HISTORY AND CONTEXT OF JOURNALISM
SEMINAR PAPER
The Outsider by Albert Camus
The Outsider (or The Stranger) is a novel (1942) written by Nobel Prize for Literature (1957) Albert Camus and is often cited as one of the greatest philosophical novels of the 20th century, due to its role in existentialist, nihilist and deterministic propositions.
The plot is based around the crime and incarceration of Meursault an Algerian man that killed an Arab who threatened him with a knife, the story is divided in two parts and is narrated by Meursault himself who describes through his life the days previous to his incarceration and his life after it, with certain pragmatism.
The philosophy behind this novel is nothing short of an existentialism masterpiece with various inclinations towards absurdism. The main themes are characterized by a clear paradox, straight forward in Meursault’s attitude throughout the novel; his carelessness and lack of empathy suggest that he is aware he has no freedom and he shows himself to be indifferent towards the moral appeal that most of our society is accustomed to, for instance: drinking coffee at his mother´s funeral, describing guests rather than his feelings or by establishing a relationship of sexual interest with an ex-employee merely a day after his mother’s death. The paradox is mirrored by the idea that perhaps he is free of a moral condition and therefore can take those decisions in consideration, freely choosing to do what suits him best without any sentimental repercussions.
Camus was a very straight forward nihilist, his points of view personified in Meursault’s actions reflect the existentialist point of view; where some might critique the fact that the main character is not emotionally disabled by the loss of his mother and rather establish instead a sexual bond with a woman, the nihilist subjectivist might see an appropriate opportunity to enjoy one’s desires, the close encounter with death might have shown Meursault his very own mortality and thus he decides to enjoy himself in any shape or form he pleases, freed from a moral conditioning. The point of this novel lies within this very argument; the proposition of a man that does not follow a social contract nor cares about his integration in society, thus the title ‘the outsider’, more personified in the fact that Meursault is Algerian and not French, lives on French colonial soil yet he belongs somewhere else, a more physical example of his conditioning.
This leads to a second theme within the novel which is Colonialism, this latter one seems to be a more superficial topic in the novel, yet important nonetheless. The Arabs have no name, and Meursault kills an Arab who he doesn’t care about nor knows his name, his crime is emphasised by the fact he did not care who he killed and it proposes the idea that the Arabic society was segregated and disregarded for.
My personal interpretation is that Camus chose the right “victim” for Meursault´s crime, as I thought ‘why should a careless man, care for a man who is disregarded by his own society?’
The philosophy within this novel is quite syntagmatic; the first part is surrounded by absurdism, Meursault only follows his life through a physical and experiential sense, and he does not assume responsibility for his actions or the consequences of such, his reasoning for the killing of an Arab man was simply due to the uncomfortable heat he was under whilst walking across the beach, and the murder is contemplated as a mere occurrence, something that “happens”, yet in the second part once he faces trial and becomes aware of the possibility of being executed he then faces an introspective of himself and assumes his mortality and the responsibility of his own life.
Once again we come back to the theme of freedom in which the character only assumes his responsibility once he is forced to, once he doesn’t have the freedom to experience since he is locked up in jail. Camus uses Meursault as an example of the way our irrationality can work, free of conditions pushing one to fulfil our desires yet the moment we face a barrier or a limitation we are forced to analyse our actions and act consequently to that new condition.
The second part of the book is focused more on the philosophy behind the arbitrariness of justice and society, Meursault is asked to repent and pretend he is a Christian in order to be absolved by the judge, yet he denies his self-preservation by maintaining a religious honesty. The proposition behind this dilemma seems uncertain but I believe that Camus wanted to show Meursault’s independence above what seemed ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. At no time there is a slight suggestion of empathy from Meursault to the Arab he killed, or is there anywhere in the novel a reference to his family or what he left behind, simply Meursault’s decision of accepting his responsibility instead of living a ‘free’ life in which he classified himself wrongly, it is merely absurd and selfish proposal yet meaningful to the nihilist perspective. In the end Meursault finds comfort in his death, his reasoning is somewhat uncertain and that shows a perseverance within the character’s true identity, since the argument of existentialism would be a farce if this changed before the contemplation of death. Albert Camus criticises the use of capital punishment as the paradox of a justice system which enforces the very action which once condemned, a slightly cynical approach proposing that perhaps one is free only through living and dying to its convictions instead of a hypocritical change of attitudes to stick to life, an existentialist frame used by similar thinkers such as Nietzsche or Sartre.
