Abstract

John Oswald

‘On keeping Camus in perspective: Political Action in the 1950s’

This paper contends that Camus’s influence and relevance are too often overstated, and takes issue with the “If Camus were here today” mode of thought common to some scholarship.
When we look in detail at Camus’s more explicit political interventions in the 1950s, we quickly see that his engagement was not as frequent or as prominent as is often argued. Indeed, in contrast to thinkers such as Aron, Camus lacks intellectual rigour and profound understanding of the detail of political circumstances surrounding him. Rather than tackling the complexity of the situation, Camus would all too quickly move to a gut-feeling, human level, which may go some way to explaining some of his unpopularity with his peers and indeed his popularity with his publique.
This paper focuses in particular on Camus’s involvement in various supranational and Europeanist movements in the 1950s, evaluating the extent of his actual involvement and reasons for staying outside of the fray. It then examines some of his journalism, particularly the influential Ni Victimes ni bourreaux series of articles. It contends that these, far from being the call to action and guidelines for our troubled times, are anchored in their place and time and should be treated with caution.
Ultimately, Camus was a deeply committed writer and thinker, but the relevance of some of his thought to our age is easy to overestimate. We must be careful not to let affection for his work blind us to the problems with his thought in other areas. The paper concludes that what he does propose is an ethics of day-to-day engagement which genuinely does offer a path towards a better understanding of the troubling human issues of our time.


	John Oswald ‘On keeping Camus in perspective: Political Action in the 1950s’ This paper contends that Camus’s influence and relevance are too often overstated, and takes issue with the “If Camus were here today” mode of thought common to some scholarship. When we look in detail at Camus’s more explicit political interventions in the 1950s, we quickly see that his engagement was not as frequent or as prominent as is often argued. Indeed, in contrast to thinkers such as Aron, Camus lacks intellectual rigour and profound understanding of the detail of political circumstances surrounding him. Rather than tackling the complexity of the situation, Camus would all too quickly move to a gut-feeling, human level, which may go some way to explaining some of his unpopularity with his peers and indeed his popularity with his publique. This paper focuses in particular on Camus’s involvement in various supranational and Europeanist movements in the 1950s, evaluating the extent of his actual involvement and reasons for staying outside of the fray. It then examines some of his journalism, particularly the influential Ni Victimes ni bourreaux series of articles. It contends that these, far from being the call to action and guidelines for our troubled times, are anchored in their place and time and should be treated with caution. Ultimately, Camus was a deeply committed writer and thinker, but the relevance of some of his thought to our age is easy to overestimate. We must be careful not to let affection for his work blind us to the problems with his thought in other areas. The paper concludes that what he does propose is an ethics of day-to-day engagement which genuinely does offer a path towards a better understanding of the troubling human issues of our time.