The Fall by Albert Camus is about a man who remembers severe guilt for a severe action (letting a woman drown) that he had forgotten, but uses this guilt to find power when he is later imprisoned in a Nazi camp. He decides that because he is extremely guilty, arguably more guilty than all the other prisoners, he must be the one that is forgiven by all and seen as the martyr for the less powerful. By declaring everyone to be guilty and himself as the "pope" of these unfortunate people, he twists his guilt to make himself better than others. He manages to take advantage of his guilt by pulling out the guilt in those who are actually ashamed of it, causing him to be in a position of power. I personally found it revolting that he would revel in his guilt for a very real "crime", but it is interesting to think that guilt can be a tool for authority over others.
This story reminded me of The Trial by Franz Kafka not in the way that they are similar, but in the way that they are complete opposites. Instead of having a man who is innocent accused of a crime, you have a man who is actually guilty but seen as innocent in the eyes of the law. I would expect the prior to have the upperhand in the knowledge of truth that he has done no wrong, but instead the latter is able to manipulate his evils in order to exercise power. It implies that in order to be "free", or at least freer than the average man, one must embrace the guilt that every person supposedly has.
I love your comparison of The Fall to The Trial. I also agree with you on your point about how Jean manipulates his sins in order to dominate others. It's interesting how he believes that he has the power to judge others because he has judged himself and come to terms with his own flaws, and this makes him better than everybody else. I've observed that it seems as if both K. and Jean desire guilt, but in different ways. Jean desires guilt in order to dominate others, whereas K. desires guilt to be set apart from others.
ReplyDeleteMaryAlice-
ReplyDeleteYour entry draws a great connection between readings. The experience of guilt, as we have spoken about in class all semester, is in fact a near perfect opposite between the readings you compare. I also find, as you point out, the mindset of the man in Camus' "The Fall" so interesting and yet repulsive. He uses his lack of a moral tie to guilt as leverage over others, promoting himself as better than those who due to their sound morals feel guilty when they have done something wrong. I agree with most of your observations and feel as though this is one of the most interesting pieces of literature we have read this semester!
Great comparison of the two opposing readings we have done in class! I found it interesting that Jean-Baptiste found relief in emphasizing and bringing out others' guilt. Personally, while reading the novel and being placed within the novel as a character, I felt uneasy. Realizing Jean-Baptiste's use of power and his manipulation of his own personal emotion and guilt made the issue more prominent for me. Knowing that I (the character) was an exact reflection of Jean-Baptiste, I can only think that his seemingly fleeing guilt was actually becoming increasingly haunting yet masked through his power.
ReplyDeleteThe really interesting thing to me about how Jean-Baptiste tries to manipulate guilt as a judge-penitent and as my role as the reader and how Jean-Baptiste is doing the same thing to me. By being put in the same place as Jean-Baptistes other clients, and by being asked all these questions that only have very vague answers, I began answering Jean-Baptiste's questions in my head and felt that the book was making me look at my own guilt and decisions.
DeleteMaryAlice - I think your connection to The Trial is very interesting. It also raises an intriguing argument as to the nature of guilt, that being the subjectivity of the difference between innocence and guilt, in the eyes of the law. The legal stance on guilt is completely dependent on evidence, testimony, and confession, which is not something that can be consistently relied upon. The only true determinant of the amount of guilt one feels is their own mind. While being declared guilty can be freeing, as seen in this book, as it relieves the secrecy burden, either way the guilty party must live with the truth.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this book really makes one think about one's own life and guilt. Like you said SJ, the rhetorical questions the book asks force you to dig deeper into how similar we as readers are to Jean-Baptiste. Like Erin says, Jean-Baptiste's guilt becomes more and more haunting as he grows more powerful and manipulative. It is really interesting how the other members of the camp accept his power over them even though he has very little real influence.
ReplyDelete