Friday, December 18, 2009
The Stranger by Albert Camus-TW - M/Th P.3
This forum is for specific discussion on The Stranger by Albert Camus. What are your first reactions? What did you like most about the story and/or the book? Also what question(s) do you have about the book? Students should try their best to answer each other’s questions. See Blog Assignment for additional information!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
The stranger is not a lively, entertaining book. When I first started to read this book I was in a good mood but after I read few pages and then stopped I felt sort of sad and drained. the way Albert Camus writes, with short, declarative sentences, and without opinion or comment, seems like the main character’s, M. Meursault’s, sub-conscience is speaking to the reader. This style of writing explains M. Meursault’s emotions to a certain extent but also explains certain things such as what he does in one day, in fine toothed detail that makes his life seem banal and boring. On pg. 24 he paints what he did that day with excruciating detail and it just seems like he is listing random thoughts or subconscious thoughts in order. With his sub-conscience as the narrator, Meursalt’s life seems raw and dull, which makes, at first, a less interesting read for the reader.
I couldn’t decide if the book portrays Meursalt himself as blunt and honest or if just his innermost/sub-conscience thoughts were. For instance, when he says on pg.10 “then finally she shut up” it is a description so it could just be his subconscious thoughts. However, when his girlfriend Marie asks him if he loves her on pg. 41 he answers in the same matter-of-fact fashion “I answered the same way i had last time, that it didn’t mean anything but that i probably didn’t love her.” It seems like he is blunt in real life, not just in describing his mother’s funeral.
My first reaction to The Stranger was that it was depressing. It made me sad to see how much Meursault did not care about anything. When I was reading about his mothers funeral I thought that he was so sad that he could not feel anything, but as I progressed I saw that that was simply how he was with everything. When his boss asked him if he would like to work in Paris, or when Marie asked him to marry her, he acted with the same indifference you might use when you are trying to choose a television show to watch. That was one question I had throughout the book. Why is Meursault so indifferent about everything? I thought that it was extremely sad to read about how he dealt with his execution. It seemed as if he did not value his life at all. The thing that I did like about The Stranger was the way that Albert Camus used adjectives. I could imagine every thing in my head. This made it easier to follow the story.
My first reaction to The Stranger was irritation. I was annoyed that Meursalt conveyed absolutely no feelings at all. The book focuses on dialogue quite a lot, which I am fairly used to; however, I am not accustomed to not knowing the narrators true feelings and thoughts. I was also not used to the narration being in such detail. Usually, books focus on the important aspect of a setting, so that they can clue the reader as to what is coming. The Stranger, instead, described every, miniscule thing about one day; including things of no importance. For part one of the book, the highlight was Meursalt’s neighbor and dog. This shows just how boring it got to be; so boring that I wanted to know more about an underlying storyline. I believe there is a great meaning to this book, and that somewhere hidden in the pages is a message. It is almost as if the message is too “deep”; as though the author wanted so badly for his novel to be recognized as having deeper meaning, that he lost the true one altogether. Overall, I was expecting a little more when it came to this novel; maybe if some of these hidden messages are pointed out, I will begin to understand the book.
My first reaction to the book focused on the main character, the man, Monsieur Meursalt. He did not really have a life in that he went to his mother’s funeral, and he went to work, and he interacted with a few people without having much emotional connection to the world or other people. He often seemed confused and even, perhaps, needed some psychological help. When Marie entered the story, I was happier because she was nice to him but he did not show any loving feelings toward her. As I read the book, I noticed that Monsieur Meursalt did not care about anything, including the fact that he had murdered a man, for no good reason. Even when the priest came to his cell, and when he faced execution, he did not want to listen to him. He screamed at the priest that a dog’s life was worth as much as a woman’s life (p. 120), which shocked the priest but revealed that the main character thinks that life is meaningless.
I did not like the book much because it is depressing. However, the style of the book made it easy to read. “The Stranger” has short sentences and it is straightforward, which is a style I like. The prosecutor’s speech is an example of the direct style of the book. On page 94, the prosecutor convinces the jury that this man is troubled and is not innocent, even though his speech has nothing to do with the death of the Arab. The prosecutor says, “Gentlemen of the jury, the day after his mother’s death, this man was out swimming, starting up a dubious liaison, and going to the movies, a comedy, for laughs. I have nothing further to say.” This demonstrates to the judge and the audience that M. Meursalt is guilty because he does not behave like a normal human would, although it is not evidence of a crime that deserves execution.
Monsieur Meursault seemed to have no emotions; he did not feel anything. He did not express any feeling for Maman nor did he show any love for Marie. The quote Elena chose above, “I answered the same way I had last time, that it didn’t mean anything but that I probably didn’t love her” (p. 41) is the quote that made me feel disgust. He acted as if he was agreeing to her proposal of marriage and still he never said he loved her. I agree with Elena: in some parts of the book it seemed that Monsieur Meursalt was very blunt, but he was honest. However, I do not understand why he refused to talk about the case or even to defend himself. He could not explain his thoughts to the judge but he had many opportunities when they wanted to hear what he had to say. I think M. Meursault was a combination of alienated, blunt, peculiar, and simply strange. I do not think the ending is complete. There were other characters in the book who were just dropped and the reader wonders what Marie and Raymond think or end up doing. Overall, I believe Albert Camus deserved the Nobel Prize in Literature Award because it was well written and original. I will recommend this book and I would like to read other books written by him.
The Stranger is definitely not a book I would recommend to anyone I know. I found the book to be very dry, at least until the very last pages of the book. M. Meursalt was indifferent to everything and it made for an interesting character for a while, but it was not interesting enough to make the whole book worth reading. My first reaction to the book was disgust. M. Meursalt hardly cared that his mother died and he was more annoyed than sad when it came time to bury her. I think M. Perez presence in that part of the book was there to sort of tell me how I should feel about M. Meursalt, Albert Camus did an exceptional job of showing contrast in characters and made me see just how heartless he is. I remained disgusted with M. Meursalt throughout the book for many reasons. I found him writing that letter to Raymond's ex-girlfriend and condoning him beating her appalling. The way he took notice of Marie's breasts even on his court date was also despicable.
Despite all the things I disliked in The Stranger, I did find a few things I did like. I was engrossed in M. Meursalt's and Marie's "romance." I liked reading to find out what was going to happen next and it made the story more interesting. I also thought that the writing was vivid and I could imagine the scenery as I was reading. I thought the ending was the most interesting because even with death looming near, he had the same approach to it as he did life. This is note-worthy because on page 119 the priest that comes to his cell says, “…But deep in my heart I know that the most wretched among you have seen a divine face emerge from their darkness.” Even with his death looming he still did not think that anything mattered and I find it interesting that most have overlooked that part in the story. I guess one question that I have about the story is why was Marie so faithful to M. Meursalt even after he showed no care for her? Overall, The Strangerwas well written, but had an exasperating storyline.
The Stranger by Albert Camus is a pretty depressing book. I think that starting with a funeral is a pretty good hook but the fact that the story was so depressing made me lose interest. The main character, M. Meursalt was so indifferent about everything. It hurt to see the way he was acting about Maman’s death. He was actually more worried about having two days off from work. He felt nothing and the worst part was that he expressed the same bluntness and insensitiveness with Marie. Like Theodora Elena mentioned, this quote is very harsh. “I answered the same way I had last time, that I didn’t mean anything but I probably didn’t love her” (pg. 41). I could not believe M. Meursalt had said this. I felt like I actually wanted to slap him. How could he be so insensitive? M. Meursalt did not show any emotion for anything not even to the fact that he had murdered a man. From what he said to the priest I could see that he really did not care about life. As I mentioned before the book was really depressing and M. Meursalt is definitely a man I would never like to meet. The only thing that I liked about this book was its details. Everything was so detailed and clear. I could easily picture everything and actually imagine myself at the spot. It was an easy read but the story was not captivating. Just like Ashley I could not understand why Marie was still with M. Meursalt after he had showed no emotion or feeling towards her? I guess it is true, love is blind.
The Stranger by Albert Camus was a very difficult book to read because it seemed absolutely morbid to me. The main character had no feelings and did not really care about anything. He could not even express his love for Marie but he still wanted to marry her. He wanted her body when she did the simplest of things, like giggle or smile. She was perfect for him in every way. What is marriage without love if all you have is lust? He did not even remember his mother’s age but you cannot condemn him for that because I even forget my parent’s age.
It seemed as though that Raymond was a woman-beater. She had not deserved multiple beatings for what he assumed. A conversation of the matter would have been a better solution than going off of your friends judgments. The book has potential of being good if the character had gone into one of those spiraling realizations that he actually does care about a lot of things and he was just masking his pain with a heart without emotion. Him remembering the stories that his Maman would tell him showed a bit of emotion but it was not enough. Overall the book was not that amazing but it was still okay. I would read that book on a rainy day after I read through every other book in my house. (Note: I have at least 20 books.)
The Stranger was a very depressing book to read over the holidays. From the entire premise to the way the story plays out, it is made evident that this book is designed to be as depressing as possible. This is established from the very first sentence: "Maman died today." This establishes the tone of the book from the very beginning, for it is obvious that when a book opens with a blunt announcement of someone's death, it is definitely not going to be cheerful. The most obvious indicator of the book's morbidity is the main character himself, Monsieur Meursault. He displays no emotion whatsoever, even when faced with such situations as his mother's death or the decision to get married. Instead, he confronts these with complete indifference. It was absolutely appalling. He also appears to have no common sense. A tip: If your girlfriend asks you if you would get married to anyone else if they asked you, don't say yes. What was most appalling, however, was Meursault's reaction when it was determined that he was guilty and that he would be beheaded in the name of the French people. He didn't even care! He approached it in the same way he approached anything in life- With complete indifference.
Even though Meursault was extremely depressing, as well as annoying, there were other disturbing characters as well. There was Raymond, whose short temper seemed to get him either arrested or hurt on a daily basis. There was Salamano, who abused his dog so much that it may have been what drove him to run away. There was even Marie, whose willingness to stay with Meursault probably would have led to a long and depressing life together. In the end, however, The Stranger was entertaining, especially when looking at all of these characters' flaws. The only downside to the book was that it could have been a bit more cheerful.
The Stranger by Albert Camus started off 'boring' to me. When I picked up the book from the store, the salesperson commented that the book was slow. If it was not a required reading, I do not think it would be a book that I would pick for myself. The main character, Monsieur Meursalt, was a very peculiar person. His days were boring and slow; yet, he described them like they were exciting. Maybe a person had to be there to realize how exciting it was for him. The author took the time to painstakingly describe this boring man's life. It was agony trying to read the book. I agree with Ashley A. (Jan 3, 2010) that it is not a book that I would recommend to anyone I know. Albert Camus' style of writing made the book easy to read. The content was hard to digest. His short sentences with easy words made it a simple book.
The book takes a turn for me on page 59 when Meursalt kills. I would not have guessed that he was capable of such a deed. During his mother's funeral he showed no sign of emotion. He shows no emotion when he is asked about love and now he commits murder, and there still is no emotion. What type of person is Meursalt? After reading this book, I wonder, what could Camus have done differently to make it a book that leaps off the shelf to readers?
When first reading the novel The Stranger I was completely bored after the first page. Literally I closed the book. I was not eager and or enthusiastic to continue reading. The setting of the story sounded boring and as if it were one of the stories that were just filled with information. However, as I continued reading that was not the case, and it was a rather interesting yet engaging novel. The Stranger is the type of novel that has a greater meaning in which the reader has to think outside of the typical book in order to find the meaning of what Camus wanted his readers to know. The story rather has a deep and essential meaning and I was amazed about the ending.
My favorite part in the book was when the book contrasted the beach with the life and the surroundings in Paris. This contrast painted such a vivid picture in my mind how the beach would look. Literary elements such as this one made me as a reader connect more with the novel. Also, the way Meursault acted towards the death of his mother. At the funeral he didn’t seem to cry at all. This moment in the book bothered me that he had such a nonchalant and uncaring attitude towards everything. I also liked the connection between Raymond, the neighbor, and his dog. It really made me think of the saying a dog is a man’s best friend.
My first reactions to The Stranger by Albert Camus were no reactions. Camus must have thought that using an indifferent, emotionless character would be thought provoking and appealing, but he was wrong. Everyone has seen or read about in movies or in books characters who really do not respond to the world in any way. The first time, I might have thought it was interesting. But, by now, his character’s indifference and boredom makes me respond in the same way, with boredom. However, the indifference that he showed was not entirely uninteresting. It was interesting how his indifference permitted him to do things that most humans could not do: not cry for his mother, go see a comedy the day after her death, and write a letter to a woman who was beaten so she would feel guilty and return to her boyfriend who would then humiliate her. It was also interesting how the prosecutor seemed to stress Meursault’s emotionless approach to life, which seemed unrelated to the case. The case was assessing whether the murder was premeditated. So checking to see if he smoked while keeping vigil over his mother’s body seems to be just an unfair tactic by the prosecutor to make the jurors hate his person and lose focus on the main issue of the case. So a question I have is: why did the prosecutor focus so much on his character instead of the murder itself? And I have met some pretty indifferent people in my life, but I bet that they would still try to save their own lives. Is the fact that he responds to his own sentencing with no emotion because of indifference or just plain stupidity?
My first impression of the short novel The Stranger by Albert Camus was that the novel was going to be very difficult to read. In the first couple of paragraphs I wanted to tear the book in half. I said to myself Vincent this is the most boring book you have ever read. Before reading the book I knew that it would be boring because of the cover. However, I had my sister with me and her words were “Vincent, don’t judge a book by its cover”, then I went ahead and got the book. The main character Meursault seemed as if he was just there, no feelings toward anyone or anything except sunlight and fresh air. Even though deep within he had a crush on Marie and wanted to marry her. This was not the type of book that I wanted to spend my winter break reading; however, once I continued to read I found the book to be rather interesting and at some parts quite funny. For example in one part of the book the character Raymond called his dog a “filthy stinking bastard.” That comment was extremely funny. Yes the book is very slow; however, it got much better towards the end and it had much meaning to it. My favorite part of the book was at the end and the protagonist had his head coped off in the name of the French army.
Vincent, you could tell that you did not actually read or maybe not paid attention to the book. First, Raymond didn’t own and a dog and he was an abuser (in my eyes). Second, the main character, Meursalt, did not actually show that he had a love or crush for Marie hidden deep within him. Third, his head was not chopped off in the name of the French Army. Now, on to Meursalt. Meursalt was a simple man with no intentions in life. He did not want to actually accomplish anything or feel any way about anything.
I wish that he would have just said one word that catches the reader off guard like, “Why?” Why is such a controversial word but it shows that you want to know somethimg. Wanting to know is a form of curiosity and to me curiosity expresses an emotion. There is just something about curiosity that exposes a person.
I agree with Ashley on one thing: As she stated in her original posting, the book was absolutely morbid. The Stranger was not designed as a happy book about bunnies that you read to three year-olds. It was designed as a book for intellectuals, and (to me, at least) poses a question: Can a man really live without any emotions whatsoever? The book is depressing from beginning to end, but is captivating at the same time, and because of this, left me with something to think about: The answer to this question.
Simon made a good point in his posting: The prosecutor's choice to focus on Meursault's character rather than the crime was unusual, however, I might be able to offer my own answer to his questions. Meursault's own response to his incarceration and his committing of the crime was so bland and disturbing that it would have been difficult to try and prosecute him based on that. So, the prosecutor probably chose to focus on his character, specifically his reaction to his mother's death, because this would resonate more with the jury. And my opinion on your second question, Simon, is that he was just indifferent. If you read the book, you can obviously tell that Meursault has some form of intelligence. However, this raises another question: Did Meursault lack emotion, or simply lack the common sense to realize what was happening.
Reading through everyone’s posts has made me see that we are all on pretty much common ground with our reactions to The Stranger. Dry, morbid, bland, emotionless are a few of the adjectives used to describe the tone and main character in this novel. I completely agree with all of these interpretations of The Stranger, and, to me, Ashley A’s word “dry” sums the whole novel up. From the dry climate of Algeria, to the dry feelings of Meursalt, “dry” encompasses every aspect of this book. I knew, coming into The Stranger that it was not an ordinary book, whose message and morals are clearly spelled out, but I never assumed that the novel’s meaning would be so densely camouflaged. I agree with Hulai, in that, in the author’s pursuit for a “deeper meaning”, he lost the simple reader’s attention and understanding. I still do not see a clear, straightforward meaning in the stranger, except for the idea that life does not matter, which I concluded from the dry, bareness, of this novel. If the significance of The Stranger was, indeed, just to suggest that life does not matter, I feel that the time used to read the stranger was not a waste, but was certainly a bleak, draining use of it.
In all, I think the message that Camus wanted to send in writing this novel is extreme and very heavy. The idea that life is irrational and may not matter is not a light subject and, I don’t think, can be casually expressed in a short novel of 123 pages. That such an intense, complicated subject is discussed in such a seemingly small, simple novel makes Camus’ philosophy even harder to understand.
In response to your post, Vincent, I believe that you have some of the facts mixed up. Raymond did not own the dog, nor did Meursalt ever express love for Marie. However, I do understand the idea of what you are saying. The one part of the book that actually got me intrigued was when Meursalt’s neighbor’s dog ran away; Salmano is the correct name, Vincent. Throughout much of the beginning of the book, Salmano had bickered and yelled at his dog for being such a, “filthy stinking bastard.” However, when his dog went missing, he made an effort to find him, and it was a definite ‘you do not know what you have till it is gone’ moments. This was one of the only moments of emotion in the book. Consequently, I view it as the most interesting period in the book. In response to Simon’s questions, I believe that the prosecutor focused so much on Meursalt’s character because he wanted to get inside his head. There was no obvious reason that Meursalt committed the crime; no motive, or need for this man to be dead. Provided that, the prosecutor felt as though it was more of a psychotic problem and decided to look into Meursalt’s past to get anymore signs of that. This was a case that the prosecutor had not seen before, so it was most likely difficult to come up with an argument. Lastly, I think that it was stupidity and partly indifference that kept him from fighting back. It was stupid because he could have saved his own life, or at least attempted to. Yet, it was indifferent because I do not feel that he displayed the desire to fight back. It is as if he is separate from the world and likes it that way.
Would you recommend this book to others? Why or why not?
I agree with Asia. The Stranger is a story that has a lot more meaning to it, if you think about it. Looking at the plot will not help you understand the true meaning of what Camus is trying to tell his audience. I agree with all of the comments above, about how the story was very sad, depressing, boring for a while, and how The Stranger has a deeper meaning. I would like to introduce to this Blog discussion, the idea that it is understandable for Camus to write a story that is as depressing as The Stranger. The reason I think it is normal for Camus to write a story like this, is because of the date he published the book, 1946. 1946 is a year after World War II. During WWII, France was occupied by the Nazis and there was a lot of destruction and death. These were very depressing and vacant years in France’s history. Albert Camus was a French intellectual. It would be normal to question the meaning of life, after so much trauma. I think this is an example of a novel where we have to really research the author’s biography, and the circumstances in which he wrote the book, in order to understand it.
First off, I agreed with Simon that the characters in The Stranger were not thought provoking or interesting. However, just recently I thought about how Mr. Igoudjil said that Albert Camus was an absurdist and then it occurred to me that he said it with purpose, so it must be meaningful. I looked up what absurdism was and found that it is belief that humans live in a purposeless, chaotic world, and strangely enough, Albert Camus was mentioned because of his incorporation of it in his books. Now that I know that M. Meursalt was the way he was for a reason, I find the book very interest. Needless to say, I disagree with Simon and almost everyone else who said that the way he did not care about anyone and his indifference towards everything was shocking and boring now. I find it interesting that Camus portrayed an extreme absurdist and his unwavering “faith” because if everyone had known the perspective of which he was writing from, then I think they would have found it more interesting upon reading about it. According to New World Encyclopedia, it was around the time the book took place that absurdist views became more prevalent. So, it is not that M. Meursalt did not necessarily care, it is just the fact of the matter that it was just what he believed. Connor posed the question: Can a man really live without any emotions whatsoever? Knowing what I now know now, I answer the question 'yes', a man can live without emotional attachment to the world.
When I first started The Stranger, like Kimberly, I thought the the funeral was a good hook that kept me wanting more; but as i got further on into the book, I started to feel like many of my peers, sad and depressed. I think that Simon made a good point that when he said the “characters indifference made me respond in the same way, boredom.” I found myself that this was the same reaction that I had while reading The Stranger.
Ashely also had a good point that the romance between Marie and Meursault was intriguing. The fact that Marie still loved Meursault despite his indifference to everything made me want to know what was going to happen between them. It almost seems like his indifference makes her love him. The confusing part of their relationship was the Meursault expressed that he had a crush on Marie, but he never seemed to care about her when she asked him if he loved her, or when she asked him if he wanted to get married.
I have to disagree with Conner, that The Stranger asks the question “Can a man really live without any emotions whatsoever?” I think that this book centers around the fact that this man does not have any emotions. I do not think that Camus is asking anyone if anyone can really live without emotions. I think that he wanted to show how one might act without emotions, this is how he made his book unique to other books.
In response to a previous comment I think that the fact that he answered to his own sentences was not stupidity, yet it was indifference that he has. The fact that he answers to himself correlates to the true meaning of the book. Also while reading I came across many strange, but interesting things that made me wonder as a reader. As a result, I begin to question the literal meaning that the author presented in the book. When I began reading the book on the first page and the author started the story by setting up the setting at the funeral, I wondered why he did that. Is it possible to start a story in the middle of a setting?
Other questions that I have are that why did the author use this style of writing, and did it impact his influence on the reader. I also wonder why that everyone at the beginning all had the same responses about the book. Did the author purposely leave out detail to make the reader question? I think that Camus has an unique way of writing, and want all of his readers to have a certain emotion about things so he adds and sometimes leaves out ideas that make the reader question, and want to keep reading.
I definitely agree with everything that everyone else is saying about The Stranger. It was a very sad and slow story. M. Meursalt was a very indifferent man and his life was just plain boring. Theodora has definitely opened my eyes to something I had never thought of before. This book was written in 1946 after World War II. I can see how everything must have been gloomy and sad and this probably influenced Albert Camus way of writing. I agree with Theodora about reading a little bit about the author’s past before reading the book. If Theodora would not have mentioned this, then I would still think that this was just a boring book. Just like my other classmates have mentioned the book is depressing and very slow, but there is a lot more meaning to it. Now that I know a little bit more about the author’s life I understand the book a little better. Also, Ashley A. and Mr. Igoudjil mentioned that Camus was an absurdist. I feel that I judged this book way too harshly after reading it, but now I feel more sympathy towards it. I understand know everything that the author was going through while he was writing the book and so know I can see that it was depressing but for a good reason. Reading about the author’s background definitely makes you understand the true purpose of his story. I guess that throughout this reading I have learned to never judge a book by its cover and to always know about the author’s background, because it can give a whole lot more meaning to the story.
When reading The Stranger by Albert Camus I felt like everyone one else, especially Kimberly, that the book was good in the beginning but took a turn for the worst after that chapter. Like Elena, I felt the characters were not lively at all and were extremely dry. I however, did not agree with Asia when she said the book got better after really getting into it. For me it was different; I could not get into this book at all. If you ask me, this book is meant for the more morbid people with no real feeling. But one thing I did like, along with Ashley, is the chemistry between Meursault and Marie. Though he could never convey or express his true feelings for her, you knew there was something there that just made them seem good for each other.
A lot of you are saying that maybe the book had a deeper meaning, however, I can not find that deeper meaning. To me this book was just...a book, nothing more and nothing less. Theodora I definitely agree with you that it is somewhat understandable why he would write a book like this considering the time era. It was depressing years back then so it seems only fitting the book might be morbid.
In response to Elena’s first post, I like and agree very much with her statement that his describing things in such detail did make his life seem “banal and boring.” His long and seemingly meaningless list of the things he did that day on page 24 leaves the reader thinking, “Man, this guy’s life is unexciting and I do not want to read about a boring person.” I also find it hard to decide if his blunt and honest thoughts, like the one on pg 10 when he thinks, “Then she finally shut up,” were Meursalt’s active thinking and personality or if they were just part of his subconscious. It seems quite possible that Meursalt himself could be blunt and honest considering that his indifference causes him to be really harsh at moments. An example of this is when he bluntly and honestly described his response to his girlfriend, Marie, when she asked if he loved her, which was, “I answered the same way I had last time, that it didn’t mean anything but that I probably didn’t love her.” So, although most people have thoughts like, “Finally, she shut up” in their subconscious, it seems that such thoughts are actually part of his personality and are active thoughts.
I agree with Hulai that there could be a deeper meaning to this book. We had already discussed in class the fact that Camus is an absurdist and likes to show absurdism in his books. When I looked up “absurdism” on the Internet, it said: a philosophy based on the belief that the universe is irrational and meaningless and that the search for order brings the individual into conflict with the universe. This book’s deeper meaning is probably the representation of that philosophical belief. However, if Camus was looking to make this book an argument supporting his belief, he did not do a very good job. It seems that Meursalt’s blatant disregard for order in the universe and his approach to the world as meaningless brought him in conflict with it, not the other way around. Such an approach and disregard allowed him to go see a comedy after his mother’s death, write a letter supporting an abusive man, and respond so harshly to his girlfriend. In a world where people search for order and meaning, people are kind, respectful, and empathetic to each other, things that Meursalt lacked and that led to his death.
I agree with everyone’s response to the blog. We all hit the nail on the head when it came to giving details about the novel, and telling how we felt when first reading the novel The Stranger by Albert Camus. However, I was a little puzzled while reading Ashley K’s comment. She stated that “The main character had no feelings and did not really care about anything”, when indeed he did. Ashley maybe you did not fully understand the novel, or maybe you read those 20 books that you have in your house and at the last minute read spark notes trying to get the summary of the book. However, my job is not to tell you what you did or did not do just know that the main character did indeed care about something. He cared about fresh air and sunlight, and maybe in his head that was all he needed to care about. Another quick comment Ashley and this is just my personal opinion; after reading this book I would absolutely read this book again.
I agree with Theodora G’s original post, Marie did bring in a happier side of the novel. I also agree that it was a fairly easy read but I would not recommend it to a third grade student or any child. It is a bit too depressing for their age; this type of novel is more so directed toward people who do get frustrated about the emotionless Meursalt and others, who agree with his lifestyle. Also, the jury and judge did not fairly convict him. Theodora is right when it comes to the fact that they convicted him based off of the fact that he was not “normal”. To that, I in turn question, “What is normal?” But it just proves my point about this malignant world; if everyone is not the same then you are different. If you are different then you do not belong. If you do not belong then you are ridiculed.
In response to Vincent R’s comment about my post, for “calling him out,” the main character only mentioned the goodness of the sunlight and smell of the fresh air. He did not show any emotion toward it, it was just something that was favorable. He never actually mentioned that he liked it. Obviously, I read the book and the other 20 had nothing to do with it. If I were to have read spark notes, then my answer would not have been as detailed. It would be limited to one measly paragraph and no good details about his life would have been given. I would not have known that he did not know his own mother’s age or anything of that matter and you can read the book “again” if you want to but it is not of my concern whether you do or do not.
I agree with everyone's consensus that the book is boring and very much depressing, and Ashley and Theodora were correct when saying that he was convicted because he was different. Of course they would have done so! Meursault was a man who, unlike every other character in that book, failed to show any true emotions or care about anything. This basically said to the prosecutors, "Hey, guys! Come convict me! I don't care!" The Stranger was an examination of a boring man's life, and, in the case of his trial, shows how being a such a boring person can have drastic consequences. Vincent's posting, however, did surprise me. He stated that he would read the book again, as opposed to most of the other postings I have read. I can agree with this, because the book was very well done, and as many of my classmates have said, it started off well in the beginning, but then, in part two, took a turn for the worse. Meursault's tale, while tragic, taught me a valuable lesson: A life without emotion is worse than death.
My first reaction to the book we read was nothing, but disappointment. The book was all about a boring man named Meursalt that really did not care about life. Nothing seemed to faze him; for instance, his mother dying, killing someone, and being sentenced to life in prison did nothing to him. I felt as though I was reading about a robot that was in a world with no feelings. Therefore, when I read the book I felt as though I was hollow inside. Reading how this man lived his life seemed to give a hidden meaning to the book. This meaning was that life is a joke. I say this because without anything to live for then life is just some made up thing. Meursalt seemed like a person that had no moral values that guided him. He had no religion, was almost if not completely emotionless, and he was not working towards something better. In life I believe that we all want to be somebody. Even if we are not the most famous people in the world, we all want to have that special influence on someone that helped them in their life. However, in this book I read about a character that did not give a crap about anything. This book really opened up my eyes to the big picture on life. Even though it was a boring read, it still provides a deep message on life.
Reading through all of the posts I would have to comment on Vincent, Simon, and Elena’s postings. First, I would like to agree with Vincent when he said that reading the book at first made him want to tear it in half. I felt the same way because we are on winter break. It is the holidays, so who wants to read a book about a boring man that is not adventurous or anything? I surely did not. Next, I would like to comment on Simon’s posting when he said that he had no reactions to the book. I know I said in my first posting that I was disappointed in the book. However, like Simon I had no feeling type of reactions to the book. I say this because how can you feel anything about a book that makes every attempt possible to hide feelings. For example, when you watch a movie and the theme is sad and people are crying, you are not going to be laughing and making jokes. The same goes for a book. If the book does not feel, then I in turn can not feel. This leads me to comment on Elena’s posting. Elena claimed that the book was draining, however, she did not clarify on what the book was draining. The book drained all emotions that I had. I was an empty shell with only a brain to tell me what to do. I had no morals or feelings while reading the book. In conclusion, I would have to say that this book was very draining, and also seemed to be brain washing. For instance, I can see a crazy person relating to this book and seeing nothing to enjoy in life. Therefore, I am happy that I have things that I love and care about that will not have me emotionless like I was when I read this book.
In response to, what Vincent posted I totally disagree. The protagonist, or the main character, is the type of character who doesn’t care about nothing but himself. He had no feelings towards his mother at her funeral, he didn’t even cry. Why is that? This is simply because he has such nonchalant and uncaring views on life. I enjoy reading books where characters are unwilling to change or unwilling to do anything for others except for themselves. The main character didn’t even show compassion when his wife wanted to marry him. Why is that? It is not because he doesn’t care it is just a lack of emotion and feelings. Do you think that the main character is at blame because he doesn’t have any compassion? Or is it that the author wanted to provide an abstract meaning of the character? What was the author’s purpose for making Meursalt so dull and nonchalant?
In comparison to what Ashley K. posted I totally agree. The main character doesn’t care about anything but him. I also agree when she said that this book is too mature for people of a certain age, and that people who are depressed or sad about things should read this novel. This novel is the type that is not that interesting or engaging, but it informs people about their inner self and how they react to their surroundings. I also agree that the jury convicted him falsely. Even though, he committed a crime he still deserved an equal opportunity.
I agree with Kimberly when she says, “I guess that throughout this reading I have learned to never judge a book by its cover and to always know about the author’s background, because it can give a whole lot more meaning to the story.” The beginning of the book started out at a funeral, which is not the best place to start out in a story. It is a morbid beginning, throughout the book you begin to understand and judge Monsieur Mersault’s emotions and attitude toward life. I think we have been focusing too much on how Monsieur Mersault is a wrong person, and how his behavior is unacceptable. I do believe he was selfish and was not a thoughtful person, but Camus injects meaning into this novel. If Monsieur Mersault was a kind man, who was thoughtful and aggressive, and did not do careless mistakes like shooting an Arab, then he would not go to jail and The Stranger would just be a story, which has a happy ending, but not much purpose to it. I am sure if that is how Camus wrote The Stranger, he would not win its Literature Award. My point is that Camus wrote The Stranger with a purpose that we have yet to explore and understand in greater depth.
I agree with Forest’s second post when he said that The Stranger made him feel empty and drained. When I was done with The Stranger I felt happy for all the love that my family gives and the love that I give back. While reading this book I realized how lucky I was to have so many people who loved me. I think that this is why all my classmates have looked down on Meursault’s character and are not able to understand his position. We cannot begin to fathom sending our mothers away because we have “run out of things to say” to her. We cannot even think about passing up the opportunity to work in Paris, or not care about a girlfriend or boyfriend. We are different people with different values and judgments.
I think that when we say that the book left us sad and depressed was because we cannot begin to think about having a life with no emotion because everyday we are surrounded by the love of our friends and family. We have always been protected by our family’s love. While I think that The Stranger kept me drained throughout the book, I think that it is because I cannot imagine a world without love in my life. Even thinking about my parents and oldest friends not loving or caring about me makes me feel sad inside.
After having the time to really think about The Stranger, I think it is a really great book. It put a lot of things into perspective for me. Things such as what do feelings matter? I think that past everything that is “human nature” that feelings really do not matter. Do feelings make something right? In most cases no, reality is reality and how you feel does not change that. Realistically, feelings get in the way of things. You may not notice, but everyone does it. Everyone stops himself or herself from doing things that may hurt or offend others sometimes. Are we not living in our own bodies controlling ourselves and making the best decisions for ourselves? Why do we worry about other people’s fate and feelings? Why should we help them when it is our job to worry about ourselves? Mostly, what happens when we die? I think that no matter what we cannot remember what we did in our human life from the grave. After you are gone, people will eventually forget about you. Even if you did contribute greatly to society, schoolchildren will dread writing reports about you and you will be thought of scarcely. I know this because how many times a month do you think about Isaac Newton or Marie Curie? I am not saying that any of this is true or right, but I am glad I read this book because it really helped me to see into the very basic human existence.
In response to Connor’s post, it should not have mattered whether or not Meursalt cared about his life. The court is supposed to be a court of justice that bases convictions on violations of the law. The court is not supposed to convict based on character, which brings me to another point. I think that Camus used the court as a symbol for a humanistic world. The court did not focus mainly on the laws broken, but on his insouciant disposition. I thought that this was a metaphor for how society glorifies “heroes” and people who are kind and make other people’s lives better. However, we look down upon people who do not care about themselves or other people and who do not deign to help people. In sum, The Stranger, when analyzed to a degree, is about how humanistic people are and helps to question the meaning of life.
In response to your post, Theodora, I understand what you are saying completely. That connection makes sense; however, should a reader have to do a background check on the author and date of publication? I highly doubt that anyone who sits down for a light read wants to do any type of research. I believe that if an author had a message, then he or she would want to convey it in the easiest way possible, so that their readers could understand it. I agree with the idea of absurdism in this book, and Camus most likely strived to get that idea across to that reader. After reading your post, Simon, a new idea struck me: What if Camus painted this horrible and depressed character to the extreme so that his readers felt horribly depressed and bored? From reading these posts, I can gather that pretty much all of us thought the book was boring and uninteresting. Therefore, we put the label “indifferent” on Meursalt. Camus could have wanted to illustrate Meursalt to the extreme in order to get the reaction out of the readers. The Stranger was too deep for my liking; I would have liked to see a better story line and more flesh added to the story. It is not one of the books I would recommend to any of my friends. They, like me, enjoy looking at the obvious meaning. Searching for a meaning takes all of the fun out of reading, and instead turns it into work. Overall, these blog discussions were a great way to get other points of view on the book, and you guys brought up a lot of ideas I had never even thought of.
The Stranger by Albert Camus; this is a very interesting book. All of the postings I have read from my peers have opened my eyes to different aspects of this book. Theodora’s posting for example, made my way of judging the book completely. I understand now that the book was depressing but of course this has a purpose. This book was written after World War II. Ashley also mentioned that Albert Camus was an absurdist this definitely influenced his way of writing. Now that I have learned this I can see that the book has a lot more meaning and that I should not just focus on one character; instead I should focus on the meaning that is being portrayed in the story. One thing that did interest me was the style of writing that Albert Camus used. His sentences were simple and clear, but were very detailed. I also agree with Hulai’s post. She does bring up a good point. Maybe Camus exaggerated Meursalt’s character so that we could be annoyed or moved by his actions. He probably wanted a specific reaction from the readers. As Hulai pointed out, we definitely did all have a similar reaction because we all came to the conclusion that M. Meursalt is an indifferent man.
To clarify and backup why I thought The Stranger was draining, and also to respond to Forest’s post, I thought The Stranger was a hard to read, depressing book. Because the emotional and mental portion of The Stranger was so sterile and dry, it took a lot of will power to continue reading. Having to convince myself to keep reading took a lot of energy and left me feeling drained. Another reason The Stranger was so taxing was because while I was reading I kept looking for “hidden” meaning; I was always alert and on edge for some piece of information that would explain the novel’s adsurb qualities. Being on edge for an explanation the entire novel, and being disappointed at the end of each chapter when no explanation appeared took a lot of energy and left me feeling spent. In contrast to Asia’s post, in which she shared her interest in books where the characters do not care about anything, I dislike books in which the protagonist has a nonchalant outlook on life, or does not care about anything. The most significant reason I did not like The Stranger was because of Meursalt’s lackadaisical attitude. The main character’s apathetic outlook on life leaks onto the reader’s outlook on the novel and discourages the reader from being enthusiastic about reading it.
After reading The Stranger, and not finding a spelled out reason for the novel’s blandness and absurdity, I looked up the reason for the novel’s monumental impact and success. The questions Ashley A asked in her post all relate to the reason of The Stranger’s success; the stimulating theme if existentialism. All of Ashley’s questions tie into the theme of existentialism and the novel’s success: “Are we not living in our own bodies controlling ourselves and making the best decisions for ourselves? Why do we worry about other people’s fate and feelings? Why should we help them when it is our job to worry about ourselves? Mostly, what happens when we die?”, and I feel that these questions are all questions that Camus would have wanted the reader to ask after reading The Stranger.
In response to Ashley A’s disagreeing with me, I disagree with her. My point was that Meursalt’s boredom with life, which is quite unoriginal as a character trait, did not draw me or my other classmates in. It was just plain boring to read about this character puttering about with very predictable actions due to his indifference, which became old and repetitive very quickly. Ashley A stated that “..it is not that M. Meursalt did not necessarily care, it is just the fact of the matter that it was just what he believed.” I doubt that Meursalt had the initiative to actually choose a philosophical approach to life. To choose such an approach in the first place, a person has to be actively thinking, experimenting, and reasoning. Meursalt did not reason his way to such a state, but instead that state was just who he was: a person who did not care. Ashley A also stated that, “…if everyone had known the perspective of which he was writing from, then I think they would have found it more interesting upon reading about it.” My response to this, Ashley, is that knowing why a piece of fruit is rotten does not make it delicious. Similarly, knowing the philosophical belief on which he based his book does not change how good the book was, it just tells you why the book was bad. So Ashley answered, “Yes” to Connor’s question: can a man really live without any emotions whatsoever? The correct answer to this question is, “No.” Life does not exist if a person becomes a rock: utterly emotionless.
After reading everyone's comments on the book I see that I judged the book to harshly and should have given it a chance. On what Theodora said about the time the book was written in and how it was depressing, it would only seem fit that the author and the characters be dull and lifeless. I, along with Kimberley, judged a book by its cover. Something you should never in life do. The Stranger can be a good book if you open your mind up to it and really give it a chance. Maybe if I were to read the book again with an open mind I can find the book as Asia took it to be; enjoyable. So in closing I think these blog posts were really helpful in getting a deeper understanding of the book and see what others view of it were. Its clear that we all took away a new view of the book from this. It was quite helpful.
Commenting on Ashley K.’s posting, this book should not really be directed to people that are similar to Meursalt. This book should be more directed to an audience that is more mature, and are happily living life because if you show this book to a depressed person they might use this book as an excuse for how they act. For example, someone might read this book and have nothing going for them, and then they read this book and may start to believe that they can act like Meursalt. Another reason this book should be directed to a more mature audience is because a mature audience will be able to handle to stress that this book deals with and can learn from it. The experience of this book can teach people that people go through a lot of things in their life and that we should not judge someone, but instead just let someone live life. This is easier said then done, but it is something that we should all strive for. If we see someone struggling, give advice, but let them make the choices for themselves on what they want to do because no matter how hard you try, you can not make someone believe something. In conclusion, this book is very deep and a challenge to understand emotionally and mentally. When you read it you can learn a lot about how happy you live your life and be grateful that you are emotionally stable. This book is a good read and people should take time to read and understand it.
I too agree with Theodora’s original comment, Marie did bring in a happier side of the novel. I also would have to agree with Forrest when he said, “I would have to say that this book was very draining, and also seemed to be brain washing”. To me the book did seem a little daring; however I am not sure where the brain washing part came in. So I would have to disagree with that part. The entire book turned out to be a well written book. Once I got into really reading the book I did not want to put the book down, I could not take my eyes off of the pages; it was just so well written. Just as Theodora said “Monsieur Meursault seemed to have no emotions; he did not feel anything. He did not express any feeling for Maman nor did he show any love for Marie.” In the end, unlike everyone else I would read this book again, and suggest the book to everyone else. I am extremely happy that I was forced to read this book.
Post a Comment