HomeGroupsTalkZeitgeist
Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

The Stranger by Albert Camus
Loading...

The Stranger (original 1942; edition 1946)

by Albert Camus, Stuart Gilbert (Translator)

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations / Mentions
22,39424156 (3.97)1 / 359
SeriousGrace's review
The quick and dirty about The Stranger: Meusault kills a man while on a weekend vacation with his girlfriend. Part I entails the events leading up to the murder and Part II is post-murder arrest and trial. The interesting component to the story is Meursault's (although not surprising) attitude towards the crime. From the very beginning Meursault has an apathy towards life in general. When he is confronted with a marriage proposal or a job offer he feels nothing. He barely shows emotion when his mother dies. It's as if he doesn't care about anything and yet, curiously, he keeps an old scrapbook where he collects things from the newspapers that interest him. He doesn't seem to understand love/hate relationships like the one his neighbor has with his dog of eight years. Meursault's attention span is also something to note. He is often distracted by lights being too bright, the ringing of bells and the chatter of people around him. the presence of light is particularly interesting since it is the sun that "causes" Meursault to murder.
When Meursault murders a stranger for no apparent reason the fact he did it is not up for debate. It is the reason why that is questioned. Calling Meursault The Stranger is a contradiction because he is not a stranger in the traditional sense. He is not a loner or outcast. He has friends, coworkers, even a girlfriend. What Meursault is a stranger to is expected societal behavior, like mourning the loss of a parent or having feelings for someone he is in a sexual relationship with. Nothing that happens around Meursault has an emotional impact on him. ( )
  SeriousGrace | Jun 7, 2012 |
All member reviews
English (215)  French (7)  Spanish (7)  Finnish (2)  Italian (2)  Portuguese (2)  Dutch (2)  Danish (1)  Swedish (1)  Norwegian (1)  Hebrew (1)  All languages (241)
Showing 1-25 of 215 (next | show all)
I can't decide on a rating for this - I'm going to have to think about it some more. Definitely brilliant, I'm just not sure how I feel about it! ( )
  humblewomble | Oct 19, 2014 |
Hard to read... not in the sense that it's a difficult book to understand but difficult to swallow. Depressing in a very bad way. ( )
  yougotamber | Aug 22, 2014 |
Well written by a gifted writer but not his best although touted as it. ( )
  JVioland | Jul 14, 2014 |
Albert Camus' first novel (orig.pub.1942 in France; first American translation pub.1946) beguiles most readers even as it bewilders them. The questions, What's wrong with Mersault? Why does he kill the Arab? Why does he shoot the man four more times? Why doesn't he say he is sorry or express some bit of remorse, if only to save himself from the guillotine? seem to evade satisfactory answers. Mersault's motives seem as much a mystery to him as to the reader, to say nothing of the prosecution lawyer who denounces him and the judge who condemns him. Indeed, to most readers, Camus' absurdist antihero seems distinctly motiveless; given his characteristic response to any emotional appeal--variations on "I said I did but that it didn't matter"--one might fairly decide that to ask about Mersault's motives is to ask an impertinent question. Perhaps a more useful question is, "How does a young man in good health, with a decent job and at least a small circle of friends, come to believe that everything he or anyone else feels, says, thinks, or does is meaningless?"

The easy (and unhelpfully reductive) answer is that this fellow is a sociopath. As well as such a diagnosis might seem to account for Mersault's peculiar, evidently cold-blooded detachment from the cares and feelings of other people, it does not explain how he comes to hold very much the same attitude toward himself. Sociopaths, modern psychiatry tells us, are colossal narcissists: self-loving beyond the verge of delusion, solipsistic to the point of self-imprisonment. Mersault, conversely, seems to love himself neither more nor less than he likes or is indifferent to anyone else. Except in the novel's final pages, in which the chaplain's insistence on God's redemptive forgiveness inspires Mersault's rage--and precipitates his awareness that "Nothing, nothing mattered, and I knew why"--his opinions are mostly neutral, his emotions generally flat. He seems to find pleasure in certain activities--sex; swimming--and enjoys food and drink, at times even craving indulgence. And yet, each experience is merely of the moment: here now, done once, gone forever. It might be repeated, it might not. Would he like to have sex again with Marie? Well, he guesses he would--probably he would, very much. But it doesn't matter. Mersault is a man always performing a psychic shrug: people are what they are; I don't care and neither should you; the world is what it is; thinking and talking about it will never change it; I am a man like any other; my thoughts and feelings are neither more nor less important, significant, or interesting to me than anyone else's. Needless to say, these sentiments are foreign to our ideas of a sociopath.

If we exclude an explanation of character based on organic deviancy, deformity, or impairment, we must conclude that Mersault's thoroughgoing estrangement from everything we might call human caring--excepting fear of death, which he seems to have--is a chosen attitude. That is, he has decided--either knowingly, in a moment of conscious choice, or uncannily, through occasional accretions of evolving awareness--that this emotional posture of not-caring, together with a belief that everything "doesn't matter," is the only possible stance to take in opposition to mortal existence, which itself is inherently meaningless because it is finite. No one can live forever, so everything a person feels, believes, etc., becomes lost, finished, canceled-out when he dies. Any person's love, hate, and so forth has only limited--Mersault might say, "momentary"--meaning, at best; and such ephemeral significance is nothing to get excited about, take "seriously" (whatever that might mean), or, what is most important to Mersault's predicament, use as a basis for judging any other person's actions, utterances, feelings, or lack of same. And so it is that he is able to think, standing in the dock and listening to the accusations made against him, "I had never been able to truly feel remorse for anything. My mind was always on what was coming next, today or tomorrow."

Mersault's failure to articulate the rationale for his existential detachment, especially in court when his life is at stake, seems a consequence of inability rather than defiance. He knows what he believes but not why he believes it. He has evolved toward detachment rather than having chosen it. Of course, to arrive at a psychic place of not-caring--to become a stranger--and accept it as one's permanent situation must entail assent. At some point, Mersault must have said to himself, perhaps on a level without words, "This attitude is the only one possible. I accept it." Or perhaps explicit assent is superfluous; if detachment is the only possible response to mortal existence in an indifferent universe, to assent or object changes nothing, for no other choice exists. To attempt to invent or imagine one's way out of the absurdist dilemma might provide a lifetime's worth of diversion and a some temporary psychic comfort, yet these efforts, likewise merely temporal, are foredoomed to failure. To believe them redemptive or a way toward salvation is to demonstrate bad faith.

Read along these lines, Mersault's subdued emotional affect, absent grief at Mother's death, haphazard act of murder, and other behavioral oddities conventionally regarded as bizarre are symptoms of soul-sickness rather than mental illness. Camus would not have cited the soul as the locus of Mersault's affliction. He likely would have attributed his problem to Mersault's entire existential being: his brave awareness that the world is as indifferent as he is and everyone is condemned. Sartre, if he deigned to comment on Mersault's condition, probably called it nausea.

Although you won't find it in The Stranger, the antidote to absurdist detachment is conscience: not just fellow-feeling (also known as compassion--an all-around helpful sentiment) but mutual respect of our human dignity. We all know we are going to die. Unless we are Albert Einstein or Leonardo da Vinci or Abraham Lincoln, etc., we all know we will be forgotten (and how many of today's ill-educated Americans can speak more than one informative sentence about the identity of Leonardo?). It is not necessary to remind anyone of these grim truths. To do so is not merely impudent; it is cruel. So, too, is it gratuitously punishing to shape one's thoughts and govern one's emotions according to the certainty that it all doesn't matter, anyway, because in long run or short we all are dead matter in a universe incapable of caring, or even noticing, that we're gone. The point, rather, is that, for a time, we are all alive; and while we are alive, our actions, words, and thoughts have consequences; and the human beings most near and dear to us suffer the consequences we create every day, moment by moment. How do you want to treat the persons you love? Never mind that this love is not eternal because you must eventually die: how do you most prefer to express your love while you are alive? How would you like the persons you love to treat you? As a trivial life-form whose presence is as negligible as a May-fly's simply because you lack immorality? Or as a worthy, decent, human being capable of imagining immortality and every good thing in everlasting plenitude, yet condemned, through no fault of your own, to perish? The human predicament is certainly absurd, yet each human's response needn't be. Be mindful of the consequences, however transient these are. In your time, the time you are alive and share with those you love, what you do, say, and think, matters.

Mersault’s human crime is his failure to recognize this truth. In this sense, his conscience is guilty despite that fact that Mersault never feels it. It is difficult to argue that he deserves decapitation as punishment for his moral blindness, but it is not astonishing to discover that the presiding magistrate thinks so. To (de)value the temporal circumstances of one’s brief life in terms of the eternal indifference of the cosmos is to excuse every unkindness and turn a blind eye to every atrocity. It is to shrug one's shoulders at every tangible wrong--including the Nazi death camps, which Camus, a brave man who fought with the French Resistance, cannot possibly intend. His composition of The Stranger preceded the worst of the Holocaust, possibly preceded his knowledge that any such catastrophe was unfolding. For articulations of his mature thinking, we must refer to his post-War writings.

~JL ( )
1 vote bookie53 | Jun 9, 2014 |
This is my second outing with Camus and, as with The Plague, The Outsider hasn’t disappointed. My Camus journey will certainly continue. Camus has a minimal and uncomplicated style of writing which is certainly refreshing. He manages to produce simple sentences with a simple use of words which nonetheless convey so much meaning and atmosphere. I find his work extremely accessible and direct. He is not a man to waste words and compose sentences which end up being a paragraph long. You know, the ones where you need oxygen to complete them. The ones where you need the Oxford English Dictionary at hand before discovering the sentence really didn’t mean a thing although it sounded good as you were reaching for the Oxygen once again *and breathe* Or maybe that’s just me. To each ones own.

"Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don’t know. I got a telegram from the home: “Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours.” That doesn’t mean anything. Maybe it was yesterday. (p.13)"

The Outsider is a simple story with the main protagonist, Meursault, narrating a short time in his life. Here we see him tell of his life, working, sitting by his window watching the world go by, the funeral of his mother, finding a girlfriend, making love and finally going through a personal tragedy which would have most people climbing the walls with fear. Meursault presents this with all the excitement and emotion of a rock. It’s all the same to him. He is matter of fact, descriptive and emotionless. He gives no reasons for his actions and offers no feelings or insight. That is left up to the reader to assume. Things are as they are. In ‘normal’ mainstream society, he could be described as detached, emotionless and apathetic. They’d probably call him a sociopath these days.

Early in the story, Meursault tells us about the time when his girlfriend broached the subject of marriage. He provides a typical response to her request, one of indifference, which runs throughout the book.

"Marie came that evening and asked me if I’d marry her. I said I didn’t mind; If she was keen on it, we’d get married. Then she asked me again if I loved her. I replied, much as before, that her question meant nothing or next to nothing – but I supposed I didn’t. “If that’s how you feel’ she said, “why marry me?” I explained that it had no importance really but, if it would give her pleasure, we could get married right away."(p.48)

Meursault’s indifferent acceptance to whatever comes his way is intentional. It is a wonderful portrayal of the ‘Absurdist’ philosophy which Camus held and which is presented brilliantly with the character of Meursault.

Reading books by Camus is an adventure where one can’t help but look at what lies behind the story in order to give it greater meaning. Without going into a full discourse on philosophy and Absurdism (of which I am sure I would fail), this school of thought describes the conflict between our need to find rational meaning to life where it is impossible to do so. It is in effect ‘absurd’ to think we can possibly know the meaning of life in a universe where there are so many unknowns. As a consequence, the answer to the fundamental question we always seek ‘why are we here?’ is impossible to discover. The Absurdist school of thought would say that there are three ways in which we react to and cope with this conflict. We either comment suicide and thus evade it or we take on religion or spirituality and thus deny the conflict exists by assuming a higher purpose or, finally, we accept this conflict and continue to live life with this knowledge.

The world seems absurd because we are part of nature and yet able to take a step back from nature and rationalize our place in the world. We become aware of what we call the Absurd when we cannot reconcile the two experiences: what we instinctively feel to be true and what we rationally believe to be true. (Simon Lea,The Camus Society)

Meursault accepts everything which happens and comes his way. He attributes no meaning to his actions and offers no explanations. It’s an extreme example which creates this motive less, detached, emotionless character. He isn’t particularly realistic or likeable nor does he invite empathy from the reader. However, he does generate interest and intrigue and that, I believe, is one of the points being made. As humans we always want to find rationality and answers where there may be none. Where we don’t have the full information and facts we make judgements, stereotypes and ideologies to make sense of our world in order to ease the conflict the Absurd brings. With the creation of Meursault, Camus has provoked us to try to provide our own analysis to his actions and words with the very little information we have.

"If I try to seize this self of which I feel sure, if I try to define and to summarize it, it is nothing but water slipping through my fingers. I can sketch one by one all the aspects it is able to assume, all those likewise that have been attributed to it, this upbringing, this origin, this ardor or these silences, this nobility or this vileness. But aspects cannot be added up." (An Absurd Reasoning, Camus)

The Outsider is a quick read (at 120 pages) which nonetheless packs a punch. I find it encourages an interesting discourse and further reading. Yet again, I am astounded at how Camus is able to write about what could be complex theories in such an accessible and simple way. More Camus will be coming my way….. ( )
1 vote lilywren | May 17, 2014 |
I'm grateful that I read [The Wretched of the Earth] before this. Colonialism as a whole is a rather predictable monster, but the specifics of just how far the conquering hoard goes in each particular case and country needs to be reviewed for suspension of disbelief purposes. Kneejerk incredulity and/or sentiment at the horrors of reality rejuvenates itself far too quickly for my tastes.

It is perfectly possible to loathe one's mother. We as a species are capable of such immense levels of arbitrary hatred, the stockpile of instantaneous dislikes upon first meetings a popular occurrence in public entertainment and private commiserations. Why should there not be a chance of the one who birthed you being the sort you could never like, admire, or love? There's the imprinting factor, true, but that is a thing of the senses, subject to the binding of self-inflicted control like anything else. A cold turkey of the hormonal heart.

I was attached to Existentialism for a time, but the passing of the moment and all the subsequent rebuttal upon rebuttal upon countless rebuttal has made me give up on the declaration of the maxim within that particular field. Debates make for paltry engagements when I have little experience and less interest in all those other name-dropping convolutions of ubiquitous dead white men, so I will stick with what I know. Besides, Camus himself didn't like the existentialist label, although I will keep the tag as a reminiscing shortcut to the proper mood.

What is the difference between someone without sight and someone without empathy? Both are missing a common interchange between themselves and the world, interchanges that allow others with a full set to receive a certain range of stimulation both voluntary and otherwise, exchanges of receptors and neuronal firings on the lighter side of pleasure and the danker side of pain. The lack of said interchange reduces a world accordingly, but more importantly modifies the perceptions of the individuals of said world. While a blind person as consequence of their missing sense may wreak as much havoc as one without empathy, it is the latter persona that we fear, for with them we have no god of remorse to call down from on high in the realm of justice. For the blind we have pity, for the unfeeling we have the deepest fear.

It is intriguing to note that the popular "sacrifice one sense and all the others are honed to the extreme" trope holds true here, for Meursault is nothing if not a sensualist. His thoughts compose themselves around observations both tactile and otherwise, seizing upon the systems of the humans around him only when they are efficient or forward thinking enough to impress him. A consequence of a lifetime rid of human distraction, leaving the mind open to pressure, temperature, the physics of ensuring oneself a spot in the world with a minimum of fuss and comfortable levels of manipulation? It is a consequence of this line of thought that I wonder at the lauding of networking and the mob hysteria reaction to psychopathy. Really, who are you fooling? Yourself seems the only answer appropriate.

As I usually do when I want to get rid of someone whose conversation bores me, I pretended to agree.

The word 'absurd' in relation to this continues to mislead my lines of inquiry. I shall have to read more Camus to expand my contextualization of the concept to a sufficient degree. Until then, I shall think of it in terms of 'human', and leave it at that. ( )
3 vote Korrick | May 11, 2014 |
Excelente obra, como toda la literatura de Camus ( )
  anyulled | Apr 2, 2014 |

يُنهي ألبير كامي رائعته الغريبه ​
بجمله" في ذلك الليل الذي يفيض بالنجوم احسستُ للمره​ الأولى بعذوبة ورقة اللامبالاه ، واحسسست اني كُنت ​سعيداً في يومٍ من الأيام ، ومازلت حتى الأن اتمنى ا​ن ينتهي كل شىء ، واتمنى ان اكون هناك اقل وحده من ه​

هكذا ، بعد تجاربي مع البير كامي من قبل في الطاعون ​و سوء التفاهم وكاليجولا اختم اعماله بأهمها على الأ​

في البدايه تشعر بجو غريب في الروايه كأنها رتيبه او​ ممله ، او كأن الكاتب لا يهتم بإثارة اهتمام القراء​ لا يهتم بحيازة تعاطف القارئ مع البطل ، وكأنه يخبر​ك بشكل غير مباشر ، انه حتى هو وليس فقط بطله ، من ذ​لك النوع الذي لا يستطيع إلا ان يؤقلم معتقداته مع ا​

شىء في شىء يأخذك معه إلى عالم مختلف خاصةً بعد حدوث​ الفعل الرئيسي في الروايه ، ليُدخِلك إلى عالم مليئ​

لن تستطيع ان تصنف هذا العمل إذا كان عبثياً ، او سو​دوياً ، او ينتمي إلى المدرسه الكلاسيكيه ، ربما هو ​خليط من كل ذلك ! لكنه بالتأكيد يستحق القراءه والتم​


وكانت نسختي الورقيه ترجمة دكتور / محمد غطاس تحتوي ​على مقدمةٌ ممتعه .. مفيده وشارحه لأعمال ألبير كامي​ عموماً لكن اكثر مااعجبني بها ، إنها ليست مقدمه عل​ى الأطلاق ! فهي تأتي في مؤخرة الكتاب وهذا ماانادي ​به من فتره ، فهو لم يحرق لك الأحداث او يرغمك على ت​قبلها من وجهة نظر المترجم بل وضعها لك كخاتمه مفيده​ توضح الصعوبات وتبين نقاط الأبداع ​
( )
  Dina_Nabil | Mar 23, 2014 |
I was surprised at how sparse this was. I had no sense of place or feeling for the characters. Interesting concept, but not a philosophy that I share. ( )
  njcur | Feb 13, 2014 |
My introduction to Camus was back in a philosophy class as we read "The Myth of Sisyphus", the essay in which Camus argues for Sisyphus's happiness in an absurd sentence. Interested in this thought, I picked this book up and read and appreciated it less than the essay, partly because the plot and the main character's narration in the first part of the novel seemed boring to me. However, it all picks up at the second part where the court practically decides whether or not the man lived an actual life. What proceeds is a near poetic argument of absurdity, although it goes to no avail, for who will listen to a man that detaches himself from most of what makes us human--who will listen to a stranger?

Tentative 3 stars ( )
  Max-Tyrone | Feb 13, 2014 |
- [The Stranger] by [[Albert Camus]] This was my first Camus, which choice is an interesting coincidence. I chose it simply because it was available as a free ebook. Little did I know just how apropos the topic would be. My mother, like the narrator's, is in an assisted living home and this plays a major part of the story. This book has been reviewed and the story discussed at least a million times so I'm bypassing that. I just want to describe my experience of reading it. Every year I spend a month or so in the Sonoran Desert. It takes me a few days to settle in. As I slow down, I begin to see the subtleties of color and the large variety of plants, cactus. As I continue to slow, the desert life begins to finally catch my eye and I realize I am surrounded by lizards, insects, bunnies, coyotes. That was the experience I had of reading this book. There was something about it (the writing duh) that drew me right in and made me want to keep reading, yet nothing much was really happening. I liked the narrator but I could not have told you why. I don't know how anything so empty and lifeless could draw me in, but it did, it stuck, and I am still thinking about it. ( )
2 vote mkboylan | Jan 25, 2014 |
(Read in 2009.) Interesting read about a “loner” who buries his mother and then finds himself with the wrong kind of friends. He eventually kills another man and ends up on death row for the crime. The loner’s point of view is quite interesting – he seems to be short on emotion, not too attached to anything in his life---mother, girlfriend, friends. It seems he is just easy going and a bit disinterested in life in general. His only emotional outburst comes at the end of the story after the priest tries to convince him to turn to God and repent. I like that he does not capitulate but (finally) verbalizes his right to live his life as his own. ( )
  Becky221 | Jan 13, 2014 |
Introduction to Existentialism. I read it and couldn't believe that all my uncertain 17 year old's thoughts were put in writing. ( )
  allisonneke | Dec 17, 2013 |
The book was slow to hook me as I wasn't caught by the narrator's detached views of the world around him.

It wasn't until later on that I realized that was
a personality trait, not poor narration, and my interest picked up.

***SPOILERS***
When I got into part two, the confused nature of the narrator in regards to legal procedure reminded me of Kafka's The Trial. But his detachment also reminded me of the main Character in American Psycho. Not because of hate or an inability to control himself, but because he didn't grasp concepts of right and wrong or inappropriate behavior. The result was me feeling torn between pitying the guy for being in a predicament he truly didn't understand, and knowing that he did some things that were deserving of harsh punishment. I still don't know for whom I should feel pity, which is something I appreciate when a lot of the time, good and evil are so simply identified. ( )
  davadog13 | Nov 21, 2013 |
I had a pleasure reading this short, reflection inducing book. Most of all, I was appalled at the sense of "it's all the same" I felt when reading this book. I was led to examine myself and think "am I also that coldly calculating to others?" It was amusing, also to see what happens when context is ignored. I don't want to try and sound smart or recite the academic insights into this book: I just left it thinking this was a remarkable parable teaching the loneliness and meaninglessness of a detached, sterile, emotionless life.
  royceworld | Nov 9, 2013 |
létranger est différent des autres hommes qui subissent leur existence sans se poser de questions, il a du mal à reconnaître ses sentiments, et surtout il est marqué par une indifférence à ce qui l'entoure ( )
  saidjaoujat | Oct 25, 2013 |
Here's the thing, I remember that somewhere, for some class, I was supposed to read this. And because it was at one of those times that I had to read a book a week for more than one class that this one got left by the wayside and I managed to get around talking about Camus, mainly because I'd read the introduction or something.

[Helpful Note to all students: you'd be amazed at how you can manage in a discussion where you haven't completed all the reading if you
1) Learn how to listen intently and ask questions indicating you're interested (If you're a major in the field and this feels like work? Sign you need another major!)
and
2) Always read scholarly introductions. Whether you agree with the author or not, you'll often learn about the themes and historical background of the work.

Also 3) If you make a good faith effort to read at least the introduction and a small part of the book, and then participate in the conversation with questions, most professors are ok with you saying/confessing "I wasn't able to finish - sorry this was a multiple-book-assignment week for me - but I was curious about etc." (You're admitting you're interested in the subject enough to show up unprepared rather than skipping the class to hide - most profs are ok with this.)

You can do both of the first two without acting or lying because hey, if you're an English major you will definitely find yourself with so much assigned reading that it's not humanly possible complete - at one time or another. In fact, you may find yourself constantly in that situation the closer you are to graduating. Never fear, at the end of the semester just keep the books and read them at your own pace. Because it's likely those books/authors will come up again next semester.]

Happily an ebook of The Stranger is available here at Internet Archive.

Book, you are downloaded and I will read you. Just not yet. You'll have to get in line. Sorry about that. Lot of classics to imbibe lately.

  bookishbat | Sep 25, 2013 |
The sun plays a terrifying part in this book. It reminds me of the Nausea and of Crime and Punishment. He kills someone, but this crime is for him just an event more in his life. ( )
  Kirmuriel | Sep 19, 2013 |
Extremely well written ( )
  ronsea | Aug 23, 2013 |
This book was...not what I expected. The style is so unusual and so straight forward and brusque. I think it does a really good job of helping us to get inside Meursault's head, but I don't know if I like it. I also don't know what I expected from this book but what I got definitely wasn't it. But I liked it. I think? I dunno. I had a lot of weird non-feelings about this book, I guess because it didn't really make me feel much of anything and usually books make me really feel a lot of things. And it was weird to feel pretty meh about any book at all. Anyway, I think it was alright. It was entertaining, and I was curious to see how it ended. It kept me turning pages, and after a little bit of research on Camus, I did understand the absurdist view he was going for, I just don't think it was as amazing as everyone seems to make it out to be.

I especially enjoyed Marie and Salamano. Salamano was an interesting taste of reality in a silly setting. The idea of loving a dog as much as you hate it is something I can understand, even if it was taken to the extreme here. Marie was incredibly sweet, realistic, and entertaining. She was by far the best part of the book.

I think by the end, I was supposed to have taken a great, enlightening journey, understood Meursault's thought process, blah, blah, you know. I really didn't get it. It was good, but I'm afraid I only understand this on the basest level.

This is the most rambling review of all time. Ugh. ( )
  CayenneEllis | Aug 5, 2013 |
Psychological novel, very interesting, very French. Rather depressing too actually. Transports you to Algeria, to an alien colonial world - in that sense, it has a huge documental value. A must-read. ( )
  Miguelnunonave | Aug 5, 2013 |
I completely related to this book and I would read it again. I loved this book all the way through. ( )
  Laurakeggg | Jul 30, 2013 |
I'm quite familiar with the feeling of dissociation. This book allows you to see directly into that state of mind. A life lived in pure objectivity because somehow, the feeling of being a human and identifying with the general consciousness most live in has vanished. Everything around you feels as if you are merely an observer physically going through the motions just to get through life, but mentally you are somewhere else. Reality becomes a blurry dream. ( )
  Melissarochell | Jul 20, 2013 |
I can't explain why I like this book. The go with the flow attitude of the first part affected my personality. Anything I say about it I'm sure has already been said. Like I said, I can't really explain the appeal.
It sticks with you. ( )
1 vote Kari.Hall | Jul 15, 2013 |
I honestly can't remember why I liked this when I read it in high school. So. Depressing. And the protagonist is not even a real person, with actual emotions and motives you could relate to. I mean. I know that's also the point, but still. This book just makes me angry. ( )
  wirehead | Jul 9, 2013 |
Showing 1-25 of 215 (next | show all)

Quick Links

Swap Ebooks Audio
63 avail.
339 wanted
27 pay9 pay

Popular covers

Rating

Average: (3.97)
0.5 8
1 61
1.5 18
2 289
2.5 71
3 1004
3.5 272
4 2038
4.5 291
5 1783

Audible.com

Two editions of this book were published by Audible.com.

See editions

Penguin Australia

Three editions of this book were published by Penguin Australia.

Editions: 0141182504, 0241950058, 0141389583

Recorded Books

An edition of this book was published by Recorded Books.

» Publisher information page

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

Help/FAQs | About | Privacy/Terms | Blog | Contact | LibraryThing.com | APIs | WikiThing | Common Knowledge | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | 93,326,848 books! | Top bar: Always visible