Before he
commits murder, Meursualt states,
The
sun glinted off Raymond’s gun as he handed it to me. But we just stood there motionless, as if
everything had closed in around us. We
stared at each other without blinking, and everything came to a stop there
between the sea, the sand, and the sun, and the double silence of the flute and
the water. It was then that I realized
that you could either shoot or not shoot (56).
What are the
implications of Meursualt’s realization that “you could shoot or not shoot,”
and how do these implications inform us of Meursault’s approach to reality? You might want to consider how Meursault’s declaration
explains his attitude towards his family and friends and his behavior in his
public and private lives.
Meursualt’s realization implies that the two options –shooting and killing the man or not shooting him so he may die later –will result in life’s ultimate destination: death. This supports the absurdist attitude that his actions are not significant since they come to the same conclusion in the long run. On the following page, he says a similar realization, “To stay or to go, it amounted to the same thing” (57). Here, he connects different actions to have ultimately the same outcomes. By implying that Meursualt finds neither of the actions to matter since they “amounted to the same thing,” one can see his absurd philosophy. Even by the end of the text, he suggests these similar qualities of an absurdist: “Since we’re all going to die, it’s obvious that when and how don’t matter” (114). Meursualt is absorbed by the idea that everything leads to death so individual events and actions “don’t matter” to him. These implications inform the reader that he does not over-analyze what has happened to him; on the same page of the preceding evidence, he says, “I had to accept the rejection of my appeal” revealing how Meursualt’s absurdist approach allows him to move on in his life.
ReplyDeleteI think what strikes me the most about Mersault on a whole, but espeically in this passage (the one about the choice of shooting)is that he sees every decision, every action or happening, with such clarity. Even in the overbearing heat, he sees crystal clear his options. I think you're right, Katherine, that Mersault sees no significance between choices,becauase they don't matter. But he sees them, perfectly clear through the muddle of life and that is what is so striking to me. In the end of the book, when he has his argument with the priest, he says, "I had lived my life one way and could just as well have lived it another."(121) His approach to reality seems honestly simple.It is bare and stark, concise and unemcumbered by opinions or lengthy descriptions. On the same page Mersault continues: "I had done this and I hadn't done that. I hadn't done this but I had done another"(121). He mirrors these two choices against each other, and when he does so he is not evaluating the implications, he only sees the choices. That is his approach to reality, he sees only what is there, perhaps because what is under or over, or after what is there, the "fluff", the noticeable ommissions in his accounts, are not important to him. After all, as he does not believe in an afterlife, he believes existence to be so one-dimensional: there is nothing after or before, that you can see past the existence of one's own heartbeat.
ReplyDelete-Brianna Ma.
I agree with Katherine and Brianna that Meursualt does not over-analyze his actions but instead sees his options as concrete. Throughout the book Meursualt shows little to no emotions in any of his actions beginning with his mom's death: "Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don't know," (3) and going all the way through his sentencing: "I wasn't thinking about anything anymore. But the presiding judge asked me if I had anything to say. I thought about it. I said, 'No.' That's when they took me away" (107). Similarly in the middle when he kills the Arab he also shows no emotion, and afterwards there is no remorse. This lack of emotion in his actions seems to point again to what Katherine suggested that Meursualt believes nothing really matters. They show that Meursualt does not care about reality because it all ends the same hence he shows no emotion in his choices/actions and sees them as two more concrete options as suggested by Brianna.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Katherine’s idea of Camus’s portrayal of absurdism; life is ultimately meaningless, and “when and how don’t matter” (114). What I wanted to touch upon was how this declaration touched upon his attitude towards his family and friends. One prominent example was Marie’s love and desire for marriage. When she asks him if he loved her and whether he would marry her, he responds that “it didn’t make any difference” and “that it didn’t mean anything” (41). The central core of the absurdist approach to reality causes Meursault’s sense of meaningless to spill into all aspects of his life. Even though he has physical affection for her, he does not adhere to societal guidelines and he tells her how he truly feels. What’s interesting about Marie’s character is how Meursault’s apathy doesn’t end the relationship; his oddness is actually what draws her to him: “she mumbled that I was peculiar, that that was probably why she loved me” (42). It seems his peculiarity often plays a major role in his relationships, and that’s what makes his absurdist philosophy impossible to ignore.
ReplyDelete