Narrators In The Stranger

In the novel The Meursault Investigation, Kamel Daoud weaves a sister story for Albert Camus’s The Stranger, and has a dialogue of sorts with Camus. At times Daoud’s novel is very critical of Camus, standing in opposition to the attitudes and themes in The Stranger. The existence of The Meursault Investigation and the character of Musa is a criticism of the incomplete picture that Camus paints in his story, and the namelessness of “The Arab” that Meursault killed. Daoud gives a name to Meursault’s victim beyond that of “The Arab.” At other times, Daoud’s book parallels a lot of the ideas put forth by Camus. This can be seen as Harun slowly comes to resemble the man who killed his brother after committing a murder

On their way to the bus, they see the “Arabs” and the brother of the mistress Raymond assaulted. When they made it to the house, they all had lunch and enjoyed the nice crisp water and enjoyed the sun. After lunch, they went on a walk where they found the arabs, and Raymond stabbed one of them. They got back and then Meursault went back for a walk, and found another arab sitting there. Then randomly he started to feel heat, a blinding sensation which led him to then shoot this arab four times, which killed the man. Here we see that This chapter represents the climax of the first part of the book. Since his return from his mother’s funeral, everything that Meursault has done in the narrative up to this point—meeting Marie, meeting Raymond, and becoming involved in the affair with Raymond’s mistress—has led him to the beach house. Yet Meursault’s murder of the Arab comes as a complete surprise—nothing in The Stranger has prepared us for it. The feeling of abruptness that accompanies this shift in the plot is intentional on Camus’s part. He wants the murder to happen unexpectedly and to strike us as

The story of the Czech man that Meursault found in his jail cell, is vastly different from his own trial at first, but their stories relate the more one thinks about it. The Czech man’s story provides Meursault a sense of peace during the last moments of his life. A similarity between the two have missing pieces. In the story of the Czech man, “the first part of the story was missing, but I gathered that its scene was some village in Czechoslovakia”(99). While the article is physically missing the piece, the trial with Meursault is more of mystery, as to what influences him to kill the Arab not not with one shot but four. Although, it never explains to why he does so, it leaves one to consider plausible reasons. Though, both murders are different at first glance, but the more deeper one searches, the more similarities between the two become known.

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

At the start of this realization, Camus displays how the French whites, have a racially segregated perspective towards the Arabs and blacks. Camus first starts of this differentiation by having Meursault dehumanize “ the Arabs” as they were “backing away” from the colonists (56). By not giving the arab men names, Camus demonstrates the idea of “othering” them to reduce the impact of their being from the impressions of their brain. In describing the nameless men, Camus goes further to only express how the Arab men were “ lying down in greasy overalls;” demonstrating the classist view in society between races, and how the only description of the Arab men is to

In the novel, The Stranger by Albert Camus, Meursault the protagonist, becomes drawn into a “senseless” murder that has to face the absurdity of life and because of his actions, Meursault is presented as a danger due to his lack of “morality” to society. Meursault who is not able to take control of his life but respond to what life offers him believes in the simplicity of life. He tries to understand the living through logic and objectivity, which ultimately turns futile, as he himself cannot maintain proper control over his thoughts and emotions. From the interactions between Marie, to the murder of the Arab, and the meeting with the Chaplain, Meursault overcomes his indifferent views to form an opinion about what life really means. The central theme presented by Camus is how the threat of mortality becomes a catalyst for understanding the significance of life.

During the trial, the prosecutor attempts to make sense of the crime, but is ultimately perplexed as to why Meursault did it. So he inquired, “Well, then, why [were you] armed and why did [you] return to precisely that spot?” (Camus 88) and Meursault replied, “It just happened that way.” (Camus 88). This demonstrates the theme of the absurdity of the universe because no one can explain why they make certain choices in their life just as Meursault cannot explain why he was compelled to kill the Arab. In addition, when Meursault was trying to convince the jury that the murder was not his fault Meursault ponders: “Fumbling a little with my words and realizing how ridiculous I sounded, I blurted out that it was because of the sun. People laughed.” (Camus 103). Meursault’s difficulty in explaining this crime to the jury shows how insensible rational rules are in an irrational world. Meursault cannot explain, nor could anyone understand why he committed the crime, but this only shows how the reality of the absurd cannot be comprehended by the logic of society and

This easy-going, pleasant hedonism is interrupted permanently by Meursault's murder of the Arab on the beach. Not only is he incarcerated, but also he must examine the reality behind the illusion of his trial and, ultimately, of his life. Introspection has not been his metier. It takes him a while to realize that the judge, the jury, the journalists, even his own lawyer, do not wish him well. Meursault finally realizes that he is going to be convicted, not because he killed an Arab but because he did not mourn his mother's death.

When reading fiction stories, we often wonder who is telling the story. Author’s write fiction stories using different styles of narration. This gives readers different perspectives of stories, causing them to analyze from a specific perspective. Depending on the style of narration, readers may either feel connected or disconnected from the narrator. Third-person narration is a style of narration that separates the readers from the narrator because it presents thoughts and feelings of other characters.

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.

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.

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.

The point of view of a narrator can make or break a story, as the narrator is extremely important to the reader's understanding of a story. Different points of view and different narrators can oftentimes affect the point the story is attempting to portray and it even change what the reader believes the story is about. If someone were to go through a story written in a first-person narrative story and change all the pronouns to a third-person point of view, or even a first person plural point of view, it can distort the way the reader understands and comprehends the story.

While on the beach with Raymond, a friend of his, and Masson, a good friend of Raymond, the three encounter two Arab men who had been following them. A fight breaks out between the Arab men, Raymond, and Masson. One of the Arabs manage to cut Raymond’s arm. After Raymond is cut the fighting stops and three rush back to Masson’s beach house. Meursault later goes back to beach to cool off. He somehow comes back in contact with one of the two Arab men. The Arab draws his knife at the sight of Meursault. Meursault grips the gun and without thinking twice “the trigger [gives]” (Camus 59). Meursault has shot and killed the Arab. Instead of worrying about the consequences he will now have to face, he is more concerned that the shot has interrupted the peace of the beach. His disregard to the consequences of killing the Arab provides insight on why Meursault can be described as the