The Plague by Albert Camus

Name: Albert Camus

Year Won: 1957

Read: "The Plague"

Original Language: French

Reason: "for his important literary production, which with clear-sighted earnestness illuminates the problems of the human conscience in our times"

About: "The Plague" follows what happens as a plague hits a French Algerian town. At first, it seems like nothing but dead rats. But before long, the hospitals are crowded with people who have the bubonic plague. The city is quaratined. Supplies dip low. Plague serum is rushed in. People panic. And then, at last, it goes away.

It's really interesting reading this in the time of COVID to compare the two. Oddly, things like the opera continue despite the characters warning that the plague may go pneumatic. (Why????) Alternately, it's kind of weird that the town gets so low on supplies (even with the quarantine), considering that it doesn't seem that hard to ship them in. (Esp. as it's only this town that's affected.) Also, for all the gnashing of teeth and wailing, not all that many people die, considering. Aside from that, though, it seems a fairly accurate portrayal of what a plague actually *is* like, down to it not affecting the rich very much, but being horrifying to the poor.

What I liked: I can see why this became a go-to read in the time of COVID. It really is an incredibly well thought out scenario as to what a plague would be like.

Strangely, I don't think this is even what Camus was trying to achieve. (Wikipedia claims this is a nilhist masterpiece, not a supposedly accurate portrayal of a small town affected by plague. Go figure?) So that he does this as well as creates a well written, nilhistic work is quite impressive indeed.

What I Disliked: There's not much of a plot besides "plague ravishes small town". And I never cared much for the characters, so their ultimate fates didn't especially bother me. Definitely if I wanted a page turner about the plague, I'd check out "The Stand" by Steven King, instead. (But this isn't much of a critique as I don't think this was what Camus was trying to achieve. Also, at 300 pages, this isn't a huge book, so the fact that I was fairly indifferent to the fates of the characters wasn't as big a deal as it would have been in something longer.)

Should it have won a Nobel: I don't think Camus is really known for his fiction, per se. He's considered more of a philosopher. So that his fiction *is* this good - and still relevant decades later - is really a testimate to his genius. So yes.

Next Up: "Doctor Zhivago" by Boris Pasternak

Juan Ramon Jimenez's "The Poet and the Sea"

Name: Juan Ramon Jiménez

Year Won: 1956

Read: "The Poet and the Sea"

Original Language: Spanish

Reason: "for his lyrical poetry, which in Spanish language constitutes an example of high spirit and artistical purity"

About: "The Poet and the Sea" is a collection of poems. Almost all of them are about the ocean. I have no idea whether Jimenez has written non-ocean based poetry, but that's what's in this collection.

What I liked: The poetry is quite lovely and has a rhythmic cadence almost like crashing waves. The meter is almost meditative.

What I Disliked: It's several hundred pages...of descriptions of the ocean. And they're almost all meditative in nature. (e.g. no angry, furious waves. Which waves can be.) It never changes. Eventually it gets pretty dull. There's only so many times I can read, "Olas, olas, olas" before wondering whether Jimenez had literally anything else to inspire him.

Should it have won a Nobel: If this is the full extent of his range, probably not. It just got really repetitive. But I'm assuming that the translators picked out specifically the ocean related poems for this volume. Maybe? Hopefully? If so, his writing is beautiful and may deserve a Nobel.

Next Up: "The Plague" by Albert Camus