The Stranger and Sisyphus often seem to receive more attention, and needless to say both are great works, but I've felt that these were still the type of thought of a yet young person struggling to come to terms with absurdity. He is still trying to think about it in terms of ideas and words, which itself is not yet exempt from the absurd. Hence why the conclusion that Sisyphus is happy feels yet a bit forced.

The Plague feels closer to an actual reconciliation with the absurd, through Rieux's whole existence, not just ideas and words.

Indeed The Plague was written later than The Stranger and The Myth of Sisyphus.

From The Plague:

> Rieux had been listening closely to the journalist. Still looking at him, he said gently:

> "Man is not an idea, Rambert."

> The other man jumped up from the bed, his face contorted with emotion.

> "He is an idea and a very brief one, just as soon as he turns away from love. And that's the trouble: we are no longer capable of love. Let's resign ourselves, doctor, let's wait until we are capable of it and if it's really not possible, wait for the general deliverance, without playing at heroes. As for me, I'm not going any further."

> "You're right, Rambert, quite right and I wouldn't want to divert from what you intend to do for anything in the world, because it seems to me good and proper. But I have to tell you this: this whole things is not about heroism. It's about decency. It may seem a ridiculous idea, but the only way to fight the plague is with decency."

> "What is decency?" Rambert asked, suddenly serious.

> "In general, I can't say, but in my case I know that it consists in doing my job."