From Shalimar to Plague

Now I am reading The Plague by Albert Camus.

Shalimar the Clown ended on a slightly ambiguous note, I wonder if the author was so pleased with his own book that he wanted to leave open the possibility for a sequel. I thought the book was good exposure to the Kashmir situation. I remember learning vaguely about India, and within the brief overview of its history a mention that Kashmir is and was a troubled region. Unfortunately the book didn't help me love and accept Muslims as a misunderstood bunch of dudes the way I think they'd like to be seen here in the States. On the other hand I guess the religion would have to take a less radical form in a civilized and monied society like this one. Isn't that what happened to Christianity?

Spoiler warning, if you're planning to read Shalimar, don't read this...
One thing I didn't like, or didn't expect was India/Kashmira to fall for and carry on with a guy who was from Kashmir. Being used to and growing up in the States wouldn't he be inaccessible?
Then again, I don't undertand the GIs who ended up staying in Vietnam or Korea, since I have a difficult time understanding cultures other than my own. As a side note, my coping mechanism
when encountering foreign behavior, American or other wise is to be accepting and not take anything too seriously. My assumption these days, in my old age is that I'm not going to have time to understand as much as I'd like any more.

On to The Plague. The cover says

"A PERFECT ACHIEVEMENT"
- NEW REPUBLIC
So far it's quite a clever read. The author gives us two characters through which the story is told, one whom the author claims is the author, and one is observed through his day-to-day encounters. The author's author is a detatched, rather eccentric person, who makes notes of odd vignettes for himself, but collects information from various sources to compose the book I am reading. I haven't decided whether the author has stepped out of his character's shoes to tell about him, or whether the author intends that his author character is writing about himself. The other character, a doctor, in a book about the plague, easily, or I should say appropriately, is in a position to chronicle the effects because he is in the position of visiting and treating affected patients. The author changes from specific conversations, using quotation marks, and specific people to the doctor's general experiences such as the fact that he has to stay at the house where a patient is inflicted, or the family will shut out the ambulance when it arrives. Then he's accompanied by volunteer police who stay so he can move on to the next house.

Also interesting about the book are the frequent references to the sky, be it indifferent, clear blue, oppressive, etc.

A little comment about myself. I almost stopped reading this book. There's a passage that reminded me that I don't do well with blood, especially in a story, or a book, or even just at parties where someone is telling a funny story about hearts exploding with nothing externally visible.
This passage is after a meeting with the local government in which Dr. Rieux tries to convince them that something is definitely going on, and that they are better safe than sorry.
Followed by scowls and protestations, Rieux left the committee-room. Some minutes later, as he was driving down a back street redolent of fried fish and urine, a woman screaming in agony, her groin dripping blood, stretched out her arms toward him.

This book is about what people do in a situation where something is going wrong, and eventually that something starts to interfere in their lives, eventually to the point where their town becomes literally cut off from the outside world.

I did stop reading Interview with the Vampire, I couldn't handle the engorgement the newly changed vampire experienced. I didn't stop reading Gravity's Rainbow though the part about the dogs' salivary glands being surgically pointed outside their mouths to more easily collect and measure the salivary response almost made me pass out.