The Stranger Or the Boy from Belcourt

ANDREW GIAMBRONECamus à vingt ans, as Macha Séry has titled her 2011 book, was a jack-of-all-trades,trying his hand at critiquing literature as much as philosophy and music. 220 He saw manyrelationships between these domains, writing in a June 1932 essay on harmony thatSchopenhauer’s (1788-1860) and Nietzsche’s (1844-1900) theories on aesthetics can greatlyinform one’s understanding and appreciation of music. 221 Meanwhile, in an article on HenriBergson (1859-1941), Camus expressed disappointment at the philosopher’s ideas aboutintuition, which Bergson had privileged above reason in his 1929 Matière et mémoire and hisearlier book, Les Deux Sources de la morale et de la réligion:It was ultimately a treatise on instinctive philosophy. There’s nothing more seductivethan this idea: To throw aside intelligence as dangerous, to base an entire system onimmediate knowledge and raw sensations: It was, indeed, to do away with all thephilosophy of our century…[Bergson’s] philosophy would only meet oppositionamong philosophers themselves. But the great literary and cultivated masses hadwelcomed it…It could have played the role of the religion of the century…Thisphilosophy appeared to me the most beautiful of all, for it was one of those rare onesalong with that of Nietzsche which rejected Reason…Instead of this one has analysisto prove the dangers of analysis, intelligence to teach one to defy intelligence,fabulation to create an idea of fabulation, and everywhere similar oppositions. Intruth, Bergson finds in himself a perpetual contradiction. How can such anintelligent being fancy himself the enemy of intelligence? There is something in hiswork that deceives us, even further, that irritates us. 222Although he had not yet begun his studies at the University of Algiers when he wrotethis essay, Camus was already a sharp critic, highlighting internal contradictions he saw inBergson’s philosophy. Here, one sees at work the influence of Jean Grenier, who taughtCamus to question received or popular ways of thinking. One also sees some of Camus’sintellectual arrogance at play, which others, including Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980), would220 Séry, Macha. Albert Camus à 20 ans: Premiers combats. Vauvert: Au Diable Vauvert, 2011. Print.221 Both Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were great admirers of the German composer, Richard Wagner (1813-1883), who is primarily known for his operas such as The Ring of the Nibelung, or Ring Cycle. ForSchopenhauer, music was the highest form of art because it was a direct expression of will and therefore atemporary relief from the suffering inherent to willing. In turn, Wagner read Schopenhauer readily and evenrecommended the latter’s works to his friends. Nietzsche had a more complicated relationship with thecomposer, starting off as a close friend and ending up as a distant acquaintance. In Nietzsche’s last year oflucidity (1888-1889) before succumbing to mental illness (possibly due to the effects of syphilis), he wrote apolemic simply titled “Nietzsche contra Wagner.” While the essay was not published until 1895, in it Nietzscheattacked Wagner’s views on art and religion, as well as Wagner’s late-in-life decision to convert to Christianity.Wicks, Robert, “Arthur Schopenhauer” and “Friedrich Nietzsche”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy(Winter 2011, Spring 2013), ed. by Edward N. Zalta. and.222 Camus, Albert. La Philosophie du siècle. Algiers: Sud, June 1932. n.p. Translation is mine.167