Talk:Albert Camus

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

(

• Review or comment
• Article history

)

• ... that while Albert Camus is widely considered as an existentialist, he himself rejected the term? Note: the wording has been edited, see discussion below. Sources: A)"Camus, for his part, repeatedly denied the idée fixé that he was an existentialist, just as he refused the label of atheist so often pinned to his breast. He even laughingly planned at one point immediately following the war to co-author a piece with Sartre explaining the differences between them:11 differences which would become all-too-serious after Camus’ publication of L’Homme Révolté in 1951, seeing Camus’ virtual exile from the kingdom of the Parisian rive gauche. All that notwithstanding, Camus continues to be anthologised as an existentialist: “since it is more convenient to exploit a cliché than a nuance, I am a prophet of the absurd as before”.12 And he is taught as such in those classes terminales and sophomoric “introductions to philosophy” that one Sartrean critic (echoing the words of his master, and the assessment of most of the Anglophone philosophical profession since) suggested represent the highest pedagogical level to which Camus’ thought can aspire.13 The almostcomplete critical silence (outside of dedicated ‘Camus studies’ circles) concerning Camus’ philosophical thought from around the time of his death until the fall of the Berlin wall (certainly in the English-speaking world, but mostly also in France) reflects this widespread grouping of Camus with Sartre et al. as an existentialist, if not as a “philosopher of the subject.”" Also see note 11 at same page: "Note11: Albert Camus, “Three Interviews” (“No, I am not an existentialist”), Albert Camus: Lyrical and Critical Essays, edited by Phillip Thody, translated by Ellen Conroy Kennedy (Vintage: New York, 1987), 345. “. . . the only book of ideas that I have ever published, Le Mythe de Sisyphe, was directed against the so-called existentialist philosophers . . .” Source: Camus, Philosophe: To Return to our Beginnings By Matthew Sharpe, page 3 B)Also Sherman 2009 p.3: "Given that “the Absurd,” the notion with which Camus is most often associated, was first devised by the father of existentialism, Søren Kierkegaard, and that Camus is almost universally taken to be at the heart of the French existentialist movement, his persistent claim that he was not an existentialist is rather strange" (and goes on analyzing why Camus rejected the term.
  • ALT1:... that during the French Occupation by Nazis, Albert Camus had an active role in the resistance as editor of the newspaper Combat? "In late 1943, Camus joined the French Resistance and became active in the underground Resistance paper Combat, which he served as both an editor and a writer (pseudonymously, of course). By early 1944, the handwriting was already on the wall for the occupying Nazi regime, and Camus’s articles, reflecting this state of affairs, are marked no less by a concern with post-occupation political realities than with the realities of the Nazi occupation. The motto affixed to each edition of Combat under Camus was, accordingly, “from resistance to revolution.”" Source Camus, Philosophe: To Return to our Beginnings By Matthew Sharpe page 23

Improved to Good Article status by Cinadon36 (talk). Self-nominated at 09:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC).

• Didn't he write a novel about the outbreak of a plague? Wouldn't that DYK attract more viewers in the current situation?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

• Yeap, that's clever but the article does not discuss that specific novel in depth. Would it still be ok? Cinadon36 16:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

• No, that's not okay, but why not include it in the article? It does not have to be in depth.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 09:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

• Ok I 'll see what I can do, and I 'll ping you. Cinadon36 18:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Real life is consuming much of my time these days so pls excuse me for the delay. It might take me a week or so to fix it. Cinadon36 07:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Sure.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Merci @Farang Rak Tham:. Is this sufficient? Cinadon36 12:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cinadon36: Yes, I think you could base a DYK item on that. I have been so bold as to rephrase the article a little.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your edit, English is not my native language and I am not particularly good at writing. Actually, one of my aims as a WP user is to improve my writing skills. Cinadon36 13:09, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• • • ALT2 that in his novel the Plague, Albert Camus, based on an epidemic in Oran, examined how a goverment could turn tyrranical? Source: Camus, Philosophe: To Return to our Beginnings By Matthew Sharpe, page 61-62 Cinadon36 13:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

How about ALT3: ... that Albert Camus based his novel The Plague on an epidemic in Oran, and examined how a government became a tyranny?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Much better! Cinadon36 07:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: None required.

Overall: The contents match that of a Finnish website, but it is highly likely that this website copied from this article, and not the other way around. In the main hook, I suggest to change himself to he himself. As for ALT3, this hook I can't review myself, because it was my own suggestion. For now, I am passing the ALT1 hook. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the proposed suggestion to change himself to he himself. As for ALT3, it is surely more eye-catching and this is an important aspect of any hook of any kind. Cinadon36 13:46, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Cinadon36: Of course, I personally like ALT3, but because I proposed it myself, I cannot review it—this is a rule of DYK reviews. For the same reason, you will have to insert the he himself yourself, for me to approve of the main hook. We can ask for a second reviewer to review ALT3.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 19:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Are you interested to review the ALT3 hook, Gerda Arendt?Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Main hook also approved. Leaving out as is more idiomatic, but it's correct English nonetheless.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Consensus on nationality

Can we come to a consensus on Camus's nationality to stop these constant changes from French to Algerian? When the article underwent a GA review on 18 April 2020, he was described as French Algerian. There is a Talk page discussion here (in Archive 1), which seems to indicate that French is preferred.

Please indicate which nationality should appear in the article:

1. French
2. Algerian
3. French Algerian
4. Algerian French

thanks! Epinoia (talk) 18:46, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

- could we leave nationality and citizenship out of the first sentence of the lead? It is done this way in the T.S. Eliot article to avoid endless edit wars over whether he was British or American. Eliot's nationality and citizenship are addressed in a subsequent paragraph.

With Camus, the second paragraph begins, "Camus was born in French Algeria to Pieds Noirs parents." That clearly states his origin. The first sentence would then read, "...was a philosopher, author, dramatist and journalist." This would avoid edit wars over whether he was French or Algerian and, really, the information is the first sentence of the lead is a repetition of content explained more fully in the next paragraph - we don't need the information twice - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 20:13, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Pessimism

The article is...odd...about pessimism. It has the 'Philosophers of pessimism' category, but the articles only mention of the topic is

"In 1933, Camus enrolled at the University of Algiers and completed his licence de philosophie (BA) in 1936; after presenting his thesis on Plotinus. Camus developed an interest in early Christian philosophers, but Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer had paved the way towards pessimism and atheism."

Which doesn't say anything about Camus and the topic. Do we have any reliable sources that associate him with this philosophy? --John (User:Jwy/talk) 22:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Assassination speculation

I think Wikipedia should not have this in the article:

"There has been speculation that Camus was assassinated by the KGB because of his criticism of Soviet abuses"

Why? Let's dig in to the source.

Catelli believes a passage in Zábrana’s diaries explains why: the poet wrote in the late summer of 1980 that “a knowledgeable and well-connected man” had told him the KGB was to blame. “They rigged the tyre with a tool that eventually pierced it when the car was travelling at high speed.”

This is the source of speculation:

"late summer of 1980 that “a knowledgeable and well-connected man” had told him"

After 20 years of his death, an author claims something without credible proof, and this gossip finds its way onto Wikipedia. Yes, this is no more than a gossip. I think it fails fit in Wikipedia:Reliable sources rules. Therefore, it should be removed. TarantaBabu (talk) 09:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

On top of my previous comment, I should note this:

Olivier Todd, a former BBC correspondent in Paris, whose biography, Albert Camus: Une Vie [A Life], was published in English in 2000, told the Observer that during research in Soviet archives he had not come across any reference to Moscow ordering the author's assassination.

Source

Zábrana’s claim falls into category of WP:BLPGOSSIP TarantaBabu (talk) 09:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)