The stranger

This to me seems like a story about a neuro-atypical, Asperger's-like young man who runs afoul of a society geared toward only those who think and feel along "normal" parameters. It holds up a mirror to the absurdities of the modern justice system and its deficiencies in doing anything but maintaining norms for the society.

Looking forward to reading some commentaries about this one so I know what I should think and how I should feel about it.

"If by some extraordinary chance the blade failed, they would just start over. So the thing that bothered me most was that the condemned man had to hope the machine would work the first time. And I say that's wrong. And in a way I was right. But in another way I was forced to admit that that was the whole secret of good organization. In other words, the condemned man was forced into a kind of moral collaboration. It was in his interest that everything go off without a hitch."

The Stranger (also known as The Outsider or L’Étranger) tells the story of Meursault, an unsympathetic French Algerian, who after attending his mother’s funeral, finds himself killing an Arab man. The novel follows a first-person narrative that explores the events before and after this murder. Albert Camus said is best when he said “I summarised The Stranger a long time ago, with a remark I admit was highly paradoxical: ‘In our society any man who does not weep at his mother’s funeral runs the risk of being sentenced to death.’ I only meant that the hero of my book is condemned because he does not play the game.”

On the surface The Stranger is the story of an emotionless protagonist; Meursault does not care about anything and could be considered a sociopath. However, this novel is often cited as an example of Camus’ philosophy on the absurd and existentialism. So in order to fully grasp the intent behind this classic novel, we must look into just what existentialism is and more practically absurdism.

The absurd is often referring to the conflicting philosophy that humans have a tendency to seek out value and meaning in life. However absurdism believes it is logically and humanly impossible to find any meaning of life. Philosophers may have very different doctrines but they generally believe that philosophical thinking begins with the human subject. Though existentialism comes from the disorientation or confusion that we are living in a meaningless (or absurd) world.

For Albert Camus, The Stranger is an exploration into the meaning of life and if life has no meaning what is the purpose of morality. Meursault’s detachment from the world is a result of his conclusion that life is meaningless; “The chaplain knew the game well too, I could tell right away: his gaze never faltered. And his voice didn’t falter, either, when he said, ‘Have you no hope at all? And do you really live with the thought that when you die, you die, and nothing remains?’ ‘Yes,’ I said.” Paradoxically, it was only after being sentenced to death, that Meursault was able to obtain some sense of happiness.

Without an understanding of Albert Camus’ philosophical ideas, I do not think that the reader will have any hope in truly understand or appreciating this novel. However I have heard that The Stranger has been an option for high school students (especially in America) to study. I wonder how many students fall into the trap of picking this novel thinking it was short only to discover how difficult it is to analyse. I do not have enough of an understanding of absurdism or existential philosophy to full appreciate The Stranger. However re-reading this novel has helped me understand this enough to enjoy the Camus’ philosophical ideas.

This review originally appeared on my blog; www.knowledgelost.org/book-reviews/genre/classic/the-stranger-by-albert-camus/

According to the preface, this book is widely considered a work relating to existentialist philosophy though the author has denied it. I can well see how this comparison is made, as the protagonist appears to be dispassionately self-involved through most of the novel, which at least gives the impression of an existentialist worldview. It seems to me, however that rather than being a study in existentialism, this is a study of a man living mostly disconnected from the people and places he nevertheless enjoys interacting with and trying to understand. He seems to be able to go through the motions of living and pass himself off on some levels as a normal thinking/feeling human being, without the burden of really feeling or caring about anything beyond his own immediate desires.

His "breakdown" at the end of the novel is somewhat revealing, but only somewhat. I have to admit that at the end of the novel, I didn't necessarily "get it," and felt that while it was an interesting character study, it didn't really enlighten any particular societal, psychological, or philosophical objective.

I often wonder if, in attempting to glean the most from a highly-regarded work, the experience is conscribed in such a way as to make it ultimately futile. Or perhaps I'm just too dense or mired in psychological and philosophical considerations to be open enough to truly benefit.