Winner of the 1957 Nobel Prize in Literature, Camus goes on to describe events happening in the coastal Algerian town of Oran during the outbreak of a plague. He decides to focus on a small group of people who interact throughout the book, and the effects of the growing epidemic on each of them.

The story surrounds Dr. Bernard Rieux, one of the prominent town doctors, and his relations with his patients and other town members. Tarrou is another “witness on the period” that the book revolves around: “his notebooks comprise a sort of chronicle of those strange early days we all lived through” (24). This phrase not only reveals the book’s structure and the fact that it’s “made up” of different collections and recollections, but also the odd narrative presence. Speaking as a witness of this plague, and using words such as “we” and “our,” the narrator’s identity isn’t revealed until the end of the novel.

As the pestilence escalates, communication with the “outside world” is shut down and the general public gets increasingly worried about the rising death toll and effects of the disease on the town. The core of the story revolves around the characters reactions to death and the rapidly spreading, fatal plague. Most likely based on the bubonic plague that occurred in Oran in the mid 19th century, this book focuses mainly on how a population deals with an epidemic and ultimately, the inevitability of life and death.

Overall, this book was pretty average in my mind. For some reason, I thought it was going to be as scientific as say, The Hot Zone, but I was slightly disappointed when I found it was more of a philosophical story with science at the core. Although Camus uses very eloquent language to describe his characters emotions and behavior, the detail of the plague and individuals the make up the central story isn’t extensive enough. In short, the writing style is very graceful, but my expectations were too high regarding the left-brain side of the novel. Because the book was written in the mid 20th century and set centuries before that, it’s completely understandable that the scientific aspect of the storyline isn’t very detailed.

Personally, I find the writing much too vague and almost disconnected to have any real attraction to the story and plot. Even though the premise is reasonably likeable, I feel that Camus doesn’t connect readers to the characters or events in the book. Although I understand the point of the novel is to convey Camus’ opinion on how the world deals with the absurd (people cannot find meaning in the universe because there is none), I was expecting more detail and captivating events, characters, or even basic writing. I’d recommend this to readers who like philosophy with a hint of science mixed in, but not to those who are drawn to a more factual, to-the-point style of writing.