Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The stranger title analysis
Assignment aboutthe stranger
An Essay On Metaphorical
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The stranger title analysis
“I ask you for this man’s head… the horror I feel when I look into a man’s face and all I see is a monster” (Camus 102). The prosecutor’s harsh judgement gives powerful intel into the narrator’s indifferent character. The focus of the trail shifts from the actual murder to Meursault's beliefs and attitudes, specifically his lack of grief at his mother’s funeral and atheism go against the social norm and label him as an outsider. As sentenced to death and deemed unfit for society, Meursault begins to draw metaphoric conclusions as he awaits his deathbed. In his eyes, those sentenced to death are viewed as patients. Meursault’s comparison of prisoners and patients provides insight into his mindset. Prisoners are similar to patients because
Meursault is a fairly average individual who is distinctive more in his apathy and passive pessimism than in anything else. He rarely talks because he generally has nothing to say, and he does what is requested of him because he feels that resisting commands is more of a bother than it is worth. Meursault never did anything notable or distinctive in his life: a fact which makes the events of the book all the more intriguing.
By the end of Meursault is imprisoned somewhere he has always mentally and emotionally been. Being isolated make him act as a stranger even more. The title describes a strange person.
Diction shows the difference in Meursault’s views and beliefs as he spends more and more time in prison, adapts to his new lifestyle, and understands the future of his life. Camus diction displays Meursault’s change toward growth in self-reflection, realization of the purposelessness of his life, and unimportance of time.
This passage is set before Meursault’s execution with the chaplain entering the scene, and telling Meursault that his “heart is blind”, leading to Meursault to yell and delve into his rant, and moment of consciousness. The passage has a calm in the beginning as if Meursault catches his breath from yelling previously, and he starts to reassure himself that he is not wrong for expressing his views as it went against the public’s religious beliefs, and states that this moment was so important to him that it was if his life was merely leading up to it. Why this particular scene is important to Meursault is that this is an instance where he successfully detaches himself from the world, and begins to deconstruct the world’s ideals as his rant shifts on to focusing on how nothing in life mattered. Meursault describes his gripes with the chaplain’s words as he explains his reasoning as to why the concept of a god is flawed as Meursault saw that everyone was inherently the same, with equal privileges just how often people could express them separated them. The passage continues with Meursault arguing that everyone would be faced with judgment or punishment one day, and explains why his own situation was not significant as it was no different. After that explanation the passage ends with Meursault posing the concept of everything in the world being equal both in wrongdoing and life in general, evident in his example of saying “Sala¬mano's dog was worth just as much as his wife.” Although the passage shows Meursault challenging the ethics and morals that the world around him follows, it does have instances like the end in which we see that the rant is still expression of Meursault's complex emotions, as it is unclear whether it is fear or a...
In prison, Meursault changes his views on both the sun, and on his view of life, which are similar.
Since he cares little for the affairs of the world, claiming they do not mean anything, then justice—a major concern of the world—also means nothing to him. His actions both before and after his decision to kill a man without provocation demonstrate his apathetic view of the world, and his indifference to justice. Therefore Meursault’s search for justice, culminated by the court’s decision to execute him, remains an example to all of the inability of society to instill justice in criminals. Meursault’s perpetual refusal to acquire a sense of morality and emotion instigates skepticism in all who learn of his story of society’s true ability to instill justice in the
While coming to terms with the absurd was a gradual process for Meursault, his final days and his heated conversation with the chaplain, and his desire for a hateful crowd of spectators show that he was able to accept the absurdity, and revel in it, finding satisfaction in spite of those around him and justifying his murder. His ego had reached an all-time high as he neared his execution, and his satisfaction left him prepared for the nothingness awaiting him. This process was a natural psychological response to his mortality, for his peace of mind. Therefore, Meursault is not the Stranger, an alien to society, but a troubled man seeking meaning and satisfaction in a life and a world that was overwhelming unsatisfactory and absurd.
The trial portrays the absurdist ideal that absolute truth does not exist. This ideal destroys the very purpose of the trial, which seeks to place a rational explanation on Meursault’s senseless killing of the Arab. However, because there is no rational explanation for Meursault’s murder, the defense and prosecution merely end up constructing their own explanations. They each declare their statements to be the truth, but are all based on false assumptions. The prosecution itself is viewed as absurd. The prosecutor tries to persuade the jury that Meursault has no feelings or morals by asking Perez if “he had at least seen [Meursault] cry” (91). The prosecutor then continues to turn the crowd against Meursault when he asks him about his “liaison” with Marie right after his mother’s death. Though Meursault’s relationship with Marie and his lack of emotions at his mother’s funeral may seem unrelated to his murder, the prosecutor still manages to convince the crowd that they are connected to one another. The jury ends up convicting Meursault not because he killed a man, but because he didn't show the proper emotions after his mother ...
Attention to the trial sequence will reveal that the key elements of the conviction had little to do with the actual crime Meursault had committed, but rather the "unspeakable atrocities" he had committed while in mourning of his mother's death, which consisted of smoking a cigarette, drinking a cup of coffee, and failing to cry or appear sufficiently distraught. Indeed, the deformed misconception of moral truth which the jury [society] seeks is based on a detached, objective observation of right or wrong, thereby misrepresenting the ideals of justice by failing to recognize that personal freedom and choice are "...the essence of individual existence and the deciding factor of one's morality.2" The execution of Meursault at the close of the novel symbolically brings
In ‘The Outsider’, the society continually brings back Meursault’s past actions against his will, such as his behaviour at his mother’s funeral. Under the rule of the French Colonialists, the French Algerian court is a microcosm of the society with the Roman Catholic belief, in value as in determination. Because of this, Meursault, who alienates himself from the Roman Catholic expectation in society, was condemned for murdering the Arab. He was announced to have “no place in society whose most fundamental rules [he] ignored” , which was mostly based on his emotions and behaviour in the funeral rather than the actual murder.
... mother, he does not react in a way most people do. He does not cry but instead accepts what has happened and realizes that he can not change it. He goes back and does physical things he would do on a normal day. When the caretaker offers him coffee, he accepts it, he smokes a cigarette and has sex with a woman he just met. Meursault also does not lie to escape death. He refuses to conform to society and lie. He would rather be seen as an outsider than do something that he does not believe in. Finally, Meursault, will not believe in G-d or Christianity just because it is the only thing to turn to before he is put to death. When Meursault decides not to cry at his mother’s funeral, he accepts himself as an outsider. When he is considered an outsider, it does not matter if he is guilty or innocent; at the end of the day he guilty just for being different.
.... He wanted to file a legal appeal but he knew they would all get rejected. Meursault was not sentenced to death because he killed the Arab but because of his absence of emotion to his mother’s death. The people wanted him dead because he posed a threat to the morals of the society. But when he accepts the fact that he is going to die he feels a sense of freedom and he looks forward to his execution. By rejecting to believe in God, it shows that he does value any hope of life after death. Then when he accepts his death sentence, he also takes the punishment away from it either. He is neither depressed nor hopeful when it comes to his death, which overall proves how he lacks morality in the story.
Losing someone is hard to accept as it takes a toll on their emotional state, causing things such as pain and grief. For majority, however, letting an individual go and moving on is the most painful feeling they have to embrace. Within the first few pages of the chapter, a reader figures out that Maman was dead, as Meursault had said “It occurred to me that somehow I’d got through another Sunday, that Mother now was buried, and tomorrow I’d be going back to work as usual. Really nothing in my life had change” (Camus, 24). The reader can notice that, through the words of Meursault, he was emotionally indifferent as he was very nonchalant about the death of his mother and did not have a close relationship or connection with her as she died.
Camus writes in a simple, direct, and uncomplicated style. The choice of language serves well to convey the thoughts of Meursault. The story is told in the first person and traces the development of the narrator's attitude toward himself and the rest of the world. Through this sort of simple grammatical structure, Camus gives the reader the opportunity to become part of the awareness of Meursault. In Part I, what Meursault decides to mention are just concrete facts. He describes objects and people, but makes no attempt to analyze them. Since he makes no effort to analyze things around him, that job is given to the reader. The reader therefore creates his own meaning for Meursault's actions. When he is forced to confront his past and reflect on his experiences, he attempts to understand the reasons for existence. At first, Meursault makes references to his inability to understand what's happening around him, but often what he tells us seems the result of his own indifference or detachment. He is frequently inattentive to his surroundings. His mind wanders in the middle of conversations. Rarely does he make judgments or express opinions about what he or other characters are doing. Meursault walks through life largely unaware of the effect of his actions on others.
Meursault, the protagonist and narrator, is a stoic and detached figure. His indifference towards family and society was apparent in his reaction to his mother’s death, relationship with his lover and the cold-blooded murder of the Arab. In the case of his mother, he showed no sense of attachment, “After the funeral, though, the case will be closed and everything will have a more official feel to it” (Albert Camus, The Outsider, Page 1). He was relentless and continued to remain detached from her as he avoided meeting her at the old age home over the weekend.