Customer Reviews

Happy Death

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I am a sophmore in high school at the moment and I read this book when I was in eighth grade. At that time I was very depresed and unhappy. I don't mean I was on the verge of suicide but I was just very gloomy. Then my english teacher told us we had to read a novel of our choosing and keep a journal on it. For some reason I choose this book. I had only read one of Camus's short stories: THE GUEST and that did not prepare me for the beauty of A HAPPY DEATH. I had never read anything of such raw unmitigated emotion! Camus tossed feelings around like jugglers do balls! When I had finished I felt at peace with myself for the first time in a year and a half. I urge everyone to read this book. Granted, there are structural problems but who cares! All that is left to say is: Thank you Albert! Thank you from the bottom of my heart!

Camus' book "A Happy Death" was never published in his lifetime. Camus was very specific and deliberate as to when he would publish what. This novel, the first written by Camus, has been published after being reclaimed from his papers.

The question that comes to mind then, is "Why did Camus never publish this work?" It seems that the book was a transitional writing for Camus. It allowed him to move forward from the life he had always thought about, to the life he believed he lived in, that being an "existential" existence.

In reading the book, one finds that Mersault, the protagonist, seems to have too many moments of happiness as compared to other protagonists in Camus' other publications. This in fact, is probably an autobiographical reflection of Camus' early life, and the book, a work to allow him to metamorphosize, transform his vision into what came next, "The Stranger."

The beauty of the novel is recognizing this transition and then, with such recognition, comes the ability to apply those thought patterns and feelings to Camus' later works, seeing how he transformed from a "regular" human being, to an "existentialist" one who has the feeling of being unique, and apart from others and the world around him.

The book gives valuable insight into Camus' mental process as he moves from where he was, to where he will go. For Camus readers, the book is truly a MUST. And for anyone with an interest in the "Existential" genre, it is truly an enlightening piece of literature.

I agree with another reviewer in that one has got to be prepared for Camus. I have only read The Stranger and The Plague in addition to this one, but found A Happy Death much better than The Plague. Also note that A Happy Death was not published by Camus during his lifetime and likely not intended to be, since much of A Happy Death is taken and used in The Stranger. For fans existentialism (which I am one) this book is a pretty fun and easy read, due to its very short length. I recommended it to a cousin I was vacationing with who had almost no philosophical background, and he read it in one day and enjoyed it well enough. But again, as I have written in my review of The Plague, one cannot help but wonder what gets lost in each translation. Giving the benefit of the doubt to Camus, this translator (Richard Howard) appears to have a better grip on the English side of the ball than does the translator of The Plague (Stuart Gilbert). Since this is (unofficially) Camus' first work, A Happy Death is a logical place to start, although note another reviewer's remarks that The Stranger and The Fall are both more enjoyable (but not The Plague according to me). A first-timer to Camus may be better served by trying The Stranger first - I'm positive Camus would prefer that starting point as well.

It's been written about "A Happy Death" that Camus' unpublished first novel was brilliantly written, and terrible organized. It's hard to deny that the novel may have some structure problems, but it's hard to care when it's written so beautifully. Philosophically, it hints at topics Camus would explore later (exile, suicide, rebellion and of course, the absurd). Even young Camus had a way with words, and although like the existentialist of his time he had a way of telling dark and depressing tales, he manages to write with an emphasis on the simple pleasures of life. Whether he's describing the act of bathing in the sun or savoring food items he has a way of making the reader want to live and experience life, for better or worse, to the fullest. "A Happy Death", in a literary sense, doesn't even come close to the heights of The Stranger (with which it bares many similarities) or The Plague (my personal favorite) but one really can't complain about a novel capable of reaffirming how beautiful (yet absurd) life can be.

A Happy Death is Camus' first novel - that's obvious from the start. Having previously read The Stranger and The Fall, I guess I was spoiled. I didn't really appreciate A Happy Death. It was a brooding, hedonistic tale laced with the same moral dilemmas as The Stranger and The Fall yet it lacked the beauty of both. The value in this novel, however, is that, in combination with his other works, it shows the development of a very talented writer. Do I recommend it? Only for those who've read everything else by Camus and have a bit of patience.

I read the Stranger in high school and loved it so when I saw this book on the shelf I had to read it.

This book was written prior to the Stranger and still centers on the brooding Meursault. The difference here is that Meursault gets away with his crime and is allow to continue with life.

The book is a beautiful record of a culture that no longer exists and provides, I think, a much better exposition of existentialism and how one can acheive some measure of happiness in a world, which most likely, has no meaning.

This is one of my favorite books and is an excellent alter-text to the Stranger.

In "A Happy Death," Meursault wants to have an "encounter"with the universe. His reasons here are no better than his reasons forsurrendering his life in "The Stranger." The later Meursault wasmuch too ordinary a man to die for something as abstract and fancy asthe idea of absurdity--and his earlier version gives no evidence ofthe stubbornness or greatness of soul that one would need to cough hislungs out in a place simply because its landscape isdramatic. Meursault is a Raskolnikov too, but without the passion. Hekills a legless man for his money, arguing, in a sort of pervertedMarxism, that "money is one of the surest and swiftest means ofacquiring one's dignity." He says that "it takes time tolive. Like any work of art, life needs to be thought about." Thereis scant evidence in the book of this thinking: in fact, Meursaultspends more time sleeping than any fictional character since Rip VanWinkle. Like the hero of "The Stranger," he performs onlygratuitous acts. When he enjoys sleeping with a girl, he abandonsher. After acquiring the money necessary for his dignity, Meursaultinexplicably goes to Prague, where he is haunted by the smell ofcucumbers. In "A Happy Death,"cucumbers, the smell of cucumbers,terrify him "on every corner." It is a peculiarity of Camus'sprotagonist that he is never moved by ordinary influences. The authoreither had a curious view of human nature or such a powerful lack ofinterest in it that he could not be bothered to describe itconvincingly. Meursault murders, marries and dies, after achievingsome sort of beatitude, and we can't believe--let aloneunderstand--any of it, for we are not meant to. Camus describes theworld in a way that we are but mere strangers to it all.

I love this book... but.... honestly, I think that this is probably the least important work by Camus (sorry for those terms) and the least relevant-- to me it strikes interest having read twenty books on him-- to see where he was coming from-- but as a novel or philosophical piece, it is less interesting than any other-- and less well crafted as well.....

This is a vaguely similar story to the Stranger (the first part anyway) and has a similar main character and similar polt lines. What differs is that it is by a younger author with less worldly experience and who has faced less worldly difficulties (i.e. the beginnings of WWII). As such, it comes off as not as good of a book....

If you haven't read 'The Rebel' or any of his other books, read them first. Then come back to this one. I promise you'll make it....

The stoic and indifferent nature of the main character (who reminded me of Edmond Dantes) toward almost every aspect of life was fascinating. To be so emotionally removed from everything that he experienced made him, and this work, more appealling than the albeit similar character in The Stranger. For many people, this is a more accurate portrayal of life than the love-filled poetry by people such as Marlowe and Frost.

In "A Happy Death", Camus took a different approach to writing what later became "The Stranger". The latter work is famous (and sometimes despised) for it terse, efficient prose, its brutal frankness, and its avoidance of moral consideration. As a result, many readers do not know what to make of Merseault and often mistake him for a psychopath. In "A Happy Death", Camus writes in the third person and adds considerably more elements to the story. The ending also differs from "The Stranger".

In "The Stranger", Merseault kills an Arab for no apparent reason other than caprice or irritability. Merseault is then put on trial and condemned more for his flagrant aversion to bourgeois hypocrisy than for the crime he committed.

But in "A Happy Death", Merseault's crime had a clearer motive and a deeper symbolism. Merseault kills his crippled friend Zagreus in order to obtain his wealth and use it to transform his otherwise mundane life. In Greek mythology, Zagreus was torn apart by the Titans but Zeus was able to give his still beating heart to his daughter who later fathered Dinoysis, the god of wine. Zagreus literally means "torn apart" in Greek. The myth of Zagreaus is comparable to the role of Christ in the Christian tradition because Zagreus was mocked, tortured, and executed. But unlike Christ, Zagreaus escaped the final humiliation by having a substitute take his place.

Camus re-appropriates this legend in "A Happy Death". The wheelchair bound Zagreaus essentially prompts Merseault to murder him so that he can escape the humiliation of his infirmity and pass his wealth on to Merseault. There are subtle indications that the two men are inextricably bound to each other. Both men experience the same lover at different times and both share the same cynical view that she is only an image of what they want to see in her. Each man also has what the other needs. Merseault has the physical capability to enjoy life, but he is hampered by routine and by his work. Zagreus has wealth but lacks the physical capability to enjoy it.

The re-appropriation of the Zagreus myth asks the question "what does it mean to truly be alive"? Is it better that only one of the two men live as long as he lives his life to the fullest rather than both living unhappy, restricted lives? After killing Zagreaus, Merseault leads a life of travel, hedonism, and leisure. When he is subsequently stricken ill, he dies a happy dignified death.

In this sense I would disagree with the reviewer who characterized "A Happy Death" as a primer for "The Stranger". Instead, it is a story with a completely different emphasis. Where the stranger depicts the fate society metes out to an honest individual, "A Happy Death" asks what it truly means to be alive.