From The Stranger: The Graphic Novel (2016) by Albert Camus, Illustrated by Jacques Ferrandez.
Overview and Directions: Please finish reading The Stranger by Albert Camus. As you read, take note of significant moments in your journal. When you complete reading the novel, take time to reflect. Then choose one of the following prompts from past A.P. Exams (see blow). Each one of the chosen prompts had The Stranger listed in the choices below the prompt. These are perfect matches. Compose a blog response using one of the prompts below as a guide in your writing. Think of it as a practice essay. See what you can do in 40 minutes. I look forward to your responses.
Prompts:
1979. Choose a complex and important character in a novel or a play of recognized literary merit who might on the basis of the character's actions alone be considered evil or immoral. In a well-organized essay, explain both how and why the full presentation of the character in the work makes us react more sympathetically than we otherwise might. Avoid plot summary.
1982. In great literature, no scene of violence exists for its own sake. Choose a work of literary merit that confronts the reader or audience with a scene or scenes of violence. In a well-organized essay, explain how the scene or scenes contribute to the meaning of the complete work. Avoid plot summary.
1986. Some works of literature use the element of time in a distinct way. The chronological sequence of events may be altered, or time may be suspended or accelerated. Choose a novel, an epic, or a play of recognized literary merit and show how the author's manipulation of time contributes to the effectiveness of the work as a whole. Do not merely summarize the plot.
2004. Critic Roland Barthes has said, "Literature is the question minus the answer." Choose a novel, or play, and, considering Barthes' observation, write an essay in which you analyze a central question the work raises and the extent to which it offers answers. Explain how the author's treatment of this question affects your understanding of the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.
2011. Form B. In The Writing of Fiction (1925), novelist Edith Wharton states the following: At every stage in the progress of his tale the novelist must rely on what may be called the illuminating incident to reveal and emphasize the inner meaning of each situation. Illuminating incidents are the magic casements of fiction, its vistas on infinity.
Choose a novel or play that you have studied and write a well-organized essay in which you describe an “illuminating” episode or moment and explain how it functions as a “casement,” a window that opens onto the meaning of the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.
2015. In literary works, cruelty often functions as a crucial motivation or a major social or political factor. Select a novel, play, or epic poem in which acts of cruelty are important to the theme. Then write a well-developed essay analyzing how cruelty functions in the work as a whole and what the cruelty reveals about the perpetrator and/or victim.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCruelty is seen as, justly so, an act of hatred and pure malice. Sometimes it is justified, but others seem to happen without reason. In either scenario, it brings about consequences that many people are unable to predict. Albert Camus uses this inability in his book The Stranger, introducing many surprises to his readers because of the consequences of cruelty. He uses it to comment on the social climate of Algeria at the time and also the social climate among everyday people through the eyes of a sociopath. Cruelty as a device is what not only drives Camus’s plot, but it highlights what is wrong with the way lives are conducted in the corrupted society that humanity has developed.
ReplyDeleteThe most obvious form of a corrupted society and unjustified cruelty comes from altercation between Meursault and the Arab man on the beach. It was Raymond who had started the problem; he had abused the Arab’s sister and had understood why he was being followed. Meursault had nothing to do with the situation, except when he wrote the letter for Raymond explaining thoughts that were not his own. He acted as witness as well, but he was protecting a friend, not trying to harm the woman further. He had no personal business with the Arab man. And yet, to Meursault, “[t]o stay or to go, it amounted to the same thing” (57). He had approached the Arab man, and, essentially unprovoked, shot him five times. His only justification was that “the whole beach, throbbing in the sun, was pressing on my back” and that the man had minorly hurt Raymond (58). No man in the right state of mind considers this an acceptable response. That means, however, that Meursault is not in the correct state of mind.
Most of Part 1 of The Stranger is quite tame. He goes on dates with Marie, spends his time doing as he pleases, and nothing exciting happens to him. This is partially because of his own worldview. Meursault has no ambition or drive in his life. His own boss refers to him as a man that “had no ambition, and that that was disastrous in business”. He is most especially cruel to Marie. She’s the woman he loves, and states multiple times how beautiful she is. When she asks if they could get married, his reply is that “didn't make any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to”. Right after, she asks if he loves her and his response is the same: “it didn't mean anything but that I probably didn't love her” (41). It’s wrong to subject Marie to this, since she loves Meursault enough to get married, and yet he is devoid of any feelings towards her. Meursault lacks empathy and emotion, making him hard to befriend. He has one throughout the book, which is just Raymond, who is also the man who causes his downfall. Eventually, his sociopathic nature is what dooms him in the courtroom of Part 2.
It is not untruthful to say that France is a country built on bloodshed. Its own history is stained with battles and revolutions and uprisings, plenty of which are categorized by terror and cruelty. At the end of the book, Meursault even reflects on how executions were public and often enough to be remembered among communities’ memories, in newspapers or by word of mouth or by nostalgia, like when he remembers his father’s reaction. It is no petty crime, killing a man, but Meursault’s entire team was convinced that his only sentence would be a few years in prison. The jury knew that Meursault wasn’t pleading for innocence; he knew well that he had committed a crime. His actions truly only deserved time in jail, and yet “in the name of the French people” Meursault was to be guillotined (p107). It is not through the French people that he will be killed. The only reason that reporters had followed his story was because he preceded a parricide case. His verdict was delivered from the cruelty of the jury and judges. They wanted this man to die because of his lack of emotions. The prosecutor’s case was built on the fact that Meursault hadn’t cried at his Maman’s funeral. Death by guillotine was because of Meursault’s nature, something he couldn’t control, even though confessing during the trial that he “didn’t have the right to show any feeling or goodwill” because of how he thought (100). He knew he’d be judged for not caring, and the one time he did care in avenging his hurt friend had ruined his life.
DeleteWhile the crime committed against Meursault is equal to the one he had committed himself, that doesn’t make the cruelty any more justifiable. Cruelty upon cruelty is still cruelty. Whether it be in the name of social justice or in the name of revenge, Camus presents how neither is acceptable. Eventually, it ruins those who caused it. Meursault serves a warning, not an example. No good end comes of violence.
Meursault lives a simple life. His actions are quite questionable. Many people are against the way he treats Marie. How he does not seem to care much about her but will still say he will marry her. And his reactions to different situations are out of the norm. Especially how he is completely fine when Raymond talks about beating his mistress. He then agrees to writing Raymond’s letter to his mistress. His actions and reactions seem cruel to the normal eye because it is so different from what people would usually do. Meursault actions throughout the story function as evidence to show Albert Camus’ view on life and existentialism.
ReplyDeleteIn his story “The Myth of Sisyphus” Camus argues that “life is meaningless and absurd.” and that we can somehow “live without the hope that life is meaningful, but without the despair that leads to suicide.” He proves his theory through Meursault. He lives the meaningless and absurd life that Camus describes, and he does not seem hopeful or content with his life, but at the same time, he does not seem to be in complete despair that his life has no purpose. The sense of hopelessness comes from his actions or lack thereof. His dispassionate actions prevents him from caring for the people around him. He is not invented in them as much as other people , therefore they serve no purpose in his life. Some can argue that Meursault’s lack of interaction with his environment makes his life seem meaningless or that because his life is pointless, he chooses not to involve himself in anything. Either way they prove Camus’ theory of a meaningless life. In a world where many people are hopeful and believe that their life has meaning, Meursault is one of the few that goes against the social norm of living to be happy and content, which makes him fit Satre’s description of humans in despair. “No God, no scheme, can adapt the world and its possibilities to my will.” Nothing Meursault does going to make a significant effect on the world around him, and whatever the world is doing is not going to affect him. And Meursault achieves the existentialism idea because his actions do not voice any purpose or passion.
There are three acts of violence in this book that contribute to the overall theme. The three acts of violence are the physical abuse of Raymond's girlfriend by Raymond himself, the fight between Raymond and the Arab at the beach, and the muder of an Arab by Meurasault. During the fight at the beach, although Meurasault had no direct ties to what was going on he was ready to strike at any given movement, but yet remained indifferent to it all. When the Arab had been beaten up Meurasault had questioned whether he should stay or go and had even stated that it didn’t matter anyways if he had stayed or not because it would cause no difference. Little did he know that him staying woud lead to the murder of an Arab. His decision to continue walking on the beach with the very hot weather had led to his discomfort and his insanity. During his walk, Meurasault saw the Arab which he had fought holding onto a knife for his own safety, and Meurasault who still held the gun given to him during the fight decided to shoot the Arab at the sight of the knife. It seems as though Meursault is unaffected by the brutality that has taken place in the novel. When referring to the murder of the Arab, Meurasault says that the four shots he lodged into the Arab was like him knocking “at the door of unhappiness four times.” The violent acts shown in the book are what led Meursault to understand his version of the true meaning of life. Meursault is obsessed with the idea that human life has no redeeming meaning or purpose. He goes as far as to say that the only certain thing in life is the inevitability of death because all humans will eventually meet death, and that therefore all lives are equally meaningless. It is in the final chapter that Meursault realizes that, just as he is indifferent to much of the universe, the universe is indifferent to him. Meursault realizes that he, along with everyone else, has been born, will die, and will have no further importance to anyone or the world they were born into. When he realizes that the universe is indifferent to the life of a man and this realization makes him very happy.
ReplyDelete- Lizaida Paulino
DeleteThe central question that Albert Camus raises in his novel “The Stranger,” is, “Can we live without the hope that life is meaningful, but without the despair that leads to suicide?” This is quite a puzzling question because almost every person’s motivation for living is the hope of personal gain, or the hope of pleasing God or some other gods. A prominent cause of suicide is the feeling that life has become meaningless, so it is difficult for us to imagine contently living a life with no end goal. In “The Myth of Sisyphus,” by Camus, Sisyphus rolls the rock back up the mountain every time, for eternity. He knows that it is meaningless to roll the rock up since it will just roll back down, but he also finds an ounce of satisfaction in proving to the gods his resilience and will to live. Camus’ theory of Absurdism says that life is meaningless, and the moment we realize this, we become alienated from the world. He says that humans “continue to live out of habit,” not out of appeal or any higher purposes. Meursault, the main character in “The Stranger,” lives this exact life, yet he seems content. Nothing is truly good in his life, yet nothing is truly bad. There is no reason to live, yet there is also no reason to die. He does not have any emotional reactions to anything because he knows that nothing holds any meaning. As readers, we react similarly to the chaplain in the novel; we pity his sad life and even become angry at his passive attitude. However, Meursault does not have despair. He actually finds happiness in small things such as the weather, food, and his girlfriend, Marie. By not putting added meaning on anything, Meursault seems to be far more at peace compared to characters such as Raymond, Salamano and the Prosecutor, who are constantly anxious or angry. Also, by Meursault not putting added meaning on anything, Camus is showing readers how much more meaning we tack onto things than we think. At the end of the novel, when Meursault receives the death sentence, he initially struggles like anyone else would with the desire to escape and live a better life. He is constantly anxious about when the prison guards will come to take him to be executed, but then he accepts the fact that the way he views life is different from others and will never be understood. His change in mindset allows him to be at peace with his punishment- a punishment for being an outsider. While this book is fictional, Camus demonstrates that it is possible to live without the hope that life is meaningful and not be in despair.
ReplyDeleteI chose to write about the second prompt which asked to explain why violence is put into text and that violence is never in literature just for the sake of having it there.
ReplyDeletePeople often view violence as a terrible thing that should be avoided at all costs. Yet in literature, there are many instances in which violence is strategically implemented to enhance the text to develop an overarching theme of the story. In “The Stranger” by Albert Camus during the second part of the story there were some very violent moments in which I believe that Meursault’s character actually started to change and develop a bit after being a dull and emotionless person for the majority of the novel. I feel like this was mainly brought out by the court sentencing of death and then the incident with the Chaplain later in his cell. When Meursault finally realized that he was actually going to die he really started to truly feel raw emotions. Once Meursault is in court and is forced to listen to all of the different wrongdoings that he has done he finally, “had this stupid urge to cry, because I could feelhow much all these people hated me”. I thought that this was a very powerful moment in the story because it reminded me of how coldly Meursault had made fun of an old woman for crying for another completely valid reason earlier in the text. Once confronted with all of his crimes I feel like he really had no way to escape himself in the situation and he really could feel the intense hatred that everyone had towards him. If Meursault had never absent mindedly killed the arab he never would have had this great intervention in which he would have realized that emotions are something that he can’t escape from.
The scene where Meursault attacks the Chaplain was also definitely another act of violence that was placed into the story to enhance the overarching theme and meaning of the story. The point in the story at which he shows the most emotion was when he, “was pouring out on him everything that was in my heart, cries of anger and cries of joy”. The scene can definitely be interpreted a few different ways since a lot of context isn't given and it is towards the end of the story so there is never any real closure or explanation to this scene. It could be scene as an illuminating moment where Meursault finally feels emotion but maybe Meursault felt emotion all along. Perhaps he could feel emotion but just had to learn how to accept and express emotions in a way that the rest of society would understand. This is all happening during the time at which the Chaplain is trying to convert Meursault to accept religion and faith and Meursault is obviously not having it. A way that it could be interpreted is how it goes to show that Meursault is completely capable of expressing emotion, and maybe he just chooses not to or maybe he expresses it in a different way than the rest of us. Throughout most of the short story I believed that Merusault was a man with no values but now I see that maybe he just has his own secular values that are quite existentialist and he does not want to follow anyone else’s religion or path or ‘normal’ way of expressing emotion or reacting to the world and so that is why he seems so odd to the rest of us. It’s not because he is an inherently bad person, it’s just because he’s different and has a different outlook on life and maybe he is viewed as so evil and ‘wrong’ because it is so backwards from the way that our society lives.
Murder, it is to what most would consider the most heinous and unforgivable of crimes. To take away one’s essence of life; to force someone to stop experiencing life and all its senses, is to be considered an action that would make you forfeit your own life. The Stranger, the novel written by Albert Camus, presents the reader with a protagonist who is in all senses guilty of a murder. Controversy and internal questioning in the reader erupts as they must decide whether the actions of Meursault were just, unjust, or if it is even the place of anyone besides Meursault to decide if the action was inherently evil or not. Ultimately, the presentation of the murder as written by Camus makes the reader all the more sympathetic of his actions than we normally would.
ReplyDeleteHow Camus sets up the character of Meursault is interesting because he only does what he is interested in doing. Meursault feels no pressure or obligation set forth by society, and instead acts as he pleases. When he wants to smoke, he smokes; when he wants to see his girlfriend, he sees his girlfriend; and if he wants to have dinner with a stranger, he will have dinner with a stranger. Because all the other actions of Meursault in the rising action to the murder never, or rarely, seem to carry significant motive nor consequences towards other people, it is hard to believe that he could have had such a motive to murder the Arab to begin with. Camus is careful in making it clear that any ill action he has made against any person thus far was never motivated personally. Even the decision to help Raymond write the letter was more out of indifference and a lack of anything else to do, rather than desire to hurt his wife. Meursault actually makes it a point in his thoughts that he didn’t understand how Raymond could get such a thrill and pleasure out of hurting or causing pain to someone else, which helps eliminate the idea that Meursault habitually acts in an antagonizing sense. That is how the background events of Meursault were presented before the actual murder.
The next question pertains to why the reader would sympathize because of how the events are laid out. To have no background info on Meursault and just have him shoot someone on a beach 5 times wouldn’t carry the same reaction by the reader. However, a cleverly crafted exposition and list of rising actions taking place before the murder would help eliminate any thought that the murder was premeditated in the reader’s head. Now that the reader knows Meursault well and can be inside of his head, it becomes easier to see that perhaps he really did shoot the Arab because the sun reflected off the blade and bothered Meursault, making him nervous and causing him to squeeze the trigger. The reader does know from previous sections that Meursault has a fascination with the sun, he is consistently bothered by it or focused on how it makes him hot. This is perpetuated further once Meursault is in prison. He longs for walks, the beach, swimming, Marie, and to have the ability to see the sun again whenever he pleases. The description of Meursault’s thoughts and feelings in prison also perpetuate why the reader can sympathize easier. The picture becomes painted that Meursault is more of a caged bird or a man guilty of nothing more than acting on his feelings, rather than a man who did shoot someone. But then again, the novel continues to beg the question if it actually was evil to pull the trigger, or if it’s even the readers place to judge Meursault for his actions.
- Ethan Gasse
DeleteQuestion 1:
ReplyDeleteMeursault is one of the most intricately presented characters in any book that I have read. He is presented as a character that has no empathy or sadness, yet he also seems to be just as lacking in any other emotion. This presented an interesting inner conflict in me. Obviously, killing someone and caring more about the heat of the sun does not paint a good picture, but there is nothing in Meursault’s life that required him to kill that man. In my opinion, the easiest way the describe Meursault is to call him a sociopath. A sociopath is someone that does not experience emotion, and I feel as though there could not be a better description of Meursault. He is a person who seems to have little to no reaction to everything in the world around him. This could be seen as though he does not care about the world, but the more accurate reasoning for his nonreactions is that he recognizes that nothing truly matters in the world. This reasoning shows Meursault as someone who looks at the bigger picture from a purely logical standpoint. This logical approach to life shows that his emotional issues stem from a point of view, not a mental illness or disorder. Now that it is established that Meursault is a sociopath because of how he views the world, it is easy to say that he chooses to be this way.
The readers view on Meursault is dependent on his choice to have no emotion. If he was to be seen as having a mental illness, it would be much easier to view Meursault in a more sympathetic manner. However, this is not the case. Because Meursault is portrayed as someone who chooses to have little to no emotion, the reader finds it much harder to connect with him. However, this is only revealed to the reader in the last moments of the book. For the entirety of the book, the reader is led to believe that Meursault has no choice in his lack of emotion. This makes it much easier for people to connect with him. We have a natural tendency to sympathize with someone who has no control over issues in their life, so it is natural for us to sympathize with Meursault. In addition to this lack of choice, the path of the book takes the reader through events in which Meursault portrays, in proportion to what we expect, less and less emotion. We begin to the death of his mother, in which he shows no emotion. We then escalate to how Meursault assists a man who beats his wife, and he continues to show no emotion. However, this is a gradual step up from the death of his mother, so the reader, while seeing Meursault as a bad person, sees him in a better light because of this gradual escalation. This is gradual escalation is completely upended by the murder of the Arab, but yet it also seems to make sense to the reader. Personally, I was not surprised by the killing of the arab because by that point I knew that Meursault had no moral bounds, but it also seemed that he had no control over this lack of emotion. This gradual escalation of the proportional lack of emotion and the presentation of the lack of Meursault’s emotions makes it much easier to sympathize with Meursault even though it is clear that he is completely immoral.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2011 Prompt :)
DeleteWhilst reading The Stranger, I was introduced to the complexity a character can have with their inner emotions. Because of his complete lack of feeling, I saw Monsieur Meursault as already being dead and viewing life through an immoral perspective. Camus was using Meursault to portray pure existentialism. His character lacks emotions and a reaction to the things happening around him. Viewing Monsieur Meursault as an angelic figure, allows us to make sense of Camus’ views on existentialism.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to existentialism, I can see Monsieur Meursault being in an angel-like position to everyone else, yet not interfering with others lives. Throughout the first three chapters, it is very apparent to the reader that he is not a very emotional guy. The first chapter seemed very ominous to me, as Camus continued to describe the bright lights coming through the room and how they hurt Monsieur Meursault’s eyes. We usually distinguish light with heaven, therefore, we can assume that that is where Maman is going. Although, it does say in the first chapter, “While not an atheist, Maman had never in her life given a thought to religion.”, from this, it is difficult to imagine what realm Monsieur Meursault is in. One part that specifically agrees with Monsieur Meursault already being dead and in this angel-like position, is when he spends all day watching the life outside from his balcony, “One of them even yelled up to me, ‘We beat ‘em!’ And I nodded, as if to say ‘Yes.’ From then on there was a steady stream of cars.” (23). From this interaction, Monsieur Meursault does exist, and does have an interaction with this sports fan, but it is limited and does not change life itself. This is also seen when Monsieur Meursault interacts with the people in his building. He sees the elderly man and his dog argue everyday, and although he asks what’s wrong and what the dog did, he does not do anything about it. Even when the dog is, “In old Salamano’s room… whimper(ing) softly.” (33), he does not do anything about it. In Raymond’s perspective, Monsieur Meursault’s angelic perspective works too. Raymond talks to him like he is his therapist, almost like he is praying and while Monsieur Meursault is listening, he is able to clearly see a lie within Raymond’s story. This represents the opposite of existentialism, so that part confused me a bit. There is one part in Raymond’s conversation when he actually does mention the Underworld, by stating, “After that he’d looked up some of his underworld friends.” (31). Though this could be a reference to drugs, alcohol, or actual violent friends, it could also be a signal to the reader that there is something involving different realms, such as the Underworld, Heaven, and middle ground.
Camus’ language throughout The Stranger is very direct. Since we are viewing the story through Monsieur Meursault’s perspective, there is a purpose to this. Camus’s delivers these thoughts and actions in simple sentences and moves on from there. However, we don’t discover why until the ending of the novel. In our world, it is expected to feel emotions very deeply, and if we don’t, we expect it to be due to mental illness. Camus takes on the strong topic of mental illness throughout The Stranger, and how we consciously blame the person for their illness rather than the illness instead. Monsieur Meursault isn’t dead, but because of his lack of human emotions, I viewed him that way. When Monsieur Meursault killed the Arab, it’s not that he didn’t want to feel bad, it’s only because he didn’t have the capability to.
First Question
ReplyDeleteMersault is presented as one of the most interesting characters in any story i have ever read. Mersault’s apathetic tendencies are at the forefront of this work, Mersault seems not to care about anything. However he also seems to calculate every move he makes. He says,“beginning to think is beginning to be undermined … the worm is in man’s heart"(Camus). When we start to contemplate further into life, we can start to second guess our previous beliefs, which opens up te door to indecisciveness. People can began to reject their own opinions on life, and began to search for real meaning, Mersault does not do this, he doesn’t care. Some may argue that Mersault struggles with this throughout the story, however I think that Mersault is perfectly content. He is emotionless throughout the story and seems to accept everything, this is the picture perfect way that a mentally stable, happy person would look at the world. When Mersault shoots the man on the beach, he seems to be unphased by it. While most people would have a reaction to this, and begin to rethink their choices, Mersault seems to just continue on like it was normal. After this incident, Mersault says that shooting at that lifeless body was,“Like knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness”(Camus). Yet, Mersault does show a shred of empathy and caring. He does not kill everybody he is presented the oppurtunity to, and even show kindness to certain characters throughout the story. Mersault accepts everything that comes his way, both good and bad.This part is more about what is actually going on with Mersault rather than his emotions. He is offered a new job, however he still does not express much emotion about it. Mersault treats life with a certain disconnect, which seeps though him making it plainly clear that he is a sociopath. Mersault is an incredibly interesting character because his emotions are very difficult to read. Mersault has sociopathic tendencies, yet is also reserved and may have some emotional depth. It is hard to understand Mersault and that makes him incredibly complicated.
I’ve chosen to do the first prompt for my blog response, as I believe it best reflects some of the topics we’ve discussed in class regarding whether or not Meursault is truly evil.
ReplyDeleteJust because you are a sociopath does not mean you are an “evil” person. Adjectives with negative connotations, like “evil” and “bad”, are ineffective at describing the true character of a person. They reflect how society views that person, but do not reflect the experiences and inner workings of their target that have made them who they are. Meursault, I strongly believe, is a sociopath. He admits to the reader that he has never felt remorse about his actions which, coupled with his actions earlier in the book, prove to me that he is sociopathic. However, I don’t think he is evil or a bad person. Meursault opens up a lot more while in prison and I felt like readers got to see a different side of him, one that was vulnerable and curious. Although Meursault does not connect with other people, let alone care what happens to them, he is actually pretty adamant about remaining in this world. A line that made me think this was in chapter 3 of part II, when Meursault says “the policeman… asked me if I had the ‘jitters.’ I said no-- and that, in a way, I was even interested in seeing a trial. I’d never had the chance before.” (83) I got sort of emotional reading this line, as it’s one of very few moments in which Meursault acts like a real person. I can picture him getting sort of excited about walking into a courtroom and taking in this brand new environment, which makes it all the more devastating what happens to him at the end of the book. Meursault lives in an existentialist society, where humans are supposed to take full responsibility for their actions. Because Meursault has never felt remorse about the bad things he has done, he immediately is labeled as “evil” by those around him. It’s not his fault, but because it has been established that people who dodge responsibility are inherently bad, Meursault is given a much worse punishment during his trial than a normal man would’ve received. The ending lines of the book show Meursault at his most vulnerable and are completely raw. They state, “blind rage had washed me clean, rid me of hope; for the first time… I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world… I felt that I had been happy and that I was happy again. For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone, I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate.” (122) Meursault doesn’t want to be alone in the world. While this desire may be selfish, only wanting to feel less alone so that he might stop suffering a little inside, it demonstrates that he had so much potential to be good. Meursault clearly wants to feel something and be connected with someone, but he can’t help it that his sociopathic tendencies get in the way. It’s tragic, especially when he expresses his wish for hateful cries to be targeted at him during his beheading. Hate is as strong an emotion as love. By being hated, Meursault can feel what it’s like to matter.
The idea of a cruel world has for years proliferated pop culture. In literature, many a character has inhabited a cold indifferent world but no character has reciprocated on this uncaring nature as Meursault of The Stranger has. In the story, Albert Camus uses this indifference to comment on the purpose of society as opposed to individualism as well as the idea of a universal meaning or order in our lives.
ReplyDeleteIn most novels, cruelty serves as a motivation, as something for the characters of the story to overcome. This is not so in The Stranger. In the beginning of the book, Camus makes it clear to the reader that Meursault operates in a state of brutal objectivism, he is acutely aware of his minute role in the universe and acts accordingly. When his mother dies Meursault seems to adopt a detached attitude. He seems to care more about missing work than he does at his mother. When he holds vigil over his mother he seems to not care about his mother. Instead, he is interested in the strangers sitting across from him. This sentiment is echoed when later Meursault is put on trial for murder and his moral system is called into question. Once again he sits across from a group of strangers yet this time they are not as uncaring as those at the vigil. In court, Meursault is torn apart. This is the cruelty of The Stranger: to judge Meursault by a system of morals and emotions that Meursault himself sees no value in. Under these societal values, Meursault is sentenced to death. Before his execution date, Meursault spends time is a small prison cell in which he reflects upon his life and it becomes clear to the reader that, in fact, Meursault is not an unfeeling sociopath, he cares deeply about the beauty of life, but he also understands that the universe is not cruel like the society that he lives under but indifferent. He realizes that after his death the world will go on. In return, he resolves that he was right to be indifferent to the world. We see this unwillingness to believe in a universal meaning in Meursault’s vehement almost violent rejection of religion. Even when he is certain that he will die he refuses to give in to the idea that his life has purpose, because he recognizes that his life is fundamentally absurd. However, his final wish is for the crowd at his execution to hate him because any emotion, even hate, is indicative of caring and in an uncaring world one needs to know that they are cared about.
No one in life is perfect. In fact, it is impossible to be perfect. Despite this being common knowledge, many people still have the expectations of perfection and when someone does not fit into this mold, they are often referred to as evil or immoral. When it comes to grief, everyone grieves in different ways. Some people will cry for days while others will simply feel glum. There is no right or wrong way to grieve because everyone has different connections to the person who has passed away as well as different ways of handling their emotions. This is accepted by others so long as they like the person who is going through this hardship. In Meursault’s case, this understanding and acceptance is non-existent because he is seen as someone who is evil. When his mother passes away, Meursault does not wish to see her body one last time, and instead insists on closing the casket and starting the ceremony. His actions come back to haunt him later during his trial, and they were used as evidence against his character. At no point during the trial did the prosecution take the time to acknowledge the reasoning behind the nuances of Meursault’s grief, instead they act as the perfect lawyer they are, using all their leverage to attack him. There are various reasons behind Meursault’s desire not to see the body, maybe it was all too much, maybe he did not want to have his last memory of her to be of her lifeless body, or maybe, just maybe, he wanted to be able to move on with his process of grief. There is no doubt that Meursault conducted his life poorly in which he seemed to have little to no emotion regarding the world around him. Despite hearing Raymond beat up his girlfriend and degrade her, as well as Salamano throw his dog around, Meursault simply does nothing. He acknowledges the situation yet continues “on [his] way back upstairs”. When Marie asks him to marry her he simply shrugs his shoulders and says “it didn’t make any difference” to him even admitting to her that he “probably didn’t love her”. These words and actions can be interpreted in the eyes of Marie as well as the reader as Meursault’s evilness as well as his immoral nature. Most people will perceive him as being a horrible man who is so cynical and as someone who does not have a heart because they are focusing solely on his actions instead of focusing on the reasoning behind them. All of the things that we perceive as horrible happened right after the death of Meursault’s mother. It might appear that his dull reaction to the death and lack of emotions displayed publicly are a part of his everyday life when in reality, not much is known about Meursault’s life before the passing of his mother. Not once during the novel are Meursault’s bad decisions viewed as resulting from the death of his mother because people are quick to judge someone at first glance. To many people, it is assumed that everything is black and white and if someone does something then it must mean that they believe or are a certain way when in fact the world and most importantly people are not so black and white but rather a messy gray where there are complex reasonings behind everything and sometimes it can’t always be determined.
ReplyDeleteIn The Stranger, there are multiple scenes of violence that contribute to the work, including the domestic abuse exhibited by Raymond and Meursault’s shooting of an Arab on the beach. Both of these actions are despicable and have a deeper purpose to them. The reactions exhibited by Meursault after these events are key to the plot of the book. After Meursault finds out about the abusive nature of Raymond, not only does Meursault not criticize Raymond, or help the victim, his non-reaction leads to him assisting Raymond with a sickening scheme designed to earn revenge: “Since I didn't say anything, he asked if I'd mind doing it right then and I said no.” Later on in the book, a fight breaks out with two Arabs, and eventually, Meursault shoots one of the men, killing him. But again, it’s not so much about the act itself as it is about that seemingly emotionless state that Meursault was in while it happened. He didn’t just shoot the man once, but five times. And he seems to chalk the whole thing up, saying “the the trigger gave”, and he compared the shots after the initial one to “knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness.” Meursault’s lack of emotions was key to the plot. His lack of remorse for the homicide he committed is what leads to him being sentenced to execution. But his sentence actually further reinforces his belief that nothing really matters.
ReplyDeleteOn the basis of simply Meursault’s actions, one might deem him evil or immoral. This accusation may be made by the climax of the events when Meursault murders an Arab man, but this accusation also could be supported by Meursault’s interactions with others such as Marie and after the death of his mother. However, due to Albert Camus’ writing in the full presentation of Meursault in The Stranger, the audience is allowed to react more sympathetically than they otherwise might.
ReplyDeleteAlbert Camus wrote his novel from the perspective of the main character, Meursault. The start of the novel with the death of his mother, the reader begins to sympathize with Mersault. Although his reaction is not what one would think of as sympathetic, Camus brings forth the idea that we all suffer and grieve in our own way. During the trial, the prosecutor brings forth that Meursault sent his mother to a home towards the end of her life as a way to deem him evil or immoral. However, Meursault explains that he did not have the resources to look after her. Although it may come across throughout the novel the Meursault did not care about his mother because he “did not cry,” it can be seen as an act of courage that he did not want to be solely responsible for his mother at the end because of how he views her and others.
Although the act of Meursault murdering the Arab man is immoral and evil, it is evident that Camus raises the idea that the man who commits the crime may not be solely evil and immoral. Though throughout the novel, Meursault from the surface may not treat others with respect, he is doing his best in the circumstances, such as how he treats Marie. When looked at quickly, it can be seen that Meursault is simply just not kind to Marie, and does not care about her feelings. The reader has observed throughout the novel that Meursault does not feel strong emotions towards anyone, but this does not make him evil; it makes him different than what happens to be valued in society. When Marie proposes the idea of marriage, and he has a less than emotional response and will agree to do it if she wants to, it is much like the situation with his mother. He wants to do what will make her happy, since he has shielded himself away from reciprocating strong feelings towards people in his life. By looking at the deeper character arc and the complexity he possesses, the audience is able to sympathize with Meursault because one wants him to feel emotions. Camus’ writing in creating a character like Meursault who does not have meaning in anything, allows the reader to provoke strong emotions and sympathize with the character to react the way that you would react. The deeper meaning behind the character of Meursault dismisses the idea that he is evil and immoral, but that he is not able to be evil and immoral because he is incapable of understanding complex emotions, causing the reader to have strong emotions.
To me, one of the most jarring aspects of “The Stranger” is the utter lack of emotion throughout the piece. As Meursault progresses through his normal day-to-day happenings, he is presented with very unnatural and often brutal occurrences. However, what is more disconcerting is how he reacts to these situations. Upon seeing the old man Salamano and his dog, he observes that, “Salamano was swearing away at the dog. He was saying, "Filthy, stinking bastard!" and the dog was whimpering. I said "Good evening," but the old man just went on cursing. So I asked him what the dog had done. He didn't answer. All he said was "Filthy, stinking bastard!” After asking again and receiving no answer, Mersuelt simply walks away from the bleeding dog without a second thought. This cruelty paired with the cruelty of indifference is a recurring theme in the book. Later on, he becomes involved with a woman named Marie. After spending quite a lot of time going out together, Marie asks Merseult if he loves her. Without a moment of hesitation he responds with, “I told her it didn't mean anything but that I didn't think so. She looked sad.” He rejects her and then dismisses the idea of love that she so cherishes completely. She does not give up, however, and they remain together, at least in her mind, a couple. She eventually asks him to marry her, and he tells her that, “it didn't make any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to. Then she wanted to know if I loved her. I answered the same way I had the last time, that it didn't mean anything but that I probably didn't love her. "So why marry me, then?" she said. I explained to her that it didn't really matter and that if she wanted to, we could get married.” This pure emotional cruelty subjects Marie to intense pain, to which Meursault is completely blind. The most heinous act thus far, however, occurs on a hot, death-filled beach. When the sun shines just a bit too much for him to handle, Meursault loses all control, and takes the life of an innocent with four pulls of the trigger. After gazing upon the horror he has committed, all he remarks is that, “I knew that I had shattered the harmony of the day, the exceptional silence of a beach where I'd been happy.”
ReplyDeleteEdith Wharton showed the importance of illuminating incidents in his novel. As an integral part of each book, illuminating incidents are surprising segments of the plot where the hidden themes of a masterpiece are revealed and emphasized. It provides a window for the readers to delve into the deeper meaning of a novel further. In The Stranger by Albert Camus, the illuminating incident is when Meursault, the main character, kills an Arab man for no apparent reason. This incident sheds light on his absence of grief on the funeral and lack of belief clearer and heightens the theme of this book: the meaninglessness of life.
ReplyDeleteThe story is told through a third-person perspective with a focus on the main character Meursault. Meursault goes to a beach with his friends, Masson and Raymond. That afternoon, they run into two Arabs on the beach, one of whom is the brother of Raymond's mistress. A fight breaks out in which Raymond was wounded. Meursault talks Raymond out of his murderous plan. Later, however, Meursault returns to the spring to cool off and spots the Arab. With the intense sunlight blaring at his eyes and, for no apparent reason, he shoots Raymond's mistress's brother. To make matters worse, Meursault continues to shot the dead man four more times almost as if he is in a trance. This horrendous incident brought the readers to a sharp, unexpected turning point and exposed more than merely the surface descriptions of a man's life. Meursault's personality as a sociopath and his lack of want is further enhanced. While most people act out of reason or want, he acts without a definite purpose. He goes to the beach simply because he was invited by people he knows. He stops Raymond since he thinks his anger and the plan for revenge are entirely pointless. He shots the Arab, who means nothing to him. Life, to Meursault, is meaningless and detached as it should be.
The illuminating incident of murder helps the reader to understand better Meursault's lack of remorse at his mother's funeral. At his mother's funeral, Meursault has no trace of sadness. He refuses to see his mother one last time and even fall asleep during the vigil. Throughout the process, he focuses on the hot weather more than the loss of his mother. Meursault's isolation, coupled with the illuminating murder, sheds light on the central theme of the novel: the emptiness of life and void of sentiment. He can not grief for the terrible loss as love and relationship hold no meaning for him. To him, the funeral is merely a mechanical process he has to suffer through. While others accuses him of being a heartless monster, he dismisses the attempts to make sense of human society and refuses to lie to himself to conform to social norms. Against the pressure of other characters' persistent efforts to impose structures of meaning, he remains isolated in his vain and hallow life.
ReplyDeleteThe events of Camus’s The Stranger, are centred around an act of violence, the murder of the Arab. Everything prior to it exists to amplify its meaning, and what comes after is all based upon the consequences. It is through the act of killing that Meursault ceases to live under the facade of normalcy.
Confronted perfectly describes how the scene is presented. Meursault feels like a stranger to any normal reader up until then with his apathy towards his mother’s death, but it is something relatively harmless. We are reminded that evil doesn’t not require malice, merely indifference. The scene itself is but a moment, yet it takes up a full page. Meursault’s full sensory input is on display. Everything he feels and thinks is presented to us to show that there is no remorse. He is only discomforted by the heat of the sun, not the least bit by the implications of murder before the act. When he pulls the trigger, he doesn’t feel the weight of life, but rather metal on skin. After the first shot is fired, time goes back to normal. He overcomes his discomfort completely and empties his gun into his unnamed victim. Only briefly does he feel the weight of what he’s done.
For a violent scene, it is surprisingly non visceral. There are 5 bullets fired, but no holes mentioned. The language used to describe Meursault’s apathetic discomfort are filled with weapons: spear, knives, and blades slash away at his sanity. The sun and sea burn at him. There is no blood described, no bullet wounds. It keeps the attention on Meursault's state of mind.
Meursault's detached personality and inability to emotionally connect with those close to him allowed society to perceive him as an immoral and an innately evil person. When his mother passed, Meursault did not go through the typical emotional turmoil that most people endure and although those around him expected him to experience this, he chooses not to shed fake tears just for the satisfaction of the general public. After he simply killed the man for no apparent reason, his trial shifts from punishment for his actions to being trialed for the sin of rejecting society's moral standards and existentialist view of life and is condemned of having a “criminal soul”. Although those in power viewed Meursault as morally corrupt, the reader forms sympathetic feelings towards him due to the authors ability to situate Meursault in realistic situations as well as his very direct and simple writing style. Camus writes the book in a first person narrative which gives the reader insight to Meursault’s mind. This perspective serves as an additional resource to understanding and processing Meursalt’s apathy to the things and people around him. The reader see’s how Meursault fails to recognize the effect of his actions on other people thus causing the reader to try to justify his actions by saying that he just simply does not understand or process emotions.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading the second part of this book, I noticed a shift in Meursault when he was in jail. While in jail, Meursault was forced to analyze his life, people, and objects that surrounded him. He begins to think about the significance of his existence and the purpose of his life. He quickly comes to terms that nothing really matters, we are all going to die sooner or later.
ReplyDelete1982. In great literature, no scene of violence exists for its own sake. Choose a work of literary merit that confronts the reader or audience with a scene or scenes of violence. In a well-organized essay, explain how the scene or scenes contribute to the meaning of the complete work. Avoid plot summary.
In the novel The Stranger, by Albert Camus, the main character Meursault murders an Arab man for seemingly no reason. The reader is left confused after the murder, especially because of the way that it was committed - four shots from a gun to different points in the body. To act with this magnitude of violence with no warning was shocking. Camus writes the character of Meursault with an emotionless tone, attaching little to no meaning to the events occuring around him. Thorugh the description of the murder and inclusion of other violent events, Camus comments on the importance of emotion and the connection of the individual to the rest of life.
After the murder, Meursault feels no remorse or regret: “Right after my arrest I was questioned several times, but it was just so they could find out who I was, which didn't take long.” Meursault does not feel like a criminal. He acts as if the police officers are his friends, assumes that they will let him go scotch free because of his social and racial status. Meursault’s description of the officer makes this idea clear to the reader: “He struck me as being very reasonable and, overall, quite pleasant, despite a nervous tic which made his mouth twitch now and then. On my way out I was even going to shake his hand, but just in time, I remembered that I had killed a man.”
There is one scene near the end of the book where Meursault finds an old newspaper clipping tucked away in the mattress in his jail cell. The newspaper contains an old story about a mother and sister who killed their son/brother for his money unknowingly: “The next morning the wife had come to the hotel and, without knowing it, gave away the traveler's identity. The mother hanged herself. The sister threw herself down a well. I must have read that story a thousand times. On the one hand it wasn't very likely. On the other, it was perfectly natural. Anyway, I thought the traveler pretty much deserved what he got and that you should never play games.” Meursault does not reflect on this story with even an ounce of emotion.
Violence and loss do not faze him, which is very strange - the reader is confused and distressed by this lack of reaction.
Livia
Delete1979. Choose a complex and important character in a novel or a play of recognized literary merit who might on the basis of the character's actions alone be considered evil or immoral. In a well-organized essay, explain both how and why the full presentation of the character in the work makes us react more sympathetically than we otherwise might. Avoid plot summary.
ReplyDeleteIn Albert Camus’s book The Stranger the audience is able to see how a life lacking of purpose will eventually lead to one’s self destruction. Camus reveals the effects of one’s built up frustration from their inability to feel and inability to break away from their routine. While in this novel the main character, Meursault, causes serious harm and feels no remorse for the people he is supposed to love, Camus plays off of our emotions to make us empathize with him.
Camus wanted to create a character in which we cannot understand, because of his lack of emotion. Through each instance in which he is supposed to feel guilt, happiness, love, etc. and he doesn’t the reader stops to question why this approach is abnormal. The reader initially sees his difference as wrong, but once we take a deeper look at why he is the way he is we are able to empathize with him. As humans with an overwhelming amount of emotion we are forced to think about what it would feel to live a cold, empty life as Meursault does. Our emotions allow is to react in a way in which we are on Mersault’s side and realize it is not his fault for not being able to feel. While Meursault kills an innocent man, which is a horrific act that is hard to sympathize with, we must see that Meursault was incapable of understanding why this decision was wrong. He cannot feel connected to the other man on a basic human level, because he was born without the ability to love. While sending someone without emotion to jail keeps others safe, it does not teach them a lesson. He is not punished, because he is unable to reflect on why what he did is wrong, so it is better to understand the truth behind why the person did what they did and work to help them improve. As the trial goes on we see that Meursault is never told why his crime is wrong, because everyone expects him to feel guilt. Before we mark others as wrong for being different we can work to see the situation from their point of view. As the book goes on the audience sympathizes with Meursault, because we would not want to live a life of numbness.
Found a typo so.... resubmitted
ReplyDeleteFamous novelist Edith Wharton once emphasized the importance of illuminating incidents in every novel. As an integral part of each book, illuminating incidents are surprising segments of the plot where the hidden themes of a masterpiece are revealed and emphasized. It provides a window for the readers to delve into the deeper meaning of a novel further. In The Stranger by Albert Camus, the illuminating incident is when Meursault, the main character, kills an Arab man for no apparent reason. This incident sheds light heightens the theme of this book: the acceptance of the meaninglessness of life.
The story is told through a third-person perspective with a focus on the main character Meursault. Meursault goes to a beach with his friends, Masson and Raymond. That afternoon, they run into two Arabs on the beach, one of whom is the brother of Raymond's mistress. A fight breaks out in which Raymond was wounded. Meursault talks Raymond out of his murderous plan. Later, however, Meursault returns to the spring to cool off and spots the Arab. With the intense sunlight blaring at his eyes and, for no apparent reason, he shoots Raymond's mistress's brother. To make matters worse, Meursault continues to shot the dead man four more times almost as if he is in a trance. This horrendous incident brought the readers to a sharp, unexpected turning point and exposed more than merely the surface descriptions of a man's life. Meursault's personality as a sociopath and his lack of want is further enhanced. While most people act out of reason or want, he acts without a definite purpose. He goes to the beach simply because he was invited by people he knows. He stops Raymond since he thinks his anger and the plan for revenge are entirely pointless. He shots the Arab, who means nothing to him. Life, to Meursault, is meaningless and detached as it should be.
The illuminating incident of murder helps the reader to understand better Meursault's lack of remorse at his mother's funeral. At his mother's funeral, Meursault has no trace of sadness. He refuses to see his mother one last time and even fall asleep during the vigil. Throughout the process, he focuses on the hot weather more than the loss of his mother. Meursault's isolation, coupled with the illuminating murder, sheds light on the central theme of the novel: the emptiness of life and void of sentiment. He can not grief for the terrible loss as love and relationship hold no meaning for him. To him, the funeral is merely a mechanical process he has to suffer through. While others accuses him of being a heartless monster, he dismisses the attempts to make sense of human society and refuses to lie to himself to conform to social norms. Against the pressure of other characters' persistent efforts to impose structures of meaning, he remains isolated in his vain and hallow life.
(I ran out of time but the third paragraph should be about Meursault's refusal to believe in a religion despite pressure. He is being true to himself and accepts the meaninglessness of life.)
According to Roland Barthes, "Literature is the question minus the answer." “L’Étranger” (Translated to “The Stranger”) by Albert Camus in which it raises the question of what makes one a “ protagonist,” both literally and metaphorically. Camus uses concepts of existentialism as a way to respond to the essential question that he raised. His vague categorization of Meursault as an antihero, double-edged dialogue he assigns to Meursault, and the way he paints the deuteragonists and tritagonists around the main character all aid in the way he answers the question he raised.
ReplyDeleteThe question of Meursault’s role is usually equated to how moral he is. He feels nothing towards the people he is around and observes them in a somewhat scientific detached way like he does with Raymond. “He asked me again if I wanted to be pals. I said it was fine with me: he seemed pleased.” Meursault always talks about the way others appear to him and barely ever his own reactions. He maintains this even with the death of his mother; “It occurred to [him] that anyway one more Sunday was over that Maman was buried now, that [he] was going back to work, and that, really, nothing had changed.” His morality compass is also not like that of a normal person’s. He talks about he he “opened [himself] to the gentle indifference of the world” and
believes that “people never change their lives, that in any case one life was as good as another and that [he] wasn’t dissatisfied with [his] here at all.”
Some may consider him a psychopath but analyzing his past, especially through this quotation:
“Looking back on it, I wasn't unhappy. When I was a student, I had lots of ambitions like that. But when I had to give up my studies I learned very quickly that none of it really mattered.”
and the fact that he has to deal with the trauma of his mother’s death reveal a different tale. I think of him more as a sociopath instead which is underscored by the colorful characterization of the people around him.
Raymond, Marie, even the couple friends with Raymond, are all characterized very distinctly that are all purposeful in answering to the role of Meursault. “He told me that I’d have to act as a witness for him. It didn’t matter to me, but I didn’t know what I was supposed to say. According to Raymond, all I had to do was to state that the girl had cheated on him. I agreed to act as a witness for him.” Raymond has his own rumors and love life to deal with that Meursault is shown to be roped into. The contrast between their character traits as well as Meursault going with the flow and becoming his friend as collateral damage highlight the role of a protagonist. The same goes for his relationship with Marie. “A minute later she asked me if I loved her. I told her it didn’t mean anything but that I didn’t think so.” Marie is painted to be lovesick and wanting marry Meursault despite his obvious indifference to her.
1979 Prompt
ReplyDeleteThose with a great sense of apathy tend to be ostracized, misunderstood. It is not like they can control themselves, but are branded as evil and immoral by action they take that are not considered normal by society. Monsieur Meursault, the epitome of indifference, is not liked by society as a whole, as his abnormal behaviors are questioned by the populace during his trial. The root issue is Meursault’s lack of emotion during the funeral of his mother. Not only did Meursault fail to perform the full vigil over his deceased mother, but he “didn’t know how old Maman was” (89). Meursault’s general attitude of unconcern for his mother’s passing shocked the audience, for it is expected by society to care for one’s parents. However, there is no situation that may have occurred in Meursault’s childhood that is delved into, ideas that would justify Meursault’s feelings, so a lopsided narrative is provided. In addition, since people deal with grief differently, Meursault may just be rejecting the notion that his mother is no longer with him, or even ‘killed’ her when he left her at the home. It is hard to judge a person on how they cope with loss, and the horribleness of the prosecution and Meursault’s lack of understanding why anybody would feel else wise cause the reader to commiserate.
Love is a weighted word. Many romantic relationships exist without a drop of love, but this emotion is generally assumed or required by society. Meursault doesn’t really care about Marie in that sense, but he does engage in pleasurable acts with his girlfriend. At the trial, the prosecution mentions that the relationship started “the day after Maman died” (93). It is presumptuous to assume that this date has any significance, but at the time, this was scandalous. This date also broadens the point that Meursault may have needed a sense of comfort after his mother died, which was also seen by that fact that he was smoking (an act that takes place to calm) during his mother’s vigil. Since his defense was so weak, Meursault was unable to interject his own viewpoint in a meaningful way, so he was found guilty.
Any religion was seen as better than none, especially in a world where religion held the answers and was tied to a sense of nationality. However, Meursault believed not. When his lawyer probed Meursault about his religious beliefs, and Meursault said he had none, the lawyer said “‘do you want my life to be meaningless?’” (69). Not only was he incredulous that one couldn’t go to church, the lawyer took personal issue with this, and sought to resole the issue, instead of accepting it. Through a modern, American standpoint, there is nothing wrong with being an atheist, and the idea that Meursault was vilified for that unthinkable.
Characters that interacted with Meursault seemed to believe that there was more to his character, that his feelings meant something deep and profound, the incarnate of the devil. It is that sense of misunderstanding that is ultimately how the reader most commiserates with Meursault. Many have experiences where nobody around them ‘gets’ them or grasps their point of view, and in “The Stranger,” this is taken to the extreme.