Meursault Thesis Statement

In “The Stranger” by Albert Camus, the juxtaposition between Chaplain’s morals and the Meursault's are symbolic of the acceptance and rejection of social constructs like religion, showing how adhering to one’s own values are ultimately more rewarding. Throughout the novel, Meursault is defined his actions driven from prioritizing his physical needs first. This mentality lands Meursault in jail for killing an Arab because he was distracted by the sun. As he is about to approach his death sentence, the Chaplain attempts to get him to convert to religion and become a believer in his final moments, as “he was expressing his certainty that my appeal would be granted, but I was carrying the burden of sin from which I had to free myself. According

The conviction of Meursault represents another main point of absurdism, that life is precious. It only takes forty five minutes for an entire jury to unanimously decide to send Meursault to the guillotine, which is unreasonable. Camus is trying to point this out as one of society’s wrongdoings. The prosecutor's argument had appealed to the jury's emotions and society’s standards rather than reason. If the jury had not felt the emotions that were supposed to influence their decision, the prosecutor's argument would have seemed completely irrational. In a rational world, Meursault's emotions regarding his mother or her funeral would not have influenced his verdict. Meursault commits a crime against an Arab, while Raymond, who had also done so earlier in the book, did not get into any trouble. He would still be found guilty, but only for the crime he committed. This would have definitely lightened his sentence; however, Meursault is sentenced to death. Camus proves the court’s hypocrisy and shows how human

What is equally absurd is that Meursault remains passive and detached over the course of a year of interrogations, and despite the pessimistic nature of his situation, he is able to feel a sense of comfort and belonging within the system trying to condemn him. Ironically, those witness testimonies that sought to free him prove to be the most damaging, and the religious people who surround him and purport to love all men unconditionally persecute him for his lack of belief. Everyone is astonished that Meursault has no emotions about the murder --no sense of remorse or desire to repent. Most men in his position find

Rubin’s dissection of Meursault in The Stranger details that he “is a man condemned to death not so much for a criminal act as for his attitude.” In regard to this statement, the reader is presented with the idea that he is being put to death as a result of his “attitude,” which is that of an outsider, or someone “removed” from society, and his motives were based on an absurdist mentality that leads one to think of death as “just another thing” because of the pointlessness of life, as there is no hope. We are lead to believe that Meursault is some “sick and twisted” person without realizing his indifference to the emotional expectations of society. The murkiness of his conscience is like a black and white film over his eyes that open to the

Consequently, Meursault was put in jail and given a lawyer, but before given a lawyer he states how “I admitted I hadn’t hired an attorney and inquired whether it was really necessary to have one” which explains how indifferent this situation was to him (Camus 36). While if he felt any sadness the day Maman died, Meursault answers with “I probably did love Maman, but that didn’t mean anything” therefore upsetting his lawyer because his answer was too truthful (Camus 65). After that answer it was apparent that his lawyer was upset and even asks Meursault if “he held back his natural feeling” which Meursault said no too, making the lawyer seem disgusted with Monsieur Meursault. This little dispute made Meursault conclude that “I made him feel uncomfortable” which isn’t unusual with Meursault and his way of communicating with others (Camus 66). After Meursault’s trial for cold blooded murder, he is sentenced to an execution, and that is when he realizes he can finally

This essay will answer the question of ¨Is Meursault guilty for the crime?¨. I do believe that he is guilty for murdering the arab. There is no question that the arab died from the first of 5 rounds fired at him. However even though he is guilty, I also believe that the accuser took advantage of Meursaultś quiet and gloomy demeanor to sway the case in the wrong direction.

Meursault is truthful, therefore not only is his guilt dealt with at the murder trial, but his personal views and opinions come out as well. In fact, during the trial his lack of emotion about his mother’s death seemed to be of more importance than the murder he committed. From this it seems that truth is a crime and

When Meursault is on trial for this murder, the evidence used by the prosecution reveals how humans naturally strive to create rationale for events in life where no reason exists. In his closing statement, the prosecutor states that “[he] accuses this man [Meursault] of burying his mother with crime in his heart” (96). After listening to all of the witness statements and viewing all of the evidence, the prosecutor has been unable to determine a true motive for Meursault murdering the Arab man, so he tries to create his own explanation by claiming that Meursault is an emotionless, dangerous man. The prosecutor is able to create a fictitious argument that Meursault is a criminal, by referring back to Meursault’s mother’s funeral, when he apparently did not react according to societal conventions and showed an indifference combined with disrespect

Meursault was introduced as a young man whom recently found out his mother, Maman, died. He was not the most emotional person, but he dealt with his feelings the best he knew how. Meursault lived his life on the verge of truth and honesty. He was honest within every aspect of life, from women to freedom. He was never certain about anything in life ,but one thing he was sure of, death was inevitable. After murdering an Arab, he was on trial in front of many people being interrogated with many questions about why he did what he did, but also to evaluate his psyche about the situation. Unlike others, Meursault did not hide from the truth and that is what others could not cope with. Living his life the way others were afraid to, Meursault was the outcast in his society.

Meursault's character is the determining factor in his conviction and sentencing. His social rebellion is deemed immoral and abominable. The reader and the novel's characters both try to rationalize Meursault's actions in order to give his life meaning. But according to Meursault, life is meaningless and consequently needs no justification.

When he returns home to Algiers, Meursault carries on with life as normal. Over dinner one evening, his neighbor Raymond tells of his desire to punish his mistress for infidelity, and asks Meursault to write a letter to the mistress for him. Meursault agrees, saying "I tried my best to please Raymond because I didn’t have any reason not to please him" (32). While Raymond is a man of questionable morals, he acts with purpose. Meursault, on the other hand, acts with mostly passive indifference, doing things simply because he doesn’t have a reason not to do them.

When Meursault first speaks with his lawyer, he asked Meursault to say that he had held back his “natural feelings. “[Meursault] said, ‘No, because it’s not true.’ [The lawyer] gave [him] a strange look, as if he found [him] slightly disgusting” (65). Here, we see someone looking for causation, and Meursault being blunt about how there truly is not a cause for the murder. As the trial commences, the only thing Meursault notices it how “the trial opened with the sun glaring outside”, and that “despite the blinds, the sun filtered through in places and the air was already stifling” (82, 83). Both of these descriptions use diction that is very similar to the diction used to describe the heat and light on the day of the murder. This can lead to the conclusion that the only possible cause for the murder that could be justifiable for society is the heat, how oppressive it is, and how it ultimately led to his final murder of the Arab.

Meursault is an independent and absurd guy who refuses to lie about himself to save his life. At the beginning of the book he avoids conversation and showed existentialism. For example, when the caretaker asked him, why he doesn’t want to see his mother’s body, he just simply said “I don’t know”. Another reason is when he would say, “marriage, no marriage, who cares.” Towards the ending of the book he starts to open up. In order for him to realize how wrong he was, he had to suffer the consequences. Meursault states, “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(2.5.165). “Meaning, he finally has awareness and is open-minded about his life.

He has no initial reaction to the news of her death, and at her funeral service he did not bother to even see her before she was buried. His lack of emotion is evident in the very first lines of the book, “Mother died today. Or maybe it was yesterday, I don’t know.” This shows that Meursault is hardly caring for his mother. Society’s standards would result in him to be in absolute mourning and wanting to go as fast as possible to her body. This is not the only example of Meursault’s lack of emotion and care for factors in his life. He does not care for love and marriage after having intercourse with someone; the society standard at this time was to get married if two partners had intercourse. He does not care for promotion and career advancement when his boss offers him a better job opportunity; the standard at that time and right now is to pursue the best career possible. In these scenarios Meursault is living free from the chains, and does whatever he thinks is right to do. Eventually, society rejects him and his ways, and he gets in trouble with the law. He is judged by society and his ways are ridiculed, making Meursault appear to be a monster.

The answer is simple: it does not relate to the murder of the Arab. Being the representative of society, the jury opposes Meursault and accuses him of not conforming to society's natural ways, and being what we nowadays refer to as the "odd one out". They exclude him from society for his odd clear-cut and sincere demeanor, and for his manifestation of an inexpressive character. Another example is the moment in which the magistrate, a local member of the judiciary having limited jurisdiction, especially in criminal cases, questioned Meursault.