Sisyphus: Paragon of Intoxication

As punishment for his defiance of the gods and passions for life, Sisyphus is sentenced to the underworld, forced to roll a stone uphill only to watch it come back down.  Condemned to endless, futile toiling, serves as Camus’ model to illustrate a rebellious happiness in spite of the absurd life. Camus begins by making awareness of one’s fate the first step to achieving the absurd victory, “If this myth is tragic, that is because its hero is conscious,” (Myth of Sisyphus). By gaining consciousness of his fate, Sisyphus may know the full effect of the punishment; it would not be as great of a torture if he could hold onto hope.  Once awareness emerges, a few options open up to determine if he shall be victorious over his fate or be defeated.  Melancholy and hopeless longing for happiness prove that the torture has broken Sisyphus’ spirit, resulting in defeat. Something more powerful shall be necessary for victory over fate itself: scorn.  “The lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time crowns his victory. There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.,” (Myth of Sisyphus).  Rebellious through contempt for his captives, Camus finds Sisyphus raising himself above his toiling.  Once victory has been seized, happiness may come.  Possessing the power to surmount fate provides the power to “conclude that all is well”.

Camus’ recognition of the power of scorn is the project’s greatest achievement, but his attempt to demonstrate Sisyphus’ happiness is lacking and at times contradictory.  By holding onto such contempt for his punishment and overlords, he proves himself to be unbroken.  The endless rolling of the stone has not been enough to beat him into the despair that ensures his defeat.  Instead, Sisyphus laughs at the gods’ ineptitude.  Their ultimate torture is unworthy of him and his contempt allows him to endure victoriously.  Sisyphus emerges undefeated but at the cost of a pleasant life.  For Camus, victory is dependent on scorn and happiness is dependent upon victory. But, scorn and happiness are incompatible, creating a dilemma for Sisyphus’ supposed happiness. While empowering, living with such contempt produces a wretched condition.  Scorn is an intoxicant: fuel for exhilaration but poison for the mind.  Happiness does not emerge in such an intoxicated state, rendering the two incompatible.  Without scorn or victory, Camus’ account for happiness is little more than proclaiming that happiness can and should be chosen but for unknown reasons. 

 “One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

Must I? Besides Camus’ lack of demonstration for the happy Sisyphus, there is an assumption that happiness is the proper state.  Despite the absurdity of life Camus proclaims, the happy life is the most deserving to be lived.  There has been a longtime fixation upon achieving happiness but such a fixation places harsh limitation on human potential.  Two of the greatest features possessed by humans are our capacity for variation and tenacity to strive.  With such a wide array of emotions and paths to walk, designating happiness as the sole life worthy of pursuit is disappointingly narrow-minded.  And what shall be left to do once the struggle for a permanent happy state has been achieved but to cut off the rest and wait to die? I say live as a traveler and walk whatever paths appear before you.

As a last bit of reflection, I would like to express how this particular writing revealed how variable truth can appear. The Myth of Sisyphus proved to be one of the most challenging readings for me to write about (in this class), not because the writing was difficult to understand but because my sporadic mood has resulted in wildly different interpretations in rapid succession. Due to certain unpleasant circumstances, my mood and general thoughts about living have had difficulty remaining consistent. With each change, I tackled the reading again, only to come up with a different answer than the previous attempt. Whether I found Camus to be an idiot or a genius, Sisyphus full of joy or woe, spite worthless or incredibly intoxicating, each ‘truth’ was held with just as much conviction as the others despite seemingly conflicting ideas. Each notion appeared so clear and distinct (for you Descartes lovers or haters out there) that I still cannot be sure of which interpretation I support more than the others. When I began doubting these convictions, I doubted any sense of intrinsic truth or at least by ability to discern it. Truth seemed to be whatever I was hoping for at the time. Word Count: 751