Stranger And Meursault Essay, Research Paper

The way a person reacts to ordinary situations determines the opinions of others

based on their behavior. Yet, when this behavior is abnormal or different from

the rest of society, it causes society to form an opinion based totally on a

person?s behavior not their true personality. In Meursault?s case, his

strange opinions and unexpected remarks put him in this position, without ever

really giving him an opportunity to be truly understood. However, Meursault

cannot change his actions and behaviors from the past, therefore making him

responsible in the society he freely chooses to live in. Meursault?s complete

indifference to society and human relationships causes him to appear as the

actual ?stranger? with those he encounters, which eventually leads to his

incarceration and inevitable date with the guillotine. Meursault is definitely a

man who is set in his ways. He has his own opinions and outlooks on life and

because of that fact he is constantly reminded of his inadequacies within

society. His refusal to look at his mother one last time after she had passed

away seemed pointless to Meursault at the time, where as the funeral director

viewed this as extremely odd: ?We put the cover on, but I?m supposed to

unscrew the casket so you can see her.? He was moving toward the casket when I

stopped him. He said, ?You don?t want to?? I answered, ?No.? He was

quiet, and then I was embarrassed because I felt I shouldn?t have said that.

He looked at me and then asked, ?Why not?? but without criticizing, as if he

just wanted to know. I said, ?I don?t know.? (Camus 6) The difference of

opinion between Meursault and all of society, but in this example the funeral

director, brought about a feeling of inadequacy to Meursault and an appearance

of him as a stranger to society. Alice J. Strange explains his situation

perfectly by saying: Holding Meursault to his words, and recognizing the voids

they reveal, the reader sees Meursault as the stranger?. (Strange 3)

Throughout the novel, these encounters and/or relationships gradually set

Meursault aside from society. His encounter with the Arab shows how the presence

of other people in his life makes absolutely no impression on him. Taking the

Arab?s life was something he did as a natural reaction, he pulled the trigger

thinking it was justified where as any normal human being would think other

wise. Once on trial, Meursault constantly observed the people in the courtroom

as if he had no idea of how the rest of society lived. Every thing he saw was

new to him and it brought him a feeling of excitement, as if he was enjoying

being on trial. Fear only came after his verdict. He didn?t even consider his

fate early on in the trial because he was in awe of the rest of society; their

behaviors and actions were all new to him. In chapter three part two Meursault

explained this by saying: Usually people didn?t pay much attention to me. It

took some doing on my part to understand that I was the cause of all the

excitement. I said to the policeman, ?Some crowd!? He told me it was because

of the press and he pointed to a group of men at a table just below the jury

box. He said, ?That?s them.? (83-84) The only thing Meursault is worried

about is the press, not the fact that his fate is about to be determined by a

group of people that don?t even know him. He doesn?t even care about death

at this point, only how he is excited to see all these new people and be able to

watch the court proceedings. Before Meursault?s incarceration, he lived a life

of desire based on his own satisfaction. His life was completely self-centered

and focused on his own physical pleasures. Meursault?s obsession with his own

desires can be explained by saying that: His contempt for man-made

necessities?, such as religion, morality, government, is supreme; but his

attitude toward natural coercion, hunger, sex, the weather, etc., though less

explicit, seems almost equally disdainful. Meursault is a non-participant (Carruth

8-9). He took absolutely no consideration of other?s feelings and how his

actions affected them. Meursault?s love of smoking, eating, drinking, having

sex, swimming and being outside, all of which are physical pleasures, are taken

to extremes. Take away these and try to imagine what Meursault would be like. He

would be practically lifeless because he wouldn?t enjoy anything. He is never

concerned with what is going on in other areas of his life or others. His

satisfaction comes above everything else in his life and controls everything he

does. Also, Meursault?s relationship with Marie was totally based on sex

rather than love. He had sex with her purely out of lust and only to satisfy

himself. At no point did he intentionally have sex with her to express his love

for her; love was never part of his intentions. Another example of how he based

his own satisfaction ahead of everything else was how Meursault went to see a

comical movie the day after he buried his mother. He wasn?t worried about his

mother at all; the only thing that he was concentrating on was having a good

time. He was able to laugh and enjoy himself knowing that his own mother had

just passed away, something that obviously made little impact on him. His

physical pleasures dominated his life and forced him to behave the way he did.

By letting these physical pleasures dominate his life, he created an attitude

and behavior that was unaccepted and seen as wrong to the rest of society. Even

though Meursault let his physical pleasures control his life, he was however

satisfied with the life he was living; completely content with where he was in

his life. He never asked anything from anyone and never once expected anything

from others. Stephen Bronner puts this into perspective by saying: ?Meursault

is passive, unreflective, and compulsive. He is a prototype of the ?absurd

man? who seeks no questions and tells no lies.? (Bronner, The Thinker 44)

Mr. Bronner explained that Meursault set himself apart from others through his

passive nature and lived extremely independent. This attitude is proven even

further when Meursault refused a promotion based on the fact that he was

satisfied with the life he had then: He was planning to open an office in Paris

that would handle his business directly with the big companies, on the spot, and

he wanted to know how I felt about going there. I?d be able to live in Paris

and to travel around for part of the year as well. ?You?re young, and it

seems to me it?s the kind of life that would appeal to you.? I said yes but

that really it was all the same to me. Then he asked me if I wasn?t interested

in a change of life. I said that people never change their lives, that in any

case one life was as good as another and that I wasn?t dissatisfied with mine

here at all. He looked upset and told me that I never gave him a straight

answer, that I had no ambition, and that I was disastrous in business. (41) The

thought of ambition and success never even crossed his mind and turning down the

opportunity made no difference to him. He could care less about what his boss

and others thought because he was only concerned about himself. This would

appear extremely strange to anyone because why in the world would anyone not

want to earn more money, respect, power and even have the opportunity to live in

Paris? Meursault?s problem was obviously that he had absolutely no ambition.

This became blatantly obvious in chapter five when Meursault said: ?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 mattered.? (Camus 41) So, we

can see that Meursault did at one time have some ambition for something other

than physical pleasures, but once he lost the opportunity to continue his

education, he also lost all of his drive. This showed that Meursault was an

intelligent man and had the ability to expand his intelligence, but apparently

chose not to. That definitely appeared as bizarre to others. Meursault?s

twisted relationship with Marie was totally based on his sexual desires, but

what became extremely clear was that he was unable to experience love. Meursault

never once showed any signs of emotion only until he was about to loose his own

life. Meursault had a hardened soul and could never bring himself to truly love

Marie. He proved just how irrelevant she was to him while he was incarcerated

when the thought of Marie brought him to say: ? Anyway, after that,

remembering Marie meant nothing to me. I wasn?t interested in her dead. That

seemed perfectly normal to me, since I understood very well that people would

forget me when I was dead? (115). His words were just as hardened as his soul

was. Meursault?s relationship with Marie was not the only odd relationship he

had with a female. Meursault?s relationship with his mother was almost

non-existent from hindsight. He never saw her, or visited her, and until her

death she was out of his life so he didn?t care much about her, or so it

seems. The fact is he did love her; it was just that he never showed it, just

like every other emotion. Meursault thought that putting Maman in the home was

the best choice for the time being, so she could be cared for better, and still

live a pleasant life. Yet, Meursault never realized that people considered him

as a bad person until his conversation with Old Salamano. In chapter five

Meursault said: ?I still don?t know why, but I said that until then I

hadn?t realized that people thought badly of me for doing it, but that the

home had seemed like the natural thing since I didn?t have enough money to

have Maman cared for.? (45) This realization shocked Meursault because he was

never aware of the reputation he had in his neighborhood. He didn?t want to be

seen as a bad person, but his strange actions and self-centered behaviors

created his image and there was nothing he could do about it. Throughout the

novel, Meursault came into contact with society many times, but each time he

always received an awkward response leaving him with the feeling like an

intruder or an outsider. Meursault?s interactions with society such as the

funeral director, Maman?s friends, Raymond, the Chaplain, and the courtroom

all provide substantial reasoning for society?s perception of him as a

stranger. Beginning with the funeral director, Meursault caused an awkward

feeling between him and the director because of his bizarre comments. Not

wanting to see his mother one last time, smoking during the memorial service,

and not even knowing his own mother?s age proves to be outrageous when

compared to the average human being?s social and moral standards. But the fact

is Meursault is not the average human being. Helene Poplyansky beautifully

explained this when she said: Meursault is far from social convention or

intellectual problems; what counts for him are his own sensations and desires.

He is an outsider not only for others but also for himself. He looks at himself

without trying to analyze his actions and their consequences. (Poplyansky 80) By

acting the way he did, Meursault almost forced his image as a stranger upon

himself. Also, the closest thing to a friend that Meursault had was Raymond.

Initially, Raymond appeared as a crude man without any morals, comparable to

Meursault at times, and he behaved in an absurd manner. Yet, he attempted to

create a bond with Meursault and some could say that Meursault accepted it, I

however do not. From the first time Raymond appeared in the novel Meursault

seemed uneasy to Raymond?s motives, as if he didn?t trust him. This feeling

never went away either. Even though the two did spend time together and

Meursault did him a favor by writing him a letter, Meursault always seemed to

never truly consider his friendship. Not only was Meursault unable to show any

signs of emotion with women, he is unable to show any signs of emotion to his

somewhat of a companion. Meursault?s final interaction with the chaplain

showed how Meursault was unable to connect with and understand other?s

perspectives. Meursault did enjoy their meetings, but only because he had no

other contact with the outside world; he only wanted to be entertained instead

of sharing any sort of friendship. The difference between Meursault and the rest

of society, courtesy of the chaplain, became blatantly clear when he and the

chaplain discussed their views of after life and religion. Meursault never

thought that the way in which he was living was wrong or even sinful and that is

what set him apart from every other human being. His lack of awareness and

ignorance for social values appeared in chapter five, when the chaplain said:

?More could be asked of you. And it may be asked. And what?s that? You could

be asked to see. See what?? (Camus 118) The chaplain was only asking Meursault

to try and understand where he was coming from and what he believed in. Religion

never played a role in Meursault?s life and he was too stubborn to try and be

open-minded about it. His stubborn attitude and close-mindedness never permitted

him to even understand where others were coming form, he didn?t have to accept

it but he could have at least given others beliefs a chance. You could even say

Meursault was blind in a sense that he never opened up so that he could get

along with others. He always saw life in a totally different perspective than

everyone else and could never be rationed with. The obvious difference between

Meursault and others became clear when the chaplain explained to Meursault that

the stones on the walls in his cell appeared as the face of God and salvation.

Meursault responded by saying: This perked me up a little. I said I had been

looking at the stones in those walls for months. There wasn?t anything or

anyone in the world I knew better. Maybe at one time, way back, I had searched

for a face in them. But the face I was looking for was as bright as the sun and

the flame of desire ? and it belonged to Marie. I had searched for it in vain.

Now it was all over. And in any case, I?d never seen anything emerge from any

sweating stones.? (119) The chaplain?s perspective of the stone walls in

Meursault?s cell was totally different from what Meursault perceived them as,

and within those lines it symbolized Meursault?s and society?s conflicting

views. The cell represented society and the stones represented the people within

Meursault?s life. He lived his entire life around those stones and had never

seen any faces like the chaplain had. The only face he was looking for was

Marie?s, or, in actuality, lust. He lived his life pursuing his desires and it

eventually led him to the cell. But how Meursault didn?t see the faces

represented him as a total stranger to society because society was the faces,

symbolically speaking. Meursault?s own perception of his life and society is

only half of the evidence that proved him to be the stranger. Society too had

their perceptions of him and it also left us with the same conclusion, that

Meursault was the stranger. Meursault did live his life on his own and never

depended on others for anything, but the fact remains that he left a lasting

impression on those whom he encountered. During Meursault?s trial, the

prosecutor basically reviewed all of society?s impressions of Meursault and

how he was a self-absorbed bastard. He constantly accused Meursault of being

inconsiderate and cold-hearted by bringing up instances in his life that had

nothing to do with the actual shooting. Stephen Bronner also stated:

?Meursault is innocent of the crimes for which he is actually sentenced and

guilty of what is essentially ignored? (Bronner, Portrait 34) This proves how

Meursault?s previous actions of indifference even caused the prosecutor to

portray him as an evil person. The prosecutor molded an image of Meursault that

appeared as if he was the devil incarnate, and he made it seem as if Meursault

intentionally set out to cause pain and anguish, when really Meursault?s only

crime was ignorance. It was as if he intentionally set out to cause others pain

and anguish, when really Meursault?s only crime was that of ignorance. Yes he

was inconsiderate, but the fact is that he didn?t know any better and no one

is able to change that without the help from others. People perceived Meursault

as though he didn?t care about their feelings, causing him to be labeled as a

horrible person. Another contributing factor to society?s perception of

Meursault was his quiet nature. Meursault did not speak unless he feels it was

totally necessary, and even then he sometimes will still keep to himself. Other

people expect reactions out of people in social interactions and when they

don?t receive one, what are they supposed to assume? In this case, people saw

his quiet nature as an insult and refuse to understand his true nature.

Meursault?s removed himself from a lot of life?s complications and tried to

live the most simple life possible. Unlike the rest of society, he didn?t

bother with things that required effort, which seemed as if he didn?t like to

express himself. However, a lot can be misunderstood from silence. Meursault?s

silence appeared as ignorance, yet, Jean Paul Sartre stated: ?A man?s

virility lies more in what he keeps to himself than in what he says.?(Sartre

3) His silence didn?t represent insecurity or a lack of consideration. How are

others to know what someone else is really thinking? Meursault?s appearance to

society was judged from the wrong criteria. People overlooked what his true

personality was and what his true intentions were, causing him to appear as an

unwanted stranger. Meursault?s character and interactions throughout the novel

can only make a person wonder about his motives even though we, the reader,

think we have a insight over the society that he lived in. All of Meursault?s

problems and complications were all because of his appearance as a stranger,

which he caused through his ignorance of social conventions. Yet, it makes me

wonder why are strangers always seen as unwanted and why does a natural fear of

them arise? The fact is that strangers are labeled and in some way disrupt a

person?s environment. What a person can not understand makes them defensive,

and when a person is defensive they scrutinize what they don?t understand,

only to make themselves feel better. Meursault fits the bill for this because

when something goes wrong, for example the shooting, someone needs to be blamed,

and no better person than a stranger, Meursault, to take the fall. Also, since

Meursault was so oblivious to others, I realized that the possibility of

Meursault not having a father figure around could have been a cause of some of

his problems. The absence of a father causes a child to grow up differently from

most of society, which usually does grow up with a father, and it creates the

question, is the father to blame? We assume not, but since Meursault is

definitely an odd character it makes us wonder. Meursault lived his life

different from any other, never aware of others and completely focused on his

personal satisfaction. Yet, after understanding his mentality and motivations

that caused people to label him as a stranger, he can not be totally blamed for

his actions. I am not saying that the way Meursault lived his life was justified

nor were his actions because he did live a self-centered life. What I am saying

is that his true crime was ignorance. Meursault was almost like a young child

that was never taught right from wrong and how to be considerate of others. He

never deliberately set out to cause harm or pain on anyone, he just didn?t

know any better. Yet, Meursault was given a chance to realize how he lived his

life was wrong only after his judgement. He understood that what he had done was

wrong and that every action has a consequence, and his consequence was death.

The only shame in the matter is that society is just as responsible as he is

because they should have taken the responsibility of teaching him social values

and even morals. Meursault deserved to be punished for his actions, but being

put to death is never justified for being inconsiderate. Now, his fate would

never leave him, but neither would his past. So, Meursault?s actions could not

be erased from time and his appearance as the actual stranger to society that is

something he can never change. Justified or unjustified, Meursault will always

be the stranger.

Bronner, Stephen Eric Albert Camus: The Thinker, The Artist, The Man. Groiler

Publishing Co., Inc., 1996 —. Camus: Portrait of a Moralist. Minneapolis:

University of Minnesota Press, 1999 Camus, Albert The Stranger. New York:

Random, 1988 Carruth, Hayden After the Stranger: Imaginary Dialogues with Camus.

New York: The Macmillian Company, 1965 Poplyansky, Helene. Camus?s

L?Etranger: Fifty Years On. New York: St. Martin?s Press, Inc., 1992 Sartre,

Jean-Paul. An Explication of The Stranger Prentice Hall, Inc., 1962

Strange, Alice J. ?Camus? The Stranger.? The Explicator (1997): 36-37