Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Confronting the Absurd as seen in The Myth of Sisyphus through The Plague and Bioshock


                Between the propensity to search for meaning in existence and the fundamental impossibility to do arises the philosophical notion of the Absurd.  Both Camus’ The Plague and Bioshock, developed by 2K Boston, strongly incorporate the Absurdist notion into their respective narratives, specifically regarding how people react when challenged with the notion of the Absurd. These narratives showcase an isolated populace being violently confronted with death, while being both unable neither to combat it nor find any solace behind it. These conditions play out to become a perfect environment in understanding the Absurd in The Plague’s case, within the citizens of Oran and you the reader, and in Bioshock’s case, within the citizens of Rapture and you the player.

                To understand the Absurd in both The Plague and Bioshock, one has to analyze Camus’ personal theory of the Absurd.  “In Camus’s view, neither human existence nor the world are themselves absurd. Instead the absurd arises because the world is resistant to this kind of intelligibility: ‘we want the world to make sense, but it does not make sense. To see this conflict is to see the absurd’ … What normally brings the individual into confrontation with his absurd condition, suggests Camus, is the awareness not of human mortality per se, but of his own personal mortality” (Foley 6). This train of thought is blatantly evident in The Plague as well as Camus’ essay which deals more directly with the Absurd and fully shapes an all-encompassing framework of Absurdist theory: The Myth of Sisyphus. In his essay, Camus clearly outlines his view of the Absurd comparatively against other philosophers’ designs and outlining ways of coping with this notion after acceptance. Camus writes in The Myth of Sisyphus “In this particular case and on the plane of intelligence, I can therefore say that the Absurd is not in man (if such a metaphor could have a meaning) nor in the world, but in their presence together. For the moment it is the only bond uniting them” (30). He then goes on to say “To destroy one of its terms is to destroy the whole. There can be no absurd outside the human mind. Thus, like everything else, the absurd ends with death. But there can be no absurd outside this world either” (30-31). This illustrates on of the key constructs of the Absurd, in that it arises from people and their experience in this world, or the human condition. More fundamentally, Camus believes that the absurd arises from the contrast of two ideals: “I am thus justified in saying that the feeling of absurdity does not spring from the mere scrutiny of a fact or an impression, but that it bursts from the comparison between a bare face and a certain reality, between an action and the world that transcends it. The absurd is essentially a divorce. It lies in neither of the elements compared; it is born of their confrontation” (Myth of Sisyphus 30). In this case, the incongruent elements being the innate human process of searching for meaning and lucidity and the unforgiving, taciturn space that is reality, a space where it is impossible to find significance in life. After coming to terms with this, Camus identifies the three ways in which a person can approach the absurdity of life. “Thus I draw from the absurd three consequences, which are my revolt, my freedom, and my passion. By the mere activity of consciousness I transform into a rule of life what was an invitation to death” (Myth of Sisyphus 64). Sequentially, these terms represent much larger issues which Camus then attends to in Sisyphus. Revolt is a reference for the extradition of the concept of suicide due to the realization of the absurd human condition. After refusing to just end one’s life because life is absurd, religion is often turned to. Camus’ “freedom” is the refusal to be constricted by religion and similar devices constructed to blind or shelter oneself to the Absurd. Finally, passion refers to the concluding chain in mental acceptance of the Absurd after rejection of hope; that one must exist in spite of the Absurd and only after this acceptance can life truly be lived wholly and appreciated. This view is categorically embodied within Sisyphus, Camus’ “Absurd Hero”, as seen in last two sentences of The Myth of Sisyphus: “The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy” (123).

                Once understanding Camus’ view of the Absurd as seen in The Myth of Sisyphus, it can be directly and absolutely applied to the narrative, as I will argue, of Bioshock. However, I choose to compare the game not to The Myth of Sisyphus directly, but instead compare it to Camus’ 1947 The Plague as it’s narrative structure set a more easily compared standard by which to compare the narrative structure of Bioshock.  Through medium entrenched experience as well as meta-experience, both of these narratives attempt to inform the audience of the Absurd as well as attempt to convey the Absurd in an immediate way, allowing the viewer to realize it firsthand.

                To understand the relation of the Absurd to the forms of media I previously mentioned, The Plague and Bioshock, one first has to be closely familiar with the storyline of both. As such, I will provide a brief yet thorough description of both in the following sections. The Plague is, on the surface, a novel that follows the experiences of a handful of citizens of the Algerian city Oran during an outbreak of Plague in the 1940’s. However, looking past the bare skeleton of the novel, one can certainly realize the deep implication of the Absurd in the story. Camus breaks the novel into five different sections, each corresponding to a certain state of the plague epidemic. The novel begins with an unknown narrator describing the thousands of rats coming out to die on the streets of the city. Following this, it shifts to Dr. Rieux beginning to notice strange feverish cases within the populace of Oran. Within the first chapter the reader discovers Rieux’s wife being sent away to a hospital out of town due to a non-plague related illness, and is introduced to Dr. Rieux’s good friend, Grand, a city clerk. Shortly afterward, Rieux meets up with Jean Tarrou, a stranger who had only arrived in Oran a few weeks prior. In the building where Grand resides, another character is introduced, Cottard, in the manner that Grand had burst into his room when he was attempting to hang himself. In this first section, the reader is also introduced to many other characters, the most notable of which is Rambert, a journalist who is only supposed to be Rapture for a short time researching a story about the poorer living quarters in the city. After this introductory period, Rieux comes to the conclusion that these feverish cases are an outbreak of plague and after discussing this with the town Prefect, the city is sealed. Part II then begins and is mostly concerned with the citizens of Oran learning to accept and cope with the plague in their midst. A preacher, Paneloux, delivers a sermon stressing that the plague is sent from God and that the citizens should turn to God as to repent. As the death toll rises, Tarrou suggests that Rieux and other characters form sanitary group that serves those afflicted with plague, both in their own homes and in the makeshift hospitals set up around the city. Rambert concocts a plan to escape the city for his love interest by meeting with people involved with smuggling with the help of Cottard, who is now profiting off the plague by selling cheap smuggled liquor and tobacco at inflated prices. After the meaty Part II, Part III is just a reiteration of the devolving nature of the townspeople coupled with the evolving nature of the plague. However, the description of funerals at this point I found to be perhaps the most graphic account of the horrors during a plague state: “The corpses were tipped pell-mell into the pits and had hardly settled into place when spadefuls of quicklime began to sear their faces and the earth covered them indistinctively, in holes dug steadily deeper as time went on” (Plague 161). Part IV continues the trend of plague in the town, with the death rate remaining at a constant. Rieux and Tarrou attend the performance Orpheus put on by a passing operatic group that had been stranded in Oran, however it ends with the lead character collapsing on stage due to plague. Another minor character’s son contracts the plague, and Rieux, Tarrou, and Paneloux try to save him with a new batch of plague serum, but unfortunately it does not perform well and the child dies an excruciating death. Soon after this, Paneloux dies from an unknown illness. Also, in this section Rambert finally gets a chance to escape the city, but eventually chooses to stay and combat the illness with the sanitary squad. The final part is concerned with the decline of plague in Oran, but not without grief. Rieux learns his wife has died, and after the apparent end of plague in full, Tarrou contracts it and dies. The end of the novel comes with Rieux revealing he was the narrator and decided to transcribe these events under the conclusion he came to that there is more to admire in the people of Oran than to despise.

                Bioshock follows a similar narrative structure to The Plague, but differs in several essential ways. The Player begins the story as a man named Jack (the name Jack I will use interchangeably with the term “Player” to emphasize the fact that during the gameplay of Bioshock, one ultimately assumes his persona and circumstances) crashing into the ocean as a plane passenger and subsequently swimming to a nearby tower surfacing in the ocean. On arriving to the tower, the player enters a bathysphere which takes him or her to the underwater city of Rapture. Upon arriving, the player is contacted via radio by an unknown person named Atlas who leads the player away from his or her first encounter with splicers. The world of Rapture is almost entirely populated with splicers, all looking out for themselves, inhabiting a closed world. Shortly afterwards the player encounters a large man in a diving suit whom Atlas refers to as a big daddy, and who is  accompanied by a small girl with a needle who is likewise referred to as a little sister. After killing the big daddy, Atlas urges Jack to kill the little sister, but another unknown person named Tenenbaum contacts the player and urges them to save the girl instead. Much of the rest of the game is concerned with traversing through Rapture confronting various splicers, big daddies, little sisters and meeting with non-splicer citizens of Rapture who ultimately lead you to Ryan’s office. Upon meeting Ryan, Jack is informed of his situation, which I discuss in more detail later. After being confronted with this revelation, the main purpose of the player shifts from killing Ryan to confronting Atlas, thereby revealed to be a notorious smuggler Frank Fontaine. Subsequently Tenenbaum attempts to assist Jack in his goal, and the game ultimately ends with the death of Fontaine at the players hands. The final cutscene in the game varies depending on the manner in which the player chooses to handle the little sisters in the game. This dynamic is significant to developing an element of suggested choice for the player in the game. Whereas the game narrative can be seen as a straightforward progression of story, the choices the player makes significantly affect the outcome of the ending. As much as the endings differ, there are only three different end scenes preprogrammed into the game. The element of choice is suggested, but in fact there only three options, mirroring the three “consequences” that Camus outlines in The Myth of Sisyphus. However, for the purposes of this critical comparison I later refer to the ending wherein the lives of all little sisters in the game are spared.

To begin the comparison of these mediums, the setting of both Bioshock as well as The Plague is crucial to their narrative and spatial development, in addition to providing a perfect backdrop for fostering of Absurdist realization. The city of Rapture, a once great marvel of humanity and willpower, is reduced to a rapidly deteriorating massive system of sealed architecture littered with forgotten statues of Andrew Ryan coupled with rotting corpses. The entire city seems to reek of an air of terror and discontent, propagated by the dog-eat-dog social system among the splicers experienced by the player while traversing through the city. This societal scheme portrayed in Bioshock and that of The Plague, albeit harshly different at first glance, can be easily correlated by the actions of their respective inhabitants. The splicers of Bioshock can be viewed as only accommodating a preexisting societal structure that they believe they have no recourse in changing. Merton describes this complication with regards to the Abstract in reference to the populace in The Plague, but can easily be read in terms of Rapture’s societal construction: “The mode of conduct that is extolled as “right” is in fact a covert justification for cruelty, lying, killing – for all the evil and injustice upon which society itself actually rests. … As long as one is content to justify one’s existence by reference to these automatically accepted norms, one is in complicity with the absurd, with a murderous society, with death, with “the Plague.” (22). Oran in The Plague is set up as a similar infrastructure to Rapture, “The silent city was no more than an assemblage of huge, inert cubes, between which only the mute effigies of great men, carapaced in bronze, which their blank stone or metal faces, conjured up a sorry semblance of what the man had been. In lifeless squares and avenues these tawdry idols lorded it under the lowering sky; stolid monsters that might have personified the rule of immobility imposed on us, or, anyhow, its final aspect, that of a defunct city in which plague, stone, and darkness had effectively silenced every voice” (Plague 156). There is no doubt that a parallel could be drawn between the two cities by their bleak visage alone coupled with the massive death count in both cases. Rieux, in The Plague writes an account of what would happen if the death rate rises any higher, but which seems as much an account of the events befalling of Rapture: “That men would die in heaps, and corpses rot in the street, whatever the authorities might do, and the town would see in public squares the dying embrace the living in the frenzies of an all too comprehensible hatred or some crazy hope” (Plague 162). But many other comparisons exist, not in the least that of the ocean. Oran, being a port city, draws its entire livelihood from the Mediterranean Sea, and with the walls of the city being closed, the ocean becomes a representation of that which has left the citizens of Oran and that which they cannot reach. Kellman writes in The Plague: Fiction and Resistance, “The sea, present or absent, is a crucial image in The Plague, and … neatly mirror the despondency and then burgeoning hope of the people of Oran. … The fact that littoral Oran lies with its back to the sea and, for most of The Plague, is denied any access at all to the harbor tantalizes with the thwarted hope of salvation” (54-55). A similar effect is garnered in Bioshock. The separate sections of the city are connected through glass tubes through which the player must traverse in order to reach the next objective. These small respites, where the player is offered a chance to look out into the ocean and presumably the surface, offer the same tantalization as seen in The Plague

Both The Plague and Bioshock can be easily justified as becoming vessels of the Absurd in their own narrative progression and structure. Camus’ begins The Plague by offering a less than flattering description of the city at the beginning of the second paragraph: “The town itself, let us admit, is ugly. It has a smug, placid air and you need time to discover what it is that makes it different from so many business centers in other parts of the world. How to conjure up a picture, for instance, of a town without pigeons, without any trees or gardens, where you never hear the beat of wings or the rustle of leaves – a thoroughly negative place, in short” (3). This echoes the environment one experiences after first arriving in Rapture; a stolid, nature less manmade city under the ocean, a city devoid of all organic life save for the human citizens and a handful of dead cats. At the absolute onset of arriving in Rapture, the player arrives at a giant statue of Andrew Ryan situated behind a banner displaying the slogan “No Gods or Kings. Only Man.” This statement, as much as it smacks of objective Existentialism, also definitely reiterates Camus’ consequences he concludes from his analysis of confronting the absurd: revolt, freedom, and passion. The freedom that Camus describes as a rejection of Religion and other moral constructs erected as an alternative to suicide after realization of the absurd human condition is undeniably seen in “No Gods or Kings.” “Only Man” poses a different problem however, as it can be seen in the guise of the digital populace inhabiting Rapture as well as the player playing the game, unlike Rapture’s citizens, free of the hierarchical structure of game design. Regardless of this qualification, “Only Man” can be viewed as a representation of Camus’ “passion” in that only through the relinquishment of the drive to justify one’s existence through external methods and principles can one truly begin to live in a meaningful existence. Maurice Cranston conscribes a quote by Camus in his article “Albert Camus”: “I continue to believe that this world has no ultimate meaning. But I know that something in it has meaning and that is man, because he is the only creature to insist on having one” (48). After arriving in the actual city of Rapture, as you wait in the entrance, one is confronted with a horrifying scene of murder as I man struggles to get help and is attacked by a splicer is being plastered by shadow on the wall opposite the bathysphere (submarine) that transports the player to Rapture. Just as this foreshadows the vile events you will later witness and experience in Rapture, a shockingly similar scene is described at the commencement of Part I of The Plague: “That evening, when Dr. Rieux was standing in the entrance, feeling for the latch-key in his pocket before starting up the stairs to his apartment, he saw a big rat coming toward him from the dark end of the passage. It moved uncertainly, and its fur was sopping wet. The animal stopped and seemed to be trying to get its balance, moved forward again toward the doctor, halted again, then spun round on itself with a little squeal and fell on its side. Its mouth was slightly open and blood was spurting from it” (8). Of course this is the harbinger of Bubonic plague and forecasts the events to come in Plague, just as the violent death in Bioshock. However, both of these ghoulish scenes attempt to convey a deeper truth pertaining to the human condition, and more topically, the Absurd. Thomas Merton gives an exact rendering of how this relates to both human nature and Absurdist philosophy in a commentary of The Plague, which I believe can be just as easily reassigned to Bioshock: “For Camus, this ‘death dance,’ this hidden propensity to pestilence, is something more than mere mortality. It is the willful negation of life that is built into life itself: the human instinct to dominate and to destroy – to seek one’s own happiness by destroying the happiness of others, to build one’s security on power and, by extension, to justify evil use of that power in terms of ‘history,’ or of ‘the common good,’ or of ‘the revolution,’ or even of the ‘justice of God.’” He then continues, “Man’s drive to destroy, to kill or simply to dominate and to oppress comes from the metaphysical void he experiences when he finds himself a stranger in his own universe. He seeks to make that universe familiar to himself by using it for his own ends, but his own ends are capricious and ambivalent. They may be life-affirming, they may be expressions and of love, or they may be life-denying, armored in legalism and false theology, or perhaps even speaking the naked language of brute power” (Merton 4-5). This statement completely qualifies the assessment of both the citizens of Oran as well as Rapture. These people, when faced with environs that undoubtedly force them violently to confront and accept the Absurd, can no longer live in systematic existence, and instead respond in abstractions with both positive and negative implications. The citizens of Oran that the story revolves around react to the plague by attempting to medically combat the epidemic despite their undeniably futile efforts. The citizens of Rapture, splicers, take the route of Merton’s life-denying “naked language of brute power” devolving Rapture into nothing more than a virtual representation of Hobbes’ state of nature, where one can do anything to preserve one’s own life, provided it possible in the limits of the law of nature. The splicers only embody the lower tier of social hierarchy in Rapture, but even those in control, Frank Fontaine and Andrew Ryan are not free from the bounds of this fundamental Absurdist truth. 

The human instinct to dominate and to destroy is seen clearly embodied in the character of Andrew Ryan, the supreme dominator, founder and monarch of Rapture. Throughout the vast majority of the game the player, in the role of Jack, is fighting against Ryan, whose sole drive seems to be an “I will dominate you and the entire city.” To parallel Merton’s quote, Ryan’s drive to dominate stems from the profound conflict between his massive megalomaniacal enterprise for meaning and his eventual realization that this meaning is simply not impossible. “He seeks to make that [impossible] universe familiar to himself by using it for his own ends, but his own ends are capricious and ambivalent.” When Ryan is finally confronted and commits suicide via the Jack’s actions, it is painfully obvious that he succumbs to Camus’ consequence of revolt. After searching for meaning in existence, and finding none, Ryan is presented with two options, acceptance and denial. The act of elusion of acceptance by turning to a higher power is obviously not in Ryan’s philosophy (exemplified by the banner that reads No Gods or Kings) therefore acceptance is the only option. Hence, the easiest way of dealing with the Absurd, as Camus has previously stated, is the simple act of suicide, the acceptance that life is just not worth living, that life is just too much. Camus writes in The Myth of Sisyphus, “This is where it is seen to what a degree absurd experience is remote from suicide. It may be thought that suicide follows revolt – but wrongly. For it does not represent the logical outcome of revolt. It is just the contrary by the consent it presupposes. Suicide, like the leap [of faith], is acceptance at its extreme” (54). Not only does Ryan take this way out of the Absurd, but decides to use it as one last opportunity to enlighten Jack, and the player to their unwitting situation. To quote Bioshock, as the player confronts Ryan for the first and final time he begins, “The assassin has overcome my final line of defense, and now he plans to murder me. In the end what separates a man from a slave? Money? Power? No, a man chooses, and a slave obeys!” Ryan delivers a small monologue regarding the phrase “Would you kindly?” and its enslaving effect on Jack, and finally commits assisted suicide by handing the player his golf club and stating “Was a man sent to kill, or a slave?” His last words are a repetition of the phrase “A man chooses; a slave obeys.” This overexpressed recurrence of the parallel between the player and a slave only serves to strengthen the resolve of Absurdist revelation in the player. An undeniably uncanny resemblance can be found in Camus’ own observations on the state of absurdity which I found vital in understanding the Absurd in relation to this specific section of Bioshock: “But at that moment I am well aware that that higher liberty, that freedom to be, which alone can serve as a basis for a truth, does not exist. Death is there as the only reality. After death the chips are down. I am not even free, either, to perpetuate myself, but a slave, and, above all, a slave without hope of an eternal revolution, without recourse to contempt. And who without revolution and without contempt can remain a slave?” (Sisyphus 57). Of course, the rest of the game is spent attempting to do just that, to revolt from slavery. However, just as Camus discusses, this is never really possible, even in the context of the game narrative. Once killing Ryan, the player attempts to rid his or her self of Fontaine’s slavery, but in doing so willingly becomes a slave to Tenenbaum, perhaps a healthier option, but slavery nonetheless. And after the game ends, we witness is the death of Jack, the player character; then, and only then are we released from the slavery of the game, both narratively and abstractly. However, to further complicate this notion of being a slave to freedom, Camus continues, “But at the same time the absurd man realizes that hitherto he was bound to that postulate of freedom on the illusion of which he was living. In a certain sense, that hampered him. To the extent to which he imagined a purpose to his life, he adapted himself to the demand of a purpose to be achieved and became the slave of his liberty” (Sisyphus 57-58). This follow-through can be applied to Bioshock in the usual dichotomy, both narratively and experientially. In both senses, when the player believes he is attempting to help Atlas reunite with his lost family, he or she progresses through the game in a manner not unlike Camus mentions, in an adaptive manner in order to reach the goal specified, playing the game more as an adventure within a new world. When the game shifts to its different narrative platform, the player realizes to an extent the slavery that he or she was put under the entire game. Because of this realization the focus shifts from the manner in which the player plays the first section to little more than a mere progression through the rest of the game, with the only difficulty attempting to overcome obstacles in that progression, i.e. becoming a big daddy, escorting little sisters, killing Fontaine. This is as Camus suggests, “In a certain sense, that [misguided illusion of freedom] hampered [the player].” This incarceration of the audience is as just as much a vital part of The Plague as it is of Bioshock. The motif of slavery is seen throughout the novel as well as Camus’ own Absurdist thinking, so much so that “In an early stage of composition, Camus noted he did not want to call his book The Plague but rather something like The Prisoners, perhaps to highlight its theme of universal incarceration, the sense that, as represented by Oran, all the world’s a dungeon” (Kellman 98). As Rieux poignantly states at the beginning of The Plague, "They fancied themselves free, and no one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences” (35). 

Perhaps the greatest parallel between the plots of The Plague and Bioshock is that the protagonist and/or narrator is never revealed until the very near end of the narrative. In the case of The Plague, the entire novel is presented in a third person account, and only at the very last chapter of Part V, does the character Dr. Rieux reveal that he has been the narrator of the entire book. This functions as a way to present the sordid account of the struggle against plague in Oran in an objective way, which also distances the viewer from the events taking place. This type of shift also occurs in Bioshock where the player plays through the massive majority of the game believing they are playing as a character stranded in Rapture due to a plane crash. Only until meeting Andrew Ryan does one realize that they have been a member of Rapture all along, guided by a catchphrase embedded in Jack, the player character’s genetic code. Whereas a player thought they were playing freely throughout the entire game, they player had been following the exact instructions given to him or her in a sequential method. The final charge in The Plague had been to realize the narrator, Rieux, was in the middle of the events taking place within the narrative the whole time, effectively changing the way the reader viewed the actions taken by both Rieux as well as changing the attitude toward all the entire experience. I argue that Bioshock does a more thorough and more immersive job of this type of meta-media experience. When a player realizes that he or she has essentially been a slave within the game events, it also rings true that the entire game, in a sense, enslaves the player to a certain path through the assistance of level design. These levels are meant to guide a player in one specific path, only allowing for an infinitesimal amount of actions to be performed. Both of these realizations, however, serve to take viewers out of the realm that they are immersed and place them in that metaphysical void that they experiences when they find themself a stranger in their own universe. In that way, both of these narrative displacements serve to confront the audience with the Absurd. “Thus the absurd man realizes that he was not really free” (Sisyphus 58). This lack of freedom as seen in the contained environment in The Plague, which could be interpreted as both the closed walls of the city of Oran as well as the constant structure of the story as a book, and the restricted milieu of Bioshock, as seen in the confined space of Rapture, as well as the limits of room design, is absolutely crucial in developing a situation in which to showcase the absurd. 

The plague as described in The Plague is easily transferred from a bacterial disease to a cultural one, relatable back to both Bioshock and the Absurd. Amidst the beginning of Part IV of The Plague the character Jean Tarrou offers the story of his life previous to arriving at Oran. In his description he relates the tale of accompanying his father, a lawyer, to work one day and witnessing him condemn to death a small, owlish man whom Tarrou eventually witnesses brutally decapitated. After this horrifying observation, Tarrou decides to do what he can to rid the social order around him of murder and its related injustice. He fights on the left Republican side of the Spanish Civil War, subsequently through witnessing a man condemned to death by firing squad in Hungary realizes that the same plague he had been fighting against was as much engrained in himself as those he’d witnessed it in prior. He states in the final throes of his account, “I have realized that we all have plague, and I have lost my peace. And today I am still trying to find it; still trying to understand all those others and not to be the mortal enemy of anyone… The good man, the man who infects hardly anyone, is the man who has the fewest lapses of attention. And it needs tremendous will-power, a never ending tension of the mind, to avoid such lapses… But that is also why some of us, those who want to get the plague out of their systems, feel such desperate weariness, a weariness from which nothing remains to set us free except death” (Plague 228-229). This is an unabashed nod to Absurdist concepts, whereas after being confronted with the Absurd the only rational manner of coping is to live constantly in its wake, and only death offers escape from the meaningless human condition. Only through constant acknowledgement of this “plague state” can one avoid further contamination of themselves and others. This is just as evident in Bioshock, where the player, through Jack, is led to the same conclusion as Tarrou. The conclusion being that the player is not a pure, meaningful soul in the midst of the plague-ridden, but that there is no distinction between the plague, and that the plague exists both in the evil Jack encounters in the game, but also in the way the player has been led by adroit and condemned predisposition through the game space. Merton writes in relation to The Plague, “The real drama of the book is found in the contrapuntal treatment of the theme of evil on two levels: the Plague as physical evil and the Plague as a deficiency in the human spirit, a challenge which summons up the deepest resources of the human conscience in its capacity for courage and love” (13). 

I now return to The Myth of Sisyphus to conclude my analysis. I have previously outlined several of the main connecting points between The Plague and Bioshock and their relation to the notion of the Absurd, a notion that arises from the time-proven fact that humans search for meaning in life meeting with the time-proven fact that the universe offers no such meaning and staunchly cannot provide one. Camus offers his insight on the Absurd in The Myth of Sisyphus, so it seems only natural to conclude with a contrast within the two mediums being compared and its text. The Plague takes its reader through the tale of a mid-twentieth century city stricken by plague, and attempts to provide a structural ground by which the reader, just as Rieux does in the novel, is allowed to confront and experience the Absurd in a confrontational design. Bioshock, as a representational game, puts the player in the foreign underwater city of Rapture, and through a series of relations and struggles, allows the player through Jack to encounter the same Absurd revelation in both a direct and metaphysical manner. In a direct contradiction to Andrew Ryan’s memorable quote, “A man chooses, a slave obeys” Camus replies “Man does not choose. The absurd and the extra life it involves therefore do not depend on man’s will, but on its contrary, which is death” (Sisyphus 63). Camus writes in The Myth of Sisyphus, “The absurd enlightens me on this point: there is no future. Henceforth this is the reason for my inner freedom. … Losing oneself in that bottomless certainty, feeling henceforth sufficiently remote from one’s own life to increase it and take a broad view of it – this involves the principle of a liberation. … The divine availability of the condemned man before whom the prison doors open in a certain early dawn, that unbelievable disinterestedness with regard to everything except for the pure flame of life- it is clear that death and the absurd are here the principles of the only reasonable freedom: that which a human heart can experience and live” (58-60). Lastly, just as Sisyphus, the Absurd hero, after one puts down The Plague or turns off Bioshock; one must imagine them happy.




Works Cited

Camus, Albert. The Plague. Trans. Stuart Gilbert. New York: Random House, 1947. Print.

Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. Trans. Justin O’Brien. New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1955. Print.

Foley, John. Albert Camus: From the Absurd to Revolt. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2008.
Print.

Kellman, Steven G. The Plague: Fiction and Resistance. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1993. Print.

Merton, Thomas. Albert Camus’ The Plague: Introduction and Commentary. New York: Seabury Press,
1968. Print.

No comments:

Post a Comment