The Stranger Essay Albert Camus novels The Stranger and The Myth of Sisyphus are based to define the meaning of existentialism. In The Stranger the main character Meursault is portrayed to show no emotions and judgments towards others. While The Myth of Sisyphus shows who lives his life in a stubbornly and arrogant behavior as if he’s out to get someone in life. In both stories the readers that they have taken life and for granted and come to sort of realize their wrongs at the end of the story. Neither understands having though, passion, feeling, or emotion in life.
This can be measured in their political side of each life, and also the treatment of and love for Phuong. Through these three aspects of the character, the audience can see how very different Fowler and Pyle are. Pyle and Fowler differ in their beliefs and the way they impact themselves and their beliefs on society. Fowler is quite introverted, keeping his secrets to himself and having no opinions as we can see his job is not a correspondent, but a “reporter, because (he) reports what he sees.” This leaves him with no impact on society due to his reluctance to do anything that would force him to have an opinion, because in his eyes “an opinion is a kind of action”. On the contrary, we see Pyle who is quite a ‘loud’ American with his ideas, but his character in general is quiet.
This is one of the most important aspects of the characterization because if other characters were allowed to appear more within the story, the reader would have more than likely had a different view of the affair. If Oates’s had allowed the reader to know Anna’s husband more intimately and definitely if the reader could read his thoughts, than the reader may have seen the affair as dirty. The reader only see’s that they never really communicate and his love for Anna is never shown within the story, so the reader has no real reason to sympathize with him. Chekhov’s perspective was through the male character’s point of view, while Oates’s perspective was through the female character’s point of view. Chekhov focuses on the male lover, Dmitry, and his thoughts on his affair with the woman named Anna.
Existentialism is the belief that "the universe" doesn't care if man is here or not. Weather it be one man or man kind itself. There are several different factors when it comes to existentialism. Even though Meursault has bad luck, The Stranger is an example of existentialism because Meursault is indifferent and Meursault is at the mercy of the universe. Existentialism is all about responsibility.
Lord Henry responds to this by noting that Dorian was beginning to moralize, and this was a negative thing because he believed that the books and art themselves did not make morals, therefore art could not be poison. Lord Henry argues, “As for being poisoned by a book, there is no such thing as that. Art has no influence upon action. It annihilates the desire to act. It is superbly sterile.
What Arendt is inherently saying about Eichmann when she states that he acted out of sheer thoughtlessness is that he is not thinking or what can also be said is that he suffers from lack of thought. Eichmann was thoughtful as an administrator to which it’s true that he could deal with lots of complicated details, but overall to her, Eichmann is not thinking. For Arendt, thinking involves on the spot judgment and the ability to take another’s viewpoint into consideration. This is something that she thinks Eichmann lacks. For instance, in her book she states that this is a flaw where he, Eichmann, cannot take another fellow’s point of view and her example is in relation to when he was working in Vienna.
Perry’s criticism of this Immaterial Soul View in his essay, expressed through his character Weirob, is based on the fact that souls cannot be and never have been perceived. According to the Immaterial Soul View, any judgments about personal identity must be judgments about souls, since the Immaterial Soul View states that a person’s identity is defined by their soul. However, since immaterial souls cannot be perceived, these judgments we make would be groundless. This means it would not be reasonable to believe people we know are who we think they are because we cannot sense and never have sensed their souls. Intuitively, this concept of judgments we make about people’s identities seems irrational and absurd.
Absurdist ideals in The Stranger The Stranger by Albert Camus it gives the reader a glimpse into the life of Meursault and how his life is just as absurd as his ideals as an Absurdist. Meursault is not your average Algerian man; he personifies the Absurdist ideals and then later the Existentialist ideals as well. He is emotionally aloof from the people and things around him in his everyday life; he feels like there is no reason to waste his time with meaningless things. He is a stranger in his own society due to the fact that he does not seem to care about emotions or even people in general. Due to this strangeness of the narrator’s personality, The Stranger highlights the three major themes of the Absurdist ideals: the irrationality of the universe, the meaningless of human life, and finally the motifs of death and decay.
In Albert Camus’ The Stranger, Meursault constantly shows his existential principles, such as his indifference toward anything and his belief that there is no afterlife. Camus informs the reader very little of Meursault’s character in The Stranger. The first person narration allows Meursault to tell the story through his own perspective, and he does not divulge much of his background or childhood. The most striking aspect of his personality is his apathetic attitude towards everything, introduced in the first paragraph of the novel: “Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don’t know” (Camus 1).
To many critics of the novella, the implementation of such words should not have been introduced into this story. However, supporters of Conrad’s Heart of Darkness disagree with that statement and believe that it added emphasis and influence to his work. Such supporters included Edward Crankshaw, who stated that “Conrad provides us with very little critical guidance.” As Edward Crankshaw put it, Conrad “seems to have worked in a state of semi-blindness, calculating as the need arose, crossing his bridges as they came, living, so to speak, from hand to mouth.” So, which side is right, those who support Conrad or those who oppose him? The use of ambiguity in Conrad’s writing provides the reader the choice as to whether or not