Review – The Myth of Sisyphus

Absurdist critics have read a great deal of meaning into Albert Camus’s essay “The Myth of Sisyphus”.  The essay consists of four parts, and only the fourth part, eponymous with the essay, appears to be a common topic of discussion.

Camus begins his essay with an overview of the myth of Sisyphus: for arrogance, trickery, and assorted crimes against the divine, Sisyphus is condemned to roll a stone up a hill for all of eternity, each time nearing the top of the hill only to have the stone roll back down again, and his labor to begin again.

Camus contemplates the myth and declares that Sisyphus overcomes his fate in those moments when he descends from the summit, following his tumbling rock.  Many critics interpret Camus’s subsequent ruminations according to the common themes of absurdist philosophy.  Sisyphus, in choosing to follow his rock, overcomes the destiny that dooms him to a lifetime of failure to reach the summit.  Man creates meaning in a meaningless universe… hence the “absurd” nature of existence.  Man’s happiness rests on the commitment of this “absurd” act of imparting meaning, and the “absurdity” lies in the fact that this meaning, imparted by himself, makes him happy.

Camus concludes with the famous line “One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

Commentary

I think there is considerably more to this myth than meets the eye.  Assuming Camus’s true line of argument follows the common interpretation, it seems to me that the myth he has chosen is not a satisfactory one.  Within the myth, Sisyphus’s action is no choice.  The gods have decreed that he endlessly push his rock up the hill, and the gods have decreed that the rock fall back down, and that Sisyphus follow it.  While it is difficult to imagine what would happen if Sisyphus chose not to follow the rock, it is also irrelevant… the necessary, set conditions of the myth are not a matter of choice.  They are essential.  Sisyphus must push the rock.  The rock must fall.  Sisyphus must push the rock.  The rock must fall.  Etc.

Camus’s interpretation, then falls apart, since Sisyphus’s “choice” to follow the rock from the summit to the plain is, in the most charitable imagination, complaisance, or, more cynically, mere necessity.  While this does not invalidate Camus’s thesis, the inapplicability of the myth to the thesis forces one to question Camus’s boast “Ancient wisdom confirms modern heroism.”

Similarly, Camus’s application of the story of Oedipus rests on a single line that appears to me to be spurious, or rising from a charitable translation of the first lines of Oedipus at Colonus… The line “I conclude that all is well”, corresponding to the conclusion that Sisyphus is happy, is not present in the translations that I would have chosen.

Without ancient wisdom, Camus is merely presenting an interpretation of the world for the consideration of his readers.  He argues nothing, he proves nothing, he merely proposes.

Advertisement