For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222
Call 1-800-351-0222
"THE PLAGUE."
Term Paper ID:29685
Get This Paper Free! or
Essay Subject:
Analysis of Albert Camus' novel.... More...
4 Pages / 900 Words
1 sources, 10 Citations,
MLA Format
$16.00
More Papers on This Topic
Paper Abstract:
Analysis of Albert Camus' novel. The action of the State quarantining a city during a plague. Danger to uninfected individuals who cannot leave. The rights of individuals versus the power of the State. Goal of the State to protect the well-being of the community and State. The Individuals' objective to protect their families and private interests.
Paper Introduction:
The determination of the state’s absolute right to quarantine a city in the event of a plague is fundamentally determined by its impact on the right of the individual. Based on Albert Camus’ description of the plague in his novel, The Plague, it is evident that the state’s absolute right to quarantine a city violated the freedom of the individual in many ways. The most critical objection to the state’s imposition of the quarantine was the key fact that uninfected members of the town risk catching the infection by remaining in this town. Because of the state’s implementation of the quarantine, all these uninfected people were unable to travel out of the town where their chances of catching the plague would be decreased significantly. Exiled from the rest of the world, they were condemned prisoners, trapped in the town against their will
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
Ultimately, the rights of the individual habitants of a city have tobe suspended in the event of a contagious epidemic. In spite of these relevant arguments, the state should still have theabsolute right to quarantine a city when the inhabitants have been exposedto an uncontrollable epidemic such as plague for several reasons. Without imposing the quarantine, the state would not able toprevent the plague from "killing off half the population of this town"(Camus 49) as well as other towns. In such diresituations in which individuals are solely concerned about their own familymembers and private interests, the state is the only entity that can adopta broad perspective of the situation and implement the necessary measuresto protect the well-being of the community, not only for one city, but alsofor others. Certainly, the sudden closure ofthe city gates and the termination of communication between the inhabitantsof Oran and the outside world also imposed tremendous hardships onindividual families. Instead of feeling grateful that their relatives might bespared the consequences of the infectious disease, these families wouldrather be reunited with their family members, at the expense of thelatter's lives (Camus 7 ). Exiled from the rest of the world, they were condemnedprisoners, trapped in the town against their will (Camus 7 -1). Essentially, under these circumstances, individuals wereunable to think about the situation beyond their immediate universe.Clearly, the state could not rely on individuals to make decisions thatwould have a dramatically adverse impact on the rest of the community. Work CitedCamus, Albert. Considering the fact that the well-being of inhabitants all over thecountry and the world were at risk through the actions of the individual,it was vital that the state's right to quarantine a city supersede therights of the individual inhabitants in the novel. Moreover, by imposing measures such as forcing reluctant patientssuffering from plague to go the hospital and quarantining the people livingin the same house (Camus 62), the state had clearly disregarded the rightsof the individuals to their own privacy. At any rate, to decrease therisk of spreading the plague to others, the state had to forbid thedeparture of anyone from the town of Oran. In his analysis of the situation, Camus notedthat the people's initial reaction to the quarantine was focused solely ontheir loved ones who were staying in another town. Because of the state's implementation of thequarantine, all these uninfected people were unable to travel out of thetown where their chances of catching the plague would be decreasedsignificantly. The Plague. Stuart Gilbert. Trans. In cases when family members were visiting in anothertown, the prohibition of movement in and out of Oran resulted in theseparation between family members (Camus 68). The mostimportant reason is the contagious nature of the disease. More importantly, Camuspointed out that "the egoism of love made them immune to the generaldistress" (76-7). For certain characters suchas the Raymond Rambert, the journalist who was trapped in a foreign townwithout any family ties, the quarantine was also extremely difficult (Camus85). The determination of the state's absolute right to quarantine a cityin the event of a plague is fundamentally determined by its impact on theright of the individual. As Dr. Rieux explained, he could not be certain whether towninhabitants who did not yet exhibit the symptoms of the disease had beeninfected by plague (Camus 86). Based on Albert Camus' description of the plaguein his novel, The Plague, it is evident that the state's absolute right toquarantine a city violated the freedom of the individual in many ways. Because of the devastating nature of the disease, the state has theright to override the rights of the individual because each individual'saction has significant ramifications for the well-being of the entirecommunity. Unlike many of the inhabitants in the town of Oran whoonly cared for their self-interests, the state was able to adopt a wideperspective of the situation (Camus 68-9). The element of doubt wassufficient to retain the people due to the terrible consequences of plague. Dr.Rieux's explanation for his refusal to help Rambert offers the ultimatejustification for the state to exercise its absolute right to quarantine acity. Bernard Rieux in the novel, the rapid deterioration of the patient uponinfection and the high rate of infection required the swift and radicalintervention of the state in ensuring that the disease did not spreadelsewhere. Themost critical objection to the state's imposition of the quarantine was thekey fact that uninfected members of the town risk catching the infection byremaining in this town. In contrast, the irrational and selfish nature of the individualinhabitants was exemplified in the decision of some families to ask theirrelatives to take advantage of the authorities' permission to allow them toreturn to Oran. Even more significantly, in the novel, the state's decision toquarantine the city was based on the information of the overall situationcollected by the local and medical agencies, thus bolstering the validityof the situation. In the novel, Rambert, the journalist, sought to leave the townby asking Dr. Rieux to certify that he did not have the disease. As explained byDr. Even though thestate's harsh measures creates tremendous hardships for the people, thecontagious and devastating nature of the disease provides littlealternative. Furthermore, because the movements of an infected individualin and out of the city can result in the rapid spread of the contagion, thestate should have the absolute right to quarantine a city. New York, NY: Vintage International, 1991. Furthermore, if the state authorities wereto let any one of these inhabitants leave town, many others would demand toleave the town, thus establishing a precedent that would endanger the livesof inhabitants of other towns (Camus 1 6).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
We can write a Custom Essay just for you.
Browse Essays by Subject