Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Meursault character in the stranger
Dr jeckyll vs mr hyde comparison
Analysis of dr. jekyll and mr. hyde
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Meursault character in the stranger
The Stranger
Meursault's actions reflect his inner self in many ways. He is the protagonist in the story. He emotionally really doesn't care about other people like is mother and Marie. Many events end up leading to the his murder of an Arab.
During his trial, there was no emotional attachment between him and his mother. That becomes a main focus of the prosecutor's argument that he is a monster.
Meursault is a young man living in Algiers. He receives a report of his mother Madame Meursault's funeral. He attends his mothers funeral, but he does not show any outward signs of appropriate grief. He returns to his home and immediately begins an affair with Marie Cardona, a former co-worker. After the weekend ends, he concludes that his mother's death has changed nothing. The banal rhythm of a Sunday afternoon remains exactly the same as it was before. He strikes up an acquaintance with Raymond Sintes, a local gigolo and pimp. Meursault unintentionally becomes involved in a dispute between Raymond and Raymond's mistress and her brother, the Arab. The dispute ends with Meursault's murder of the Arab. Meursault, who narrates The Stranger, does not offer an explanation for the murder. It is by all appearances completely without motivation. Nevertheless, society demands a rational explanation.
Meursault is arrested and brought to trial. During the trial, it becomes apparent that various members of the courtroom feel a need to explain the senseless, unmotivated killing. It refuses to convict him of the murder without imposing a rational explanation onto the event, which allows for a moral condemnation of the killing. Without a justification for moral condemnation, punishment for the murder lacks a rational basis. Unfortunately, Meursault ends up being tried and sentenced to death more on the basis of his atheism and lack of emotional attachment to his mother than on the basis of anything logically connected to the murder. By the end of the trial, the court construes his lack of emotional attachment to his mother as an explanation of the murder, and vice versa. Together, the two justify the prosecutor's definition of Meursault as a "monster."
Meursault's predicament develops Camus's philosophy of the absurd--that humans tend to impose a rational order on the world in the face of evidence that the world is absurd.
Meursault is a fairly average individual who is distinctive more in his apathy and passive pessimism than in anything else. He rarely talks because he generally has nothing to say, and he does what is requested of him because he feels that resisting commands is more of a bother than it is worth. Meursault never did anything notable or distinctive in his life: a fact which makes the events of the book all the more intriguing.
Meursault resists being typecast into an archetypal moral category in many of his deeds and actions. Many of his actions in Part One of the novel help contribute to the fuzzy picture of the character. For example, at his mother's funeral, Meursault does not cry or weep in the typical mourning fashion, but rather sleeps during the vigil and entices one of the other mourners present to smoke a cigarette with him. This would be typically considered "evil" behavior, in the context of the story. He could easily been seen as disrespectful and seditious toward his mother and the established procedures of mourning, which seem to be fairly definite at that era in France. However, this "evil" mold can easily be shaken if one considers that Meursault may be more shaken than anyone else present at the funeral. Considering the other events in the novel, it seems as though he does not have a large capacity for emotion. Based on this, it is not unreasonable to assume that the events leading up to and including his mother's death may have overtaxed his limited scope of emotion, and he was therefore nearly incapable of mourning in the "normal" or expected way for his mother, but rather had to resort to his own, more c...
While coming to terms with the absurd was a gradual process for Meursault, his final days and his heated conversation with the chaplain, and his desire for a hateful crowd of spectators show that he was able to accept the absurdity, and revel in it, finding satisfaction in spite of those around him and justifying his murder. His ego had reached an all-time high as he neared his execution, and his satisfaction left him prepared for the nothingness awaiting him. This process was a natural psychological response to his mortality, for his peace of mind. Therefore, Meursault is not the Stranger, an alien to society, but a troubled man seeking meaning and satisfaction in a life and a world that was overwhelming unsatisfactory and absurd.
Albert Camus has his own toolbox of literary devices when it comes to accentuating the theme of The Stranger, one of them being his unique sense and use of secondary characters. Whether major or minor, every character in the book serves a purpose, and corroborates the theme in some form of fashion. Camus describes his secondary characters as foiling Meursault in one aspect or another, and thus, shining light on Meursault’s characteristics. Whether through close connections like familial relationships (Maman) and friendships (Salamano, Raymond, and Marie), or through bonds as distant as people he briefly converses with (Chaplain), or even so much as complete strangers (Perez and unidentified lady at the restaurant), characters that Meursault encounters foil and therefore, emphasize many aspects of his nature. Furthermore, because Meursault aptly embodies Camus’s ideology of Absurdism, emphasizing Meursault through secondary characteristics simply highlights Camus’ doctrine and theme of the book.
A stranger is also someone who looks and acts strangely which is fitting to Meursault. Meursault never shows emotion and finds it annoying when people do. At his mother’s funeral he gets annoyed of a lady he didn’t
... mother, he does not react in a way most people do. He does not cry but instead accepts what has happened and realizes that he can not change it. He goes back and does physical things he would do on a normal day. When the caretaker offers him coffee, he accepts it, he smokes a cigarette and has sex with a woman he just met. Meursault also does not lie to escape death. He refuses to conform to society and lie. He would rather be seen as an outsider than do something that he does not believe in. Finally, Meursault, will not believe in G-d or Christianity just because it is the only thing to turn to before he is put to death. When Meursault decides not to cry at his mother’s funeral, he accepts himself as an outsider. When he is considered an outsider, it does not matter if he is guilty or innocent; at the end of the day he guilty just for being different.
During the first half of the novel, we see many examples of Meursault’s freedom and how he exercises it. He does what he wants, when he wants to with no regard to how he affects the people around him. Meursault lives his life with no restrictions. He is his own boss. Relaxed and free.
Every character that revolves around Meursault seems to be in direct contrast to him. Meursault is an amoral person who does not seem to care passionately about anything. He acts in accordance with physical desires. In other words, Meursault is a sensualist person. At this particular time in his life, his path crosses with his neighbor, Raymond, who feels as though his girlfriend is cheating on him. He decides to take revenge with minor aid form Meursault. Meursault helps him only because he thinks he has nothing to lose if he does. As things lead into one another, the first major violent act of the book is committed.
Meursault, the main character and narrator, is a man living in Algiers. He receives a letter that his mother had died, so he goes to the funeral. From there, he meets a young lady, Marie, and falls in love with her. They both love one another and date. As Meursault returns to his apartment, he meets his neighbors, Raymond and Salamano.
All in all, the influence of Raymond is negative towards Meursault and leads to Meursault’s death sentence. The peer pressure put on Meursault to testify against Raymond’s mistress sets Meursault up and was the first of many instances where Meursault was manipulated into doing something. The aggression of Meursault to use violence against the Arab is a forced demand that Meursault is to fight for Raymond in times of hardships, as if Raymond owns Meursault. Finally, the declaration of Meursault as “a pal” influences the jury heavily because Raymond runs a whorehouse and the people one hangs out with have strong affects. Together, these three things lead to Meursault’s downfall, the death sentence, and Raymond is the one to blame.
This ideal destroys the very purpose of the trial, which seeks to place a rational explanation on Meursault’s senseless killing of the Arab. However, because there is no rational explanation for Meursault’s murder, the defense and prosecution merely end up constructing their own explanations, which they each declare to be the truth, but are all based on false assumptions. Therefore, the prosecution itself is to be viewed as absurd. When the prosecutor asks Perez if “he had at least seen [Meursault] cry,” he tries to persuade the crowd that Meursault is without feeling (91). The prosecutor then further turns the crowd against Meursault when he asks him about his “liaison” with Marie right after his mother’s death. The prosecutor remarks “indifferently that if he was not mistaken, that was the day after Maman died” (93). Though the liaison with Marie and the lack of emotions at Maman’s funeral may seem unrelated to Meursault’s killing, the prosecutor effectively convinces the crowd that they are in fact intertwined. The jury convicts Meursault not because he killed a man, but because he didn't show the proper emotions after his mother died. Despite hearing Meursault’s own thoughts ...
The trial portrays the absurdist ideal that absolute truth does not exist. This ideal destroys the very purpose of the trial, which seeks to place a rational explanation on Meursault’s senseless killing of the Arab. However, because there is no rational explanation for Meursault’s murder, the defense and prosecution merely end up constructing their own explanations. They each declare their statements to be the truth, but are all based on false assumptions. The prosecution itself is viewed as absurd. The prosecutor tries to persuade the jury that Meursault has no feelings or morals by asking Perez if “he had at least seen [Meursault] cry” (91). The prosecutor then continues to turn the crowd against Meursault when he asks him about his “liaison” with Marie right after his mother’s death. Though Meursault’s relationship with Marie and his lack of emotions at his mother’s funeral may seem unrelated to his murder, the prosecutor still manages to convince the crowd that they are connected to one another. The jury ends up convicting Meursault not because he killed a man, but because he didn't show the proper emotions after his mother ...
Nearing the end of the book, he is imprisoned. In this time, he begins to contemplate his own death, as his execution (for killing the Arab) is inevitable. While in captivity, the chaplain visits him to help him with faith, but Meursault could not be less interested. In fact, he is annoyed by the chaplain’s presence and his attempts to make Meursault a man of faith. As an atheist, he is irritated by this.
Camus’s absurd philosophy asserts that the events of the world have no rational order or visible meaning. The story of the returning son murdered by his mother and sister is a perfect example of what he is trying to show us in The Stranger. There is no reason for the son to have died. His terrible, ironic fate is not compatible with any logical or ordered system governing human existence. Like Meursault’s killing of the Arab, the son’s death is a purposeless, meaningless tragedy that defies rationalization or justification. Now because of the murder Meursault is put on trial the following summer and while he is on trial, Meursault comes to understand that his failure to interpret or find meaning in his own life has left him vulnerable to others, who will impose such meaning for him. Until this point, Meursault has unthinkingly drifted from moment to moment, lacking the motivation or ability to examine his life as a narrative with a past, present, and
Camus writes in a simple, direct, and uncomplicated style. The choice of language serves well to convey the thoughts of Meursault. The story is told in the first person and traces the development of the narrator's attitude toward himself and the rest of the world. Through this sort of simple grammatical structure, Camus gives the reader the opportunity to become part of the awareness of Meursault. In Part I, what Meursault decides to mention are just concrete facts. He describes objects and people, but makes no attempt to analyze them. Since he makes no effort to analyze things around him, that job is given to the reader. The reader therefore creates his own meaning for Meursault's actions. When he is forced to confront his past and reflect on his experiences, he attempts to understand the reasons for existence. At first, Meursault makes references to his inability to understand what's happening around him, but often what he tells us seems the result of his own indifference or detachment. He is frequently inattentive to his surroundings. His mind wanders in the middle of conversations. Rarely does he make judgments or express opinions about what he or other characters are doing. Meursault walks through life largely unaware of the effect of his actions on others.