The Stranger, By Albert Camus

The conviction of Meursault represents another main point of absurdism, that life is precious. It only takes forty five minutes for an entire jury to unanimously decide to send Meursault to the guillotine, which is unreasonable. Camus is trying to point this out as one of society’s wrongdoings. The prosecutor's argument had appealed to the jury's emotions and society’s standards rather than reason. If the jury had not felt the emotions that were supposed to influence their decision, the prosecutor's argument would have seemed completely irrational. In a rational world, Meursault's emotions regarding his mother or her funeral would not have influenced his verdict. Meursault commits a crime against an Arab, while Raymond, who had also done so earlier in the book, did not get into any trouble. He would still be found guilty, but only for the crime he committed. This would have definitely lightened his sentence; however, Meursault is sentenced to death. Camus proves the court’s hypocrisy and shows how human

Albert Camus’ The Stranger explores the philosophic ideology of existentialism in the character Meursault. Meursault is a man in the 1920s in French Algeria going through life seeing and acting through the lens of an existentialist. Without explicitly stating that he lives existentially, his life hits on many key characteristics of an existentialist. Perhaps the most defining of these key characteristics is that he does what he wants, because he can. He also does this because in existentialism there is emphasis on individual choice and freedom based on the assertion that there is no universal right and wrong. Meursault doesn’t always take into consideration what would be polite, or kind, but rather only

The French philosopher Roland Barthes once said, “Literature is the question minus the answer” (Barthes 2). This statement hold true for most works of literature that explore a central question. According to Barthes, literature often raises a question, but leaves it up to the reader to determine the answer. The Stranger by Albert Camus is an excellent example of how a central question, “Is there value and meaning to human life?” is raised and left unanswered, resulting in different interpretations of the answer, depending on the viewpoint of the reader. Although the question is never explicitly answered, Camus offers perspectives on what French society regarded the answers to be, such as connections with others, elusion to freedom, and faith in religion and God.

The story of The Stranger by Albert Camus is quite simple. Monsieur Meursault is a simple man, leading a simple, useless life until he makes some new friends and finds himself with someone else’s blood on his hands and his life on the line. Through Meursault’s reaction to his own impending death, Camus portrays the meaninglessness of human life.

Within the last defendant Raymond’s testimony, who was Meursault’s friend that all this was ultimately caused from, we can see the how exactly the prosecutor fully intends to rationalize Meursault. Raymond was

Meursault is a psychologically detached man on trial for murder. However, it is ultimately his psychological detachment, not the murder of another man, that proves to be most damaging to his reputation and judicial case. Deemed a monster by society for his lack of emotion and general indifference, Meursault is sentenced to public execution by guillotine. The Stranger, a philosophical novel by Albert Camus, explores the concept of alienation as a result of failing to adhere to society’s accepted moral standards. Camus begins with the idea of extreme indifference in a world that expects deep human emotions and feelings, continues with the murder of the Arab man, and ends with the concept of human life ultimately having no grand meaning or importance

In Part 1 of the novel, Meursault does not fully grasp the significance of life because of his absurdist way of life. Camus presents Meursault as a person who does not live life, but reacts to what life presents him. Meursault is incapable of understanding the metaphysics of the world due to his lack of emotions. The greatest understanding of Meursault is through his own mind; instead of being subjective, he is objective. “Behind them, an enormous mother, in a brown silk dress, and the father, a rather frail little man I know by sight” (22). His thoughts include “note-taking” details about his environment with an

During the trial, conventional morality is satirized. The Public Prosecutor's convoluted logic equates Meursault's lack of emotion of his mother's death to symbolic matricide and even to actual parricide. As foolish and bizarre as this reasoning is perhaps there is a kernel of truth to it. Meursault has neither parents nor children. He is without a past that he cares about, nor

When Meursault is on trial for this murder, the evidence used by the prosecution reveals how humans naturally strive to create rationale for events in life where no reason exists. In his closing statement, the prosecutor states that “[he] accuses this man [Meursault] of burying his mother with crime in his heart” (96). After listening to all of the witness statements and viewing all of the evidence, the prosecutor has been unable to determine a true motive for Meursault murdering the Arab man, so he tries to create his own explanation by claiming that Meursault is an emotionless, dangerous man. The prosecutor is able to create a fictitious argument that Meursault is a criminal, by referring back to Meursault’s mother’s funeral, when he apparently did not react according to societal conventions and showed an indifference combined with disrespect

Both Meursault’s lawyer and the prosecutor create explanations for Meursault’s crime that are based on reason and logic. The prosecutor even claims to have figured out the intent behind Meursault’s actions saying, “I have retraced for you the course of events which led this man to kill with full knowledge of his actions”(100). However, rationalizing behavior only serves to deny the alarming idea that the world is completely random. Therefore, Meursault’s trial shows absurdity and society’s futile attempt to impose rationality on every aspect of the universe.

When Meursault first speaks with his lawyer, he asked Meursault to say that he had held back his “natural feelings. “[Meursault] said, ‘No, because it’s not true.’ [The lawyer] gave [him] a strange look, as if he found [him] slightly disgusting” (65). Here, we see someone looking for causation, and Meursault being blunt about how there truly is not a cause for the murder. As the trial commences, the only thing Meursault notices it how “the trial opened with the sun glaring outside”, and that “despite the blinds, the sun filtered through in places and the air was already stifling” (82, 83). Both of these descriptions use diction that is very similar to the diction used to describe the heat and light on the day of the murder. This can lead to the conclusion that the only possible cause for the murder that could be justifiable for society is the heat, how oppressive it is, and how it ultimately led to his final murder of the Arab.

How do you understand a stranger? How do you judge their actions? In Albert Camus’s existentialist text, The Stranger, the protagonist is a stranger to all but himself and because of his character, society finds Meursault guilty of being an incomprehensible and dangerous alien. The court that judges Meursault ignorantly sentences him to death. However, the first person perspective narrative allows the reader a glimpse into his mind, giving them a chance to understand his character and the actions that inevitably leads him to the guillotine. Although difficult to interpret, Meursault’s character, as it develops throughout his ‘normal’ life, can be expressed through more familiar medias. The main aspects of Meursault’s character — his

Widely recognized for philosophical writings as a French essayist and playwright, Albert Camus is a major contributor to exploring the absurd in modern Western literature. Characterized by highlighting the human condition, Camus’ writing style focuses on the everyday lives and inner psyche of individuals in both ordinary and extraordinary circumstances. Such a character-driven writing style is most notably displayed in his 1946 work, The Stranger, a tale of an emotionally-detached man known as Meursault, who lives in French-colonized Algiers during the intermission of the two World Wars. Consisting of two parts—The Stranger first explores his daily life as a free man, and in the second, delves more into the character’s own philosophy as Meursault contemplates during his remaining time in jail. At its core, the story explores the relationships and interactions of the odd Meursault through the character’s inner monologue and dialogue with those around him. The story itself is very ambiguous in its’ nature, and the idea of contemplating the meaning of life and purpose is prevalent throughout The Stranger. Evidently, Camus writes Meursault as a man who believes that life has no meaning, and therefore people are free to do as they please. To supplement the protagonist’s view, the author also presents Meursault alongside various personalities of key supporting characters, each with their own unique personality, and differing outlooks on life. Doing so thus enables Camus to get readers to contemplate about meaning through multiple perspectives. Stylistically, through many devices that emphasize diction, imagery, and story themes. Ultimately, The Stranger is a way for Camus to convey that there are multiple ways to perceive the meaning of life, using Meursault to directly project a different view than what readers are used to. Surely, with the intent of crafting a protagonist so strange, that Meursault becomes comparable to other characters; less so as a reflection of what the author personally believes the meaning of life is, but more of what such exploration of the idea could be.

Camus wants us to be able to live with the idea of a meaningless life and find happiness. We are all like Sisyphus, who was condemned to roll a stone up a mountain every day only to watch it roll back down. We are all doing the same thing every day, only to repeat those actions forever. But Camus wants us to imagine Sisyphus as happy instead of miserable. He tells us that is Sisyphus can accept his existence as meaningless, and remain aware of that fact, he can find happiness in his life. By accepting his fate as meaningless but not opting out of it, he is his own master. He has beaten his stone, and we can all master ours

The courtroom portrays Meursalt as an appalling man for enjoying himself the day after his mother’s funeral. The broad statement said by the prosecutor shows that society does not allow one to have any entertaining moments after a time of repentance because it is thought to be disrespectful. A quick rebuttal by Meursalt’s lawyer helps realign the trial so that it is actually focusing on why they are having the trial in the first place by saying, ““Come now, is my client on trial for burying his mother or for killing a man?” The spectators laughed.” (96). The trial never focuses on why Meursalt killed the Arab man and no one ever bothers to make any real efforts to discover his motives. This reveals that the courtroom is more interested in the type of person Meursalt is and how he can be a danger to society than the death of the Arab. The courtroom judges Meursalt as a heartless man with the only intention of killing a man because he felt like it, yet neither ever proves the killing of the Arab, not even in their closing speeches.