In Camus' The Myth of Sisphus, Camus comments on the story of Sisphus having to spend the rest of his life pushing a rock up a hill. Though he seems to be suffering and though having to spend the rest of one's life in such a state would be miserable, he is in the end fact happy. Since the task is so absurd and ridiculous, every time Sisyphus pushes the rock up the hill, he is rebelling against the absurd and does not let the absurd get in the way of his life, even if it is a life spent doing such a task.
Sisyphus pushing the rock up the hill everyday can be seen from the outside as a sort of torture. Towards the beginning of the semester we talked about how even if you were bound and tortured with your arms tied around your back, not able to move, that you still have a choice of sinking into darkness and sorrow, or still moving on in your mind. No matter how physically impaired you are you still have the ability to think and even feel anxiety about possibilities. You do not have to think how miserable your life is that you are imprisoned--you always have the choice to think of something else and not succumb to sorrow. In East of Eden, to bring this book up again, the character Lee lives by one word: timshel, which means 'thou mayest.' In the story of Sisyphus, this word is applicable in that it says basically that you are allowed, you can chose your own destiny--there are always possibilities, which are left up to you. Sisyphus is happy to be pushing up the rock, to be revolting against the absurd, because he is allowed to; he is free to think and feel what he chooses, and he chooses to keep pushing and never give up.
However, though Sisyphus is going against the absurd task, how does he know he is happy? Could he be merely lying to himself like Sartre's "bad faith?" He could almost be compared to the overzealous waiter in the restaurant: Sisyphus could be simply acting or faking his happiness--maybe he is just "a little too excited" to be pushing the rock up the hill. Could his happiness objectify him, just as "a table is a table" and thus put him in "bad faith?"