Summary:
“The Stranger” by Albert Camus is a novel that follows the story of Meursault, an emotionally detached and indifferent person living in the colonial period in Algiers. The narrative begins with Meursault learning about his mother’s death but shows little emotional response. As the story unfolds, Meursault becomes involved in a senseless murder, his indifference to societal norms and his refusal to conform to expectations lead to his alienation from others. The story is divided into two parts: Meursault’s first-person narration before and after the murder. The novel culminates in a trial where Meursault is judged not only for the crime but also for his perceived lack of conformity and emotion.
Analysis:
“The Stranger,” often cited as exemplar of Camus’ philosophy of the absurd as well as existentialism, although Camus personally rejected the label of the existentialist. It unfolds in a world Camus portrays as fundamentally meaningless, absurd, insignificant and indifferent. It shows life is a monotonous cycle, permeated by violence, oppression, and death, juxtaposed with fleeting moments of pleasure. Meursaults actions reflect this existential indifference. His emotional detachment from societal norms, results in alienation and isolation.
In January 1955, Camus said, “I summed up The Stranger a long time ago with a remark that I admit was extremely paradoxical: In our society any man who does not weep at his mother’s funeral runs the risk of being sentenced to death. I just wanted to say that the hero of the book is doomed because he doesn’t play the game.”
Meursault embodies existentialist principles by rejecting conventional values, creating his own personal meaning and embraces living in the present moment. His indifference to societal norms, God, authority and rituals like mourning, underscores the theme of nonconformity.
Meursault is much more interested in the physical aspects of the world around him than in its social or emotional aspects. When he observes the people from his balcony, he does so passively, absorbing the details but not judging what he sees, unlike the other characters who are desperately searching for meaning. Neither the external world where the protagonist lives nor the internal world of his thoughts and moods possess a logical order. Meursault has no separate reason for his actions (marrying Maria, killing the Arab, etc.). Society nevertheless tries to invent or impose logical explanations for his irrational actions in order to maintain order.
The trial scene exposes the arbitrariness of justice and fate. Meursault’s judgment revolves more around perceived lack of conformity than the actual crime, highlighting the arbitrary nature of societal judgment. Camus explores the human condition and mortality through Meursault’s contemplation of life and death. Meursault’s acceptance of death amid societal pressure to express remorse is a significant aspect of this exploration. The acceptance of absurdity and mortality is a core point of the novel.
The narrative suggests that all lives share equal value or lack thereof, rejecting hierarchy in experiences. Distinctions between human and animal lives or any chosen way of life are blur and they all lead to the same ultimate end and no one has the right to judge another.
The different characters in The Stranger hold very different attitudes towards decay and death, which Meursault neither denies nor comments on. Yet he realizes that just as he himself is indifferent to the universe, the universe is equally indifferent to him. Like all men, he is born, will die, and will have no further significance. Paradoxically, it is only after coming to this seemingly sad realization that he is able to achieve happiness. When he has fully come to terms with the inevitability of death, he understands that it does not matter whether he dies by execution or lives to die a natural death in old age, and is able to accept the reality of his impending execution without despair.
This realization allows Meursault to put aside his fantasies of escaping execution by filing a successful lawsuit, he even refuses to “escape” death by rejecting a turn to religion. He realizes that these false hopes, which had previously occupied his mind, would do him no more than create a false sense that death can be avoided. Meursault sees that his hope of sustaining life has been a burden. His release from this false hope means that he is free to live life for what it is.
Meursault’s journey represents a quest for personal understanding and significance in a seemingly purposeless world. “The Stranger” challenges readers to question societal norms, the nature of existence, and the individual’s relationship with the absurdity of life.
‘The Stranger’ and its overarching meanings hold a philosophical significance and overall resonate with me.
Critique:
Meursault’s rejection of conventional values and his indifference to societal expectations allign perfectly with my philosophy. Meursault’s refusal to conform to fixed moral standards and rules imposed by society is what makes a person a master of himself and that is something that expresses me. I appreciate Meursault’s focus on living in the present moment, his rejection of religious beliefs, and his refusal to cling to false hopes. For me everything should be based on your self with the realization that you are not special and that you are mortal and finite. You should be the one choosing how to engage with the world. In the end all standards are ultimately subjective. I would argue though that having a fixed meaning and creating a purpose for your life, like some existentialists would argue for, is problematic since it can imprison you in something that you are not anymore, but Cammus doesn’t really argue for that and he would probably agree with me. You can have many purposes that you define but they don’t define you, and none is more important than you. The only parts that don’t express me in the novel are the lack of empathy and the indifference that Meursault has, although I can understand that this just something that does’t express me but it’s still based on a valid philosophical ground.
Meursault’s actions often seem passive or reactive without actively pursuing his desires and particularly in the first part of the novel, he seems to drift through life without actively rebelling against society or challenging and reshaping his identity until later in the story. Meursault’s relationships, especially with Marie, are somewhat passive and seem to lack the desire to be preserved. Also the acceptance of death don’t necessarily imply a passive response and a lack of self-preservation. If I had the chance I would take more assertive measures to preserve my own freedom and interests within the societal framework. Of course I can understand indifference as a response to the lack of free choice since in the end whatever I choose to do I didn’t really choose it. But indifference, like non-indifference, cannot escape from this reality, i.e. the lack of free choice and the lack of a pure unaffected ego.
