Also a philosophy major and I have to say I disagree with your assessment of Camus. He was a far better writer than philosopher and I think his account of "the absurd" is filled with holes.  I appreciate his writing and The Myth of Sisyphus is a brilliant piece of literature despite it's failures as a philosophical piece.  Nagel has a brilliant response to Camus (and the existentialism movement in general) aptly titled "The Absurd" that you should probably check out since he's held in much higher regard than Camus by academic philosophers.

He concludes:

"If a sense of the absurd is a way of perceiving our true situation (even though the situation is not absurd until the perception arises), then what reason can we have to resent or escape it? Like the capacity for epistemological skepticism, it results from the ability to understand our human limitations. It need not be a matter for agony unless we make it so. Nor need it evoke a defiant contempt of fate that allows us to feel brave or proud. Such dramatics, even if carried on in private, betray a failure to appreciate the cosmic unimportance of the situation. If sub specie aeternitatis there is no reason to believe that anything matters, then that doesn't matter either, and we can approach our absurd lives with irony instead of heroism or despair."

Personally, I found the existentialism movement very disappointing as I went into my class expecting to be blown away.  With the exception of Nietzche I found most existential arguments to be flimsy with an extreme western bias (especially Sartre).