The Individual Versus His Environment in The Stranger and Grendel

1662 Words4 Pages

The Individual Versus His Environment in The Stranger and Grendel

Due to the multifaceted nature of literature, analysis thereof is prone to generalization. One of the most grievous generalizations oft encountered involves failing to distinguish between a character and the novel it inhabits. Take John Gardener’s Grendel and Albert Camus’s The Stranger, for instance. It’s far too easy, when analyzing for dominant ideologies, to slap them both with the label of existentialism and be done with it. However, closer scrutiny indicates that whilst both Meursault and Grendel are existential heroes, Grendel, unlike Meursault, exists in a solipsistic universe that runs contrary to his ideology and thusly never experiences the catharsis that Meursault does.

As put by Jean-Paul Sartre in his essay Existentialism is a Humanism, “The other is indispensable to my existence, and equally so to any knowledge I can have of myself,” meaning that one’s existence is utterly dependent on the existence of others. We see the idea that the perceptions of others shape one’s self very clearly in The Stranger. Meursault requires “that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of [his] execution and that they greet [him] with cries of hate,” signifying that others’ physical expression of hatred (and thus separation) are necessary for Meursault to become truly alienated. Just as he is nothing before he defines himself, he is nothing without being defined by others. Thus, the existential crisis he experiences supports the ideology of existentialism throughout the novel.

Another important existentialist concept is that everyone is completely accountable for his or her actions. “We have neither behind us, nor before us in a luminous realm of values, ...

... middle of paper ...

...-year-old, still new to the universe, still trying on ideologies like shoes at a Sneaker Barn to see which’ll fit me best or take me farthest before wearing out, I look at both novels and see a warning against meaninglessness. Maybe Meursault was content to live a meaningless life and die a meaningless death, but I know that I would never be. And Grendel’s demise, brought on by his blind insistence on ignoring the meaning all around him, is a powerful argument by inverse for looking harder at the world around me, finding meaning where meaning may not at first appear to be. Through the mistakes of others we improve ourselves; through the deaths of Meursault and Grendel may a distinction arise between an individual and his surroundings, and may us intrepid inhabitants of the real world glean meaning through Meursault and Grendel’s adventures through meaninglessness.

Open Document