Has there ever existed a person that has not judged someone else over their lifetime? Judging by reality as well as literature it seems that no person like that has ever existed. It appears that it is human nature to want to pronounce others as either purely good or evil. But does everyone fit into the mold of good or evil? In Albert Camus's The Stranger, Meursault is a morally ambiguous character, and this ethical indistinctness plays a major part in the novel as a whole and the theme that Camus is trying to portray.
Meursault resists being typecast into an archetypal moral category in many of his deeds and actions. Many of his actions in Part One of the novel help contribute to the fuzzy picture of the character. For example, at his mother's funeral, Meursault does not cry or weep in the typical mourning fashion, but rather sleeps during the vigil and entices one of the other mourners present to smoke a cigarette with him. This would be typically considered "evil" behavior, in the context of the story. He could easily been seen as disrespectful and seditious toward his mother and the established procedures of mourning, which seem to be fairly definite at that era in France. However, this "evil" mold can easily be shaken if one considers that Meursault may be more shaken than anyone else present at the funeral. Considering the other events in the novel, it seems as though he does not have a large capacity for emotion. Based on this, it is not unreasonable to assume that the events leading up to and including his mother's death may have overtaxed his limited scope of emotion, and he was therefore nearly incapable of mourning in the "normal" or expected way for his mother, but rather had to resort to his own, more c...
... middle of paper ...
...inal moments. Secondly, by embracing his fate, he gains a sense of compassion from the reader, who, by default, will begin to feel pity for this tortured soul. Morally, it would be impossible to judge this sort of act "evil," but also equally difficult to label it "good." Again, this is Camus' personal philosophy emerging through his literature, almost seeming to beg the audience not to pronounce judgment.
Throughout the novel, Camus presents the audience with one reason after another why Meursault should not, and in many cases cannot, be judged by "normal" standards. He also seems to say that no matter how mystifying or straightforward a person might be, there is no excuse for judging another human being. The question he finally presents to the reader is this: do we take his advice and abstain from judgment, or do we continue to judge others, often wrongly?
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.
Has a person ever existed that hasn’t judged someone else in their lifetime? Judging by reality as well as literature it seems that no person like that has ever existed. It appears that it is human nature to want to separate others as purely good or evil. Does everyone fit into the mold of good or evil? In the two novels The Five People You Meet in Heaven and The Catcher and the Rye the main characters are morally ambiguous and this plays a major part in the novels as a whole and the theme the authors are trying to portray.
However, upon deciding to kill a man, he quickly learns that his previous unconcern will not diminish the consequences for his deed. Put to death, Meursault remains stagnant on his opinion of justice, refusing to ever consider that justice possesses any worth. Upon receiving a visit from a chaplain hours before his execution, he merely uttered “I had been right, I was still right, I was always right” (Camus 121) Meursault did not understand why the chaplain wanted to force him to turn to God and gain a moral sense about life. Thus he simply reiterated the motto that he lived by: an apathetic, self-absorbed idea that nothing in life means anything. Meursault’s continual refusal to accept the moral standards of the world prohibited him from every truly finding a true sense of
Meursault is a man who chooses to observe people, rather than interact with them. He often people watches from his balcony in the evening, than actually going down to communicate with them. While he was in exile, he was forced to converse and discuss his feeling to strangers like his lawyer, and the chaplain of the prison. Due to being a severe introvert, the idea of discussing his problem to another person was foreign for him. The experience of opening himself up to others for help was alienating, and contradicted his personality of being a stranger to everyone. Camus writes, “He didn’t understand me, and he was sort of holding it against me. I felt the urge to reassure him that I was like everybody else, just like everybody else.” (Camus, 66) Meursault wanted to help his lawyer understand his point of view, but his nature is so closed off that he’s unable to put his feeling into words for others
“It was then that I realized they were all sitting across from me, nodding their heads, grouped around the care taker. For a second I had the ridiculous feeling that they were judging me” (Camus, 50). The quote adds to the book because at that point they were at the viewing of Meursault’s mom. Instead of feeling comfort from all the people, he felt as if they were judging him.
In the book he is perceived as a mystery, or someone unfamiliar to those who do not know him, but those close to him adore and respect him, because they took the time to get to know him. Those who are strangers to Meursault have a difficult time understanding him so either try to force their morals or customs on him, such as his lawyer, or they just try to find a label that best fits him, like they did during the court case, or how his lawyer labels him an antichrist. Those within that particular society do this because they fear what they do not know, so they feel they must somehow familiarize themselves with him in order to be content with themselves, but because he brings this frustrating situation to those in the society, they tend to label him negatively. On the contrary those who actually get to know meursault, see the pureness and honesty in him, and they respect that he refuses to be other than himself, and speak nothing but his truth. For example, when Marie asks Meursault if he loves her, he tells her that it did not mean anything but he did not think so. Despite his telling her this she still continues to surround herself with him. This is a display of the light that Meursault provides to the people around him. The only issue with Meursault's character is that he cannot successfully reach everyone in his society with his light, because they are too busy trying to
... 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.
In the opening of the novel, Meursault receives word that his mother has passed away. While keeping her vigil, he smokes a cigarette. He hesitates at first, because he doesn’t know if he should smoke with his mother right there, but, he says, “I thought about it, it didn’t matter.” He is not sad about her death. Therefore he sees no reason to act as if he is.
In the passage, Camus utilizes negative connotation of Meursault’s growth in self-reflection to demonstrate his recognition of himself. When Meursault claims, “I looked at myself in my tin plate. My reflection seemed to remain serious even though I was trying to smile at it” he attempts to understand and observe himself which shows his growth in self reflection (Camus 81). Contrasting to when he looks into the mirror a few days after his mother funeral, he looks at the furniture in his room instead at himself, “I glanced at the mirror and saw a corner of my table with my alcohol lamp next to some pieces of bread” (24). Before sent to prison, Meursault gave more importance to things physically going around him rather then paying attention to himself. Now, as he looks at himself he saw “the same sad, stern ex...
The novel opens with Meursault having just learned that his mother has died. His reaction to her death is far from typical, and he simply says, “Maman died today, or yesterday maybe, I don’t know.” As he prepares to leave town to attend the funeral, he expresses a sort of general discomfort. This discomfort can be seen in his extremely uncomfortable conversation with his boss, in which Meursault simply tells his boss, “it’s not my fault.” Meursault also wishes that the funeral were already over so that, “the case would be closed, and everything will have a more official feel to it.”
Every character that revolves around Meursault seems to be in direct contrast to him. Meursault is an amoral person who does not seem to care passionately about anything. He acts in accordance with physical desires. In other words, Meursault is a sensualist person. At this particular time in his life, his path crosses with his neighbor, Raymond, who feels as though his girlfriend is cheating on him. He decides to take revenge with minor aid form Meursault. Meursault helps him only because he thinks he has nothing to lose if he does. As things lead into one another, the first major violent act of the book is committed.
An example that he does not have the same feelings as other people do is when his mother passed away. Meursault did not even know how old his mom was. In the first few lines of the novel he said
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
Meursault was always indifferent. Meursault accepted death. Why? Meursault saw the purpose of life meaningless. That is “Absurdity”! Absurdity, how does that word sound? Pretty bad, eh? Absurdity when used like “that’s absurd!” gives the feeling of negative judgment and a sense of finality. The idea of the Absurd seems to attach itself with meaningless, pointless and other such words that express a destination but without the means to get there and vice versa means but no destination. So from there I inferred that Camus does not believe in God nor any high law or universal law that are associated with a divinity, which is a path in life (either the means or the destination). So what is Absurd? The Absurd is living, a quest to find the meaning of anything within a reality with no purpose. Reality has no purpose because there is no high law, a universal law nor a God. Therefore this reality must be randomness. I believe that Camus wants us to see this and begin questioning our existence. So he wants he wants us to see the Absurdity and to cope with the Absurdity.
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.