Skip to main content

Plagues, Nazis, and bad allegories

 Something that we talked about a bit right at the beginning of our reading of The Plague (and in class today) was Camus' intention to make this book an allegory of the Nazi occupation of Europe in World War II. As someone who has read extensively about the Nazis' role in WWII, particularly the Holocaust, I was excited for Camus to provide a thought-provoking parallel. However, I was thoroughly disappointed by the direction in which Camus took this parallel. And while The Plague is a fascinating novel through which to examine human nature and deadly plagues, it is inaccurate and even offensive as a WWII metaphor.

First of all, fascism is rooted in extreme government control. In The Plague, the government is very neutral and rational, eliminating this most basic and foundational piece of fascism. Furthermore, in the novel everybody is unified against the plague, which disrupts the parallel between medical teams and resistance groups, since resistance groups were at odds with most of society. It is ignorant to frame Nazi-occupied France (or any Nazi-occupied country in WWII, for that matter) as fully unified, either in support of or against the Nazis, but Camus does exactly this.

Secondly, a cornerstone of Nazism is the systematic targeting of certain groups, while a plague clearly does no such thing. It is offensive to even suggest that there was anything arbitrary about who the Nazis placed in concentration camps and murdered. By failing to include an overly controlling government or a more systematic killer from his novel, Camus' allegory turns into one where the only significant parallel is mass death.

I am not saying that Camus' allegory has absolutely no credibility - there are some scenes that mirror scenes from Europe in WWII (for me, the most chilling of these were the descriptions of mass graves and burning the dead, both of which are clear parallels to the Holocaust). Even the final scene, where Rieux ominously hints at the plague never being fully eradicated, is a clever warning that Nazis and Nazi-like beliefs will always linger under the surface, waiting opportunistically. However, there are not quite enough connections, whether overt or covert, to make this allegory really work.

Comments

  1. Katya S.24 November 2020 at 15:20

    Yeah, I agree with you. I was initially planning to write my last blog post for this novel on something related to WWII, but I scrapped that idea because I just didn't see enough parallels. There were a few moments that popped out at me where I could definitely see a bit of that point peering out (such as the mention of efficiency at the camp), but I don't think it's necessarily enough to frame this novel as a WWII novel. Instead, I think it is more of just a novel focused on how people respond to the unknown. It also serves as a good tool to compare philosophies, but neither of those really do enough to make it a WWII novel. It's a valid idea, just not one related to Nazis.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Noel Chi24 November 2020 at 15:23

    I agree; I was really thrown off by how Camus exaggerated the indiscriminate nature of the plague, especially in the scene depicting the death of M. Othon's young, innocent son. As you pointed out, the Holocaust was anything but indiscriminate. I actually did some poking around on the Internet to see if anyone had come up with a thorough, convincing analysis of The Plague as an allegory for Nazi occupation, and I couldn't find anything worth sharing... Unfortunately, I actively *disagreed* with some of the analyses I read. If anyone has parallels they can draw, though, I'd be curious to hear them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Katya S.24 November 2020 at 15:32

      I think a better statement for this book would be that it was inspired by Camus's experience in Nazi occupied France, but it in no way demonstrates the actual events of the Holocaust. I can see where there might be some parallels; for example, people ignoring a seemingly ominous sign in front of them until it's too late, but it's not enough to make this a full-blown WWII allegory.

      Delete
  3. Lucas Wood30 November 2020 at 19:14

    Yeah it seems pretty loosely based on Nazi occupation, however I think Camus' point is the sysiphian parallels between the two situations and focused more on the parallels between the resistance and health workers than anything else.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bianca7 January 2021 at 10:16

    If I hadn't heard of the Nazi allegory theory beforehand, the idea of the Plague being synonymous with Nazi occupation would never have crossed my mind. If it's hinted at at all, it's only in the general moral and existentialist/absurdist questions the book raises. I think the situation of the plague itself doesn't work well as an allegory, but some of the same moral lessons still apply. Otherwise, I don't think the connection is clear at all.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Will the Party lose steam?

In terms of optimistic book passages, I can't say this one is at the top of my list. Basically what we learned from chapters III-V of Part Three is that the Party will rule the world for all of eternity, and there is no situation in which they will not succeed. Winston protests when O'Brien tells him this, arguing that the Party will self-destruct at some point, or at least some spiritual force in the universe will prevent the eternal rule of the Party. However, O'Brien just mocks Winston. O'Brien makes a very convincing case for the Party, but there is one potential loophole that could topple the Party - decreasing devotion to the cause.  In revolutions, the most passionate generation is the one that actually revolts (obviously). In 1984 , that is the group that is currently running the Party. However, as authoritarian regimes pass down through the generations, this revolutionary fervor dies down, and those in power either loosen their grip enough to destabilize themse...
11 comments
Read more

Isolating the variable: setting in The Plague

Today in class, we talked a lot about how Camus establishes the setting for The Plague . To be honest, a lot of the first section of this book blended together for me - the middle-class French men with unmemorable names, the rats (and then humans) gruesomely dying in the streets, the conversations among medical professionals - many of the finer details are difficult for me to recall. However, the description of Oran stuck with me. The narrator describes one of the blandest and ugliest towns I have ever imagined, with not very nice humans living in it.  At first, I thought it was strange that Camus had selected such a boring setting for his book. Then I realized how intentional it was, and how important. Camus is using the story of the plague as a medium through which to analyze fascism and the Nazis. That is his primary focus, and in order to fully focus on the plague he needs to eliminate all distractions (e.g. a noteworthy setting). He is isolating the variable by placing it in a...
9 comments
Read more

Billy's psychological baggage

Arguably the most defining line of Slaughterhouse-Five is "so it goes". Billy Pilgrim uses this phrase freely throughout the novel, usually in the context of something which would normally be seen as tragic or sickening. The Tralfamadorians use it to remind themselves that time isn't linear, so they shouldn't feel sad or upset when bad things happen. However, Billy tends to use "so it goes" more dismissively, using it to push his problems and traumatic experiences aside. This toxic adaptation of Tralfamadorian culture hurts Billy, as it prevents him from reflecting on and working out his wartime trauma.  From the beginning of the book, it's pretty clear that Billy has some level of psychological damage from the war. He shows recurring symptoms of PTSD, and his uncontrollable time travel could easily be interpreted as traumatic flashbacks. Every time Billy is haunted by his memories of the war, he pushes them away by simply stating, "so it goes...
9 comments
Read more