Caligula by Albert Camus summary and theme

Caligula Summary

Caligula is a play by Albert Camus, a 20th-century French author and philosopher. Camus is known for his novels He received the Nobel Prize in 1957 for his works The Stranger and The Plague. Despite his resistance to the designation while he was alive, he is now regarded as a member of the existentialist philosophical school. Caligula falls into philosophical reflections on the absurd, which were greatly influenced by his literary work. Some people consider Caligula to be an early example of the "Theater of the Absurd," a trend among European playwrights in the middle of the 20th century. These playwrights investigated the notion that life is basically meaningless, making all human judgments—such as right and wrong—inherently absurd.

The movie Caligula tells the tale of Emperor Caligula from the time of his sister Drusilla's passing until his own assassination several years later. Beginning with a few patricians, the first act

By the time Act II begins, the patricians have suffered through three years of Caligula’s random brutality. Some are beginning to plot an assassination attempt, but others counsel caution. The common people of Rome still support the emperor. One character—Cherea—advises the others to wait until Caligula’s brutality has had a broader impact, when even more people would turn against him. This provides the emperor a continued window in which to press his philosophy to its extreme. At a gathering of patricians in Act II, Caligula forces one man to laugh at the story of his own son’s execution, seizes another’s wife for rape, and forces a third to drink poison, all while issuing decrees to produce a national famine.

In Act III, Caligula leads the patricians through a blasphemous religious performance, assaulting the common pieties that form the basis of Roman society. Several characters try to warn him about the threat of an assassination plot. One even produces a tablet of evidence against Cherea, who has emerged as the ringleader. Caligula is convinced, however, that his destiny is already set; he rebuffs each warning by derailing the conversations into absurd, unrelated topics. He eventually calls for Cherea and discusses his philosophical principles before revealing that he knows of Cherea’s plot. To Cherea’s astonishment, Caligula destroys the evidence and makes no attempt to stop the plot.

In the final act, Caligula invites the patricians to a series of performances. These are meant to reveal the absurd, meaningless nature of reality. Along the way, he continues to brutalize them with unrelenting applications of his logic, forcing them to forfeit their fortunes and lives. He eventually sends everyone away except his mistress, Caesonia, who tries to comfort him. By this time, however, Caligula’s power and nihilism have become so all-consuming, culminating in his murder of Caesonia.

Caligula has one final soliloquy: He reflects on his failure to seize the impossible and realizes that his pursuit of freedom has been wrong all along. It has led him to a final fate from which there is no escape, no freedom for any other choice. The conspirators rush in and stab Caligula in the face, led by two of his closest circle. The emperor is dying as the curtain falls, but he calls out in the final moment that he remains alive.

caligula summary sparknotes, what is caligula known for, albert camus' philosophy, albert camus influences, existentialism albert camus, albert camus biographie, albert camus height, how did albert camus die

Caligula Character Analysis

CALIGULA (CAIUS)

Caligula is the play’s protagonist. While his name is noted as Caligula in the written text, most of the other characters refer to him in dialogue by his personal name, Caius. As a historical figure, Caligula was among the most notorious of the Roman emperors, rivaling or exceeding even the infamous Nero and Domitian in depravity. He reigned from 37 to 41 CE, a short period of rule between the longer reigns of Tiberius and Claudius. Camus’s portrayal of Caligula follows along historical lines. However, he interprets Caligula’s behavior according to 20th-century nihilism or absurdism rather than the philosophical perspectives of the first century. In other words, Camus takes the story of a historical figure and reinterprets it to explore modern ideas.

The drama depicts Caligula as a good emperor up until the passing of his sister and mistress Drusilla, which leads to an insight into the nature of reality. Caligula comes to the conclusion that everything else—the worth of love, good and evil, right and wrong—are meaningless after becoming convinced that nothing endures and that death is the only certainty. The bounds of reality bind human existence into a system where nothing matters unless the impossible can be realised. Social conventions are seen by Caligula as an absurd restriction on his independence. He seeks independence by removing what he perceives as illogical restrictions from those around him, frequently from the very lives of other characters.

Although Caligula is frequently depicted as having insanity, Camus demonstrates that he does not Camus presents Caligula as a tragic figure despite his abhorrent brutality. His actions are designed to evoke shock and revulsion. However, the play itself sympathizes with the logic of his position, often expressed by Cherea. While the consequences of Caligula’s philosophy are devastating, the play admits the logic of his perspective. Part of the tragic nature of Caligula’s character is the tragedy of nihilism itself: It leads to ruin, but no alternative is ever found. At the end of the play, Caligula bemoans that he has not been able to seize the impossible. He realizes that his pursuit of freedom has led him in the wrong direction, culminating in freedom’s negation. Life’s meaninglessness remains, and the play ends exactly where Caligula predicted that all things end: in death.

CHEREA

Cherea, like Caligula, is based on a historical figure—in this case, a former military tribune who served as a leader of Caligula’s guard. Camus changed the historical portrayal of Cherea, which emphasizes his desire for revenge against the emperor because of personal taunts. In Camus’s interpretation, Cherea is a stoic character who wants to assassinate Caligula only to protect against the dangerous excesses of the emperor’s philosophy. Rather than a praetorian guard, the Cherea of the play is a literary man, a philosopher.

Cherea represents a voice of calm and moderation, which is striking when one considers that he becomes the ringleader of the assassination plot. Having the most moderate, stoic character in the play organize the attack is a way of showing just how far-reaching Caligula’s actions are. Whereas most of the other characters believe that Caligula is either having a mental health experience or motivated by cruelty, Cherea understands Caligula’s philosophical perspective. He agrees that the emperor is logical but denies that his philosophy is sound: it is not the sort of truth one can build one’s life upon. Cherea’s decision to kill Caligula represents not a desire for revenge or malice, but a necessity undertaken to protect the world from the danger of Caligula’s nihilism.

SCIPIO

Scipio is Caligula’s young friend. His name suggests that he represents one of the most famous families of Ancient Rome, which counted among their number the general Scipio Africanus. Scipio is devoted to Caligula at the beginning of the play, choosing to see the best in the young emperor. His character represents the hopefulness of the Roman establishment at the outset of Caligula’s reign, as well as their sense of betrayal as Caligula’s rule spiraled into brutality and devastation.

Scipio’s relationship with Caligula swings back and forth throughout the play, driven by Caligula’s murder of his father on one hand and Scipio’s sympathetic fondness for the emperor on the other. Caligula manipulates Scipio, pretending to share his artistic sensibilities when he wants to draw out his affection, but referencing his father’s death when he wants to send Scipio away. In the end, taunting Scipio with his father’s execution leads to Scipio’s participation in the assassination.

CAESONIA

Caesonia is based on a historical figure, Milonia Caesonia. While she is Caligula’s mistress in the play, most historical sources record her as his wife, thus giving her the title of empress. As with the other characters, Camus changes some features of Caesonia’s story—in her case, making her death come at the hands of Caligula rather than as part of the wider assassination plot.

She and Helicon are the only characters who remain fully devoted to Caligula throughout the play. Helicon acts as an assistant to Caligula and appears blithely unconcerned by the devastation being wreaked around him. Caesonia, in contrast, remains on Caligula’s side, but with some awareness of the effects of his actions—in particular, the psychological toll he wreaks upon himself.

Caesonia defers to Caligula in public scenes with other characters, but when they are alone, she tries to address the state of his soul. She believes that she can comfort Caligula through her affection, but her continued attempts lead to Caligula’s realization that not even love, affection, or memory—in short, nothing that connects people to one another—is of lasting value. Her attempts at love incite Caligula’s final act of cruelty: he murders her as a symbolic act of severing those closest ties of human affection, which he views as meaningless. Caesonia’s character does not significantly change throughout the play, but her influence on Caligula’s trajectory is profound.

Caligula Themes

THE DESIRE FOR THE IMPOSSIBLE

Yearning for the impossible drives Caligula throughout the play. The emperor declares: “What happened to me is quite simple; I suddenly felt a desire for the impossible” (8). He speaks about this in terms of his quest to capture the moon, but it is clear that it represents a philosophical ambition as much as a fanciful quest.

As the play continues, the reader begins to understand where this desire, so apparently unrooted in reality, comes from. Caligula’s philosophy is based on the premise that nothing lasts—everyone dies, no one is happy, and so nothing matters in the end. Caligula is driven to pursue the impossible, at least in part, as a reaction against life’s meaninglessness. It is how he responds to Drusilla’s death. The impossible is an escape from the meaninglessness of everything around him: “Yet, really, it’s quite simple. If I’d had the moon, if love were enough, all might have been different” (73). This sentiment parallels some of Camus’s own journey: he was always looking for a solution to the inherent nihilism of life.

Caligula's yearning for the unattainable is shown not only in his attempt to seize the moon. He also discusses it in terms of going above and beyond to become a god: "But what kind of deity is it that I would want to be on par with him? I am assuming control of a kingdom where the impossibility is the monarch, not something higher, far above the gods. (16). At the end of the play, he recognises that he has fallen short, though. Despite Caligula's use of power, Helicon, whom he had assigned the job of seizing the moon, has not been successful: "The unthinkable! At the edges of the universe and in the recesses of my heart, I have looked for it. [...] I've selected a

LOGIC AS THE MEASURE OF TRUTH

Camus transforms the historical portrayal of Caligula. He suggests that the young emperor is not experiencing psychosis but is rather quite logical. Caligula says this himself: “All that’s needed, I should say, is to be logical right through, at all costs” (8).

If it were only Caligula saying such things, the reader might still suspect psychosis, but Cherea, the most level-headed character in the play, repeats and affirms Caligula’s logic: “He is converting his philosophy into corpses and—unfortunately for us—it’s a philosophy that’s logical from start to finish” (21).

Strictly speaking, to be “logical” does not necessarily mean that an argument is true—it only means that it validly proceeds from its own premises. However, Caligula believes that the logic of his position reflects its correspondence to reality. In the blasphemous litany he forces the patricians to recite, he refers to the world’s lack of truth as a “verity of verities” (41)—that is, as an ultimate truth. With this paradoxical turn of phrase, he conveys his belief that the world is meaningless. If his premise is correct—that the final reality is that “men die; and they are not happy” (8)—then life is meaningless.

Cherea, however, adds nuance to Caligula’s perspective. While he agrees with the logic of Caligula’s argument, he does not think that logic is the only measure by which a position should be judged. In reference to his own way of thinking, Cherea admits to Caligula: “My plan of life may not be logical, but at least it’s sound” (51). The implication is that Caligula’s philosophy is unsound. Regardless of its logic, or even of its truth, it is not possible for humans to build a life upon its principles. Thus, it loses its value as a philosophical system. It is unworkable in a practical sense, and perhaps even dangerous, which in Cherea’s view means that it needs to be discarded. Throughout the play, there is an ongoing dialogue about whether a position’s logic is enough to make it worth pursuing.

DEATH AND THE MEANINGLESSNESS OF LIFE

In the author’s preface to the play’s 1958 publication, Camus writes that “if [philosophy] exists, it stands on the level of this assertion by the hero: ‘Men die; and they are not happy’” (vi). If there is no reality beyond this life, and if death does away with all the attachments, memories, and values of life, then all those things have no lasting value. “I now know that nothing, nothing lasts,” says Caligula (71). In the emperor’s view, death is the ultimate reality, stripping away all meaning and worth.

Caligula’s philosophy allows him to deal out death without any hesitation or compunction. In his view, death is inevitable and renders everything else in his victims’ lives meaningless. Therefore, there would be no reason not to kill them whenever the fancy struck. Caligula thus exerts power by randomly executing members of the patrician class and tricking interlocutors to their deaths by entrapping them in their own words.

Caligula is convinced that death is his destiny. It appears inevitable, and so he makes no attempts to escape it beyond his idealistic pursuit of the impossible. Rather than put down the assassination coup, he destroys the evidence of its existence and allows the conspirators to keep planning, all while continuing behavior that led to the plot in the first place. As he destroys the evidence implicating Cherea, Caligula says, “your emperor awaits his repose. It’s his way of living and being happy” (54). Caligula suggests that the only practical way of living is to embrace death as one’s destiny.

Caligula finally faces his own death. Rather than end the play on that note, however, Camus provides an unexpected twist. It is evident that Caligula is dying as the curtain falls, but the final line repudiates death: “I’m still alive!” (74). Here Camus suggests that the ideas which motivated the emperor’s behavior are still alive in the world, as inescapably present as death itself.

THE PURSUIT OF COMPLETE FREEDOM

The inescapable reality of death strips meaning from every other part of life. This includes all human customs, attachments, and valuations, all the social standards by which people live in community with one another. If nothing lasts and nothing matters, then politeness counts for nothing, sexual morality counts for nothing, and even good and evil count for nothing. They are all meaningless. Caligula views them as illogical restrictions—why bind oneself to doing those things which are perceived as “good” if there’s really no such thing as goodness? His mission is to enforce meaninglessness on his subjects, and to find freedom from the illogical restrictions of moral and social rules: “This world has no importance,” says Caligula. “Once a man realizes that, he wins his freedom” (14).

While this might seem logical given Caligula’s philosophy, it has two serious flaws: Freedom is a contextual reality which impacts others, not an independent attainment; and second, Caligula’s philosophy leads to a negation of freedom, as death removes all other choices and possibilities. Camus articulates the first of these errors in his preface to the 1958 edition: “Caligula accepts death because he has understood that no one can save himself all alone and that one cannot be free at the expense of others” (vi). Caligula’s exercise of freedom impinges on everyone else’s freedom in dramatic and terrifying ways. Rather than being the principle of a liberated life, “freedom” in Caligula’s philosophy becomes a zero-sum game in which, if there is a winner, everyone else loses.

Caligula expresses the second flaw of his philosophy in his final soliloquy, as the assassination plot closes in around him: “I have chosen the wrong path,” he says, “a path that leads to nothing. My freedom isn’t the right one” (73). He admits that his pursuit of freedom has backed him into a corner. It is not true freedom, but a captivity in death, the only option left to him. It is the most pernicious restriction of them all. His final epiphany matches a common theme in moral philosophy, which warns against mistaking liberty for what is merely license. Liberty is true freedom, but it comes with associated obligations to one’s fellow humans, whereas license—an imagined freedom from arbitrary morals—leads not to freedom, but to captivity to one’s passions.

ALSO READ:-