同途而殊归——《恶心》与《局外人》比较谈

Taking the Common Courses which Lead to Different Destination: Comparing Nauseous with Stranger

在形式上,《恶心》与《局外人》都是主人公的自述,文学与哲学融为一体;在内容上,二者都以“世界是荒诞的”为前提和底色,都塑造了一位严肃、阴郁、痛苦的思想者形象,洛根丁和莫尔索思想的前提和出发点都是“上帝死了”。但是萨特主张自由选择,加缪相信人无可选择,每一种人生都是空虚,改变不了最终的虚无,二人同途而殊归。

In the form, both Nauseous and Stranger are accounts in dramatis personae's own words, syncretizing the literary side and philosophical side. In the aspect of content, the two each figured a severe, gloomy and grievous thinker, Roquentin and Murtha, who thought beginning from the jumping-off place of 'God had been dead', on the premise and grounding of 'the world is absurd'. The difference is that Jean Paul Sartre advocated everyone being free to choose, but Camus believed that person could not make one's option, every kind of life was void and the ultimate nihility had no way to change. So the two took the common courses which nevertheless led to different destination.