47 pages • 1 hour read
Albert CamusThe Fall
Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1956A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
Morality in an Absurd World
The crisis of nihilism in Europe was partly caused by the rise of secularism. Christian beliefs, church attendance, and cultural practices formed the basis of most European moral beliefs before the late 19th century. Thinkers like Nietzsche helped accelerate this secularism, a way of interacting with the world outside of the frame of religion. Both World Wars occurred during this trend toward secularism, and the atrocities of these wars caused many to question how a God could exist. As such, many Europeans came to believe that the world was absurd and fundamentally meaningless. Morality for people who saw the world as absurd became just as meaningless, and many struggled to justify holding onto moral principles.
The “death of God” that Nietzsche posited is central to this crisis. Clamence, who embodies Nietzchian “master/slave morality,” considers God and Christians and exclaims:
An odd epoch, indeed! It’s not at all surprising that minds are confused and that one of my friends, an atheist when he was a model husband, got converted when he became an adulterer! Ah, the little sneaks, play actors, hypocrites—and yet so touching! Believe me, they all are, even when they set fire to heaven. Whether they are atheists or churchgoers, Muscovites or Bostonians, all Christians from father to son. But it so happens that there is no more father, no more rule! (134).
God is the “father” that no longer exists, an echo of Nietzsche’s statement that “God is dead.” Clamence believes that the crisis of nihilism has not fundamentally altered the basis of European moral beliefs; rather, it has only made God a “master” that is “out of style” and no longer stylish to claim (133). Clamence believes that Europeans have worshipped power and slavery under the disguise of God. Clamence states that “When we are all guilty, that will be democracy” (136). From his point of view, democracy requires that everyone be reduced to the lowest common denominator, and those, unlike “the masses,” must be “scorned, hunted down, and compelled” into behaving (136). Clamence’s beliefs are nearly direct quotes from Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals. These beliefs justify enslaving others: Humanity needs a ruler to not tear itself apart.
Clamence struggles to understand the meaning of the suicide he witnessed. He grasps at reasons that his guilty conscience provides him. Clamence feels it was pre-ordained, but in an absurd world, there is no reason for why he witnessed the suicide. Clamence’s struggle to find meaning in a traumatic, meaningless experience is exacerbated by living in a world plagued by nihilism, and Camus highlights the irrationality of nihilistic beliefs by couching Clamence’s assertions in delirium.
Innocence and Guilt
Camus asks his audience to contemplate the nature of innocence and guilt in The Fall. When instructing “fledgling lawyers,” Clamence gives the following speech:
Let us suppose that I have accepted the defense of some touching citizen, a murderer through jealousy. Gentlemen of the jury, consider, I should say, how venial it is to get angry when one sees one’s natural goodness put to the test by the malignity of the fair sex. Is it not more serious, on the contrary, to be by chance on this side of the bar, on my own bench, without ever having been good or suffered from being duped? I am free, shielded from your severities, yet who am I? A Louis XIV in pride, a billy goat for lust, a Pharaoh for wrath, a king of laziness. I haven’t killed anyone? Not yet, to be sure! But have I not let deserving creatures die? Maybe. And maybe I am ready to do so again. Whereas this man […] will not do so again. He is still quite amazed to have accomplished what he has (94-95).
Clamence explains his stance on the nature of innocence and guilt in this speech. He challenges traditional notions of guilt by projecting the most guilt on the privileged positions in the courtroom: the lawyer and the judge. This greatly upsets his colleagues and the new lawyers. Lawyers and judges are supposed to be above reproach when considering the crimes of those in court, especially when defending the accused. Clamence accuses himself of having more guilt than the hypothetical murderer because he has let innocent people die and would do so again. Clamence admits his guilty feelings by alluding to the woman who drowned. He compares his guilt for deciding not to help somebody to that of a person who chose to murder another and declares he is even more dangerous and guilty because of his presumed goodness as a lawyer. If Clamence is a serial murderer compared to his client who has killed once, then the process of justice is a sham. Clamence says he is all sorts of terrible things: an incredibly prideful king, a lustful animal, and a wrathful despot. Yet unlike his hypothetical client, Clamence is “free” and “shielded” because of his social position.
Clamence’s views on innocence and guilt explain his glorification of power. Clamence believes that human nature is the belief in our own innocence and a desire to avoid judgment. If those who legally assign innocence and guilt can be just as guilty as the rest of us, then assigning innocence and guilt becomes an exercise in power rather than morality. Clamence views himself as guilty of murder, yet his job requires that he defend the innocence of murderers and thieves. Successfully defending the innocence of murderers raises Clamence’s social prestige, as does helping widows and blind people. This social prestige is the “shield” that “frees” Clamence from his colleagues’ judgment, giving him presumed innocence. Clamence casts the adage of “innocent until proven guilty” not as a discovery of the truth but as a conversation between powerful and shielded individuals (lawyers and judges). This dynamic inspires Clamence to glorify power and judge everybody as guilty to placate his own guilt. For Clamence, innocence is a ruse that covers up each person’s guilt. He goes so far as to claim that Jesus wanted to die to avoid his own guilt (112-13). Clamence’s discovery of guilt underneath his veneer of innocence causes his fall from grace.
Alienation in the Modern Era
Alienation is a philosophical concept that means there is a disconnect between an individual and their surroundings. To be alienated is to feel that one’s actions, presence, and thoughts have no bearing on the thing they are alienated from. People who are alienated often feel that they are less of a person and more of a tool for people or organizations. Alienation is often identified in feelings of depression and helplessness. People who are alienated feel little to no sense of belonging and purpose to their work, family, community, and so on.
Clamence is an alienated narrator. He is estranged from concepts of family, community, and fulfilling work. This is evidenced by how he presents and narrates his story. Clamence generally does not name other characters within his narrative and spends very little time talking about others. None of his colleagues are named, nor are the women he has affairs with. His own father is left unnamed, and he does not even name his cher ami despite spending five days with him. The closest approximation to a named individual is the man who crowns Clamence as pope, referred to as Du Guesclin. Du Guesclin was a medieval French knight and is not the prisoner of war’s real name. Clamence claims he loved this man but cannot be bothered to share his name. Likewise, Clamence often dehumanizes others while referring to them. The bartender of Mexico City is an “ape” (3) and the people of Amsterdam are “silhouettes” (6). Clamence seems incapable of seeing others as people as complex as himself, which is reinforced by his need to dominate others. Clamence states “I have no more friends; I have nothing but accomplices,” turning the people around him into tools that are a means to an end (73). Clamence cannot experience a genuine connection to another person.
The experience with the drowned woman alienates Clamence from his work. He calls it a “game” that gave him a “flattering reputation,” which only enrages him after the incident. Clamence spirals into sin because he wants to “break open the handsome wax-figure” that others saw in him (73). The incident shows Clamence that he only helps people for his own social prestige; helping a drowning woman would mean risking his own life for no reward, so he let her drown and kept it a secret. Clamence once believed his work and charity were done out of genuine kindheartedness. Once he sees through this ruse, he becomes distraught and alienated from his job as a lawyer.
With this alienation, Camus comments on the negative effects of nihilism. Estranged from community and comradery, people like Clamence become alienated to the extent that he ceases to view others as human. This alienation leads not only affects interpersonal relationships but larger political issues; the sort of dehumanization, domination, and slavery espoused by Clamence have structural mirrors in institutions like slavery, colonization, and the Holocaust.
Related Titles
By Albert Camus
