The Stranger Reviews

• A work of art and a fine book. I hated it!

  
  By A17FLA8HQOFVIG on 2001-12-04
  This short novel by Albert Camus was written in 1946. It's about a young Algerian Frenchman, Muersault, who works at an office job and lives a dull ordinary life. He describes his mother's funeral with clarity and dispassion and, as the story unfolds, the reader sees that this detachment is the general theme of the book. He doesn't love his girlfriend but it makes no difference to him whether he marries her or not. He helps an acquaintance commit an aggressive act because he just doesn't care enough one way or another. And, eventually, he commits a murder and is arrested. The trial then focuses on this disaffected aspect of his character. The conclusion is inevitable.

  I found this book quite uncomfortable reading. As Muersault observed the world around him, I was caught up in it, found myself seeing it all through his eyes, trapped in his inertia. I entered his world and felt a weird kind of sympathy as well as identification with him. This was very troubling. The little book packs quite a wallop.

  Yes, I do see this book as a work of art. Every word resonates with double and triple meanings. And every word is like a hammer blow. I read it fast, trying to shake off its impact. That didn't work, however, because "The Stranger" will linger long in my mind. This is the philosophy of essentialism and the book is a classic. I just can't help the fact that I hated it.
  
  

• An existentialist tour de force of literature

  
  By A3KF4IP2MUS8QQ on 2002-07-10
  The Stranger is a haunting, challenging masterpiece of literature. While it is fiction, it actually manages to express the complex concepts and themes of existential philosophy better than the movement's most noted philosophical writings and almost as well as Dostoyevsky's Notes From the Underground. This is a new kind of literature. The story in and of itself is rather simple, but the glimpses into the intellect and feelings of the protagonist are the sources of the magic of this novel. M.Meursault is a normal man in Algiers, France. When we meet him, he is on the way to his mother's funeral, where he says very little, expresses no remorse over her death, and immediately returns home. The next day, he goes swimming, meets Marie, takes her to see a comedy that night, and spends the next few weeks living his normal life and occassionally seeing Marie. He ends up getting indirectly involved in a dispute between his neighbor Raymond and a girl who did him wrong, and the conflict culminates in an encounter on the beach between Raymond, Meursault, and the girl's Arab brother and friend. Raymond is cut with a knife, but the whole episode seems to be resolved. Meursault, though, decides later to take another walk on the beach because he is too worn out to go inside and rejoin his friends, and somewhat inexplicably he ends up killing one of the Arabs. The second half of the novel examines Meursault's thoughts in relation to his trial and sentence; interestingly, he is prosecuted as much if not more for his moral character than for the crime of murder itself.

  Basically, Meursault does not care about anything, does not feel anything for anyone (including himself, for the most part). He looks at life objectively and determines that it really doesn't matter whether he does something or not in the overall scheme of things. When Marie expresses her love for him, he tells her he will marry her if it will make her happy but that he cannot say he really loves her. He expresses no remorse for killing the Arab because it just happened; he had no intention of doing it, but the fact is that he did, so there's little point in dwelling on it. He cares about the present and, to a lesser degree, the future, but the past is meaningless for the very reason that it is the past. Meursault sees things as they are; rather than rely on flights of fantasy and imagination (the typical tools of the Romanticists), he deals with facts in the here and now rather than run from them and has no problem admitting the seemingly obvious fact that man is a creature of utter depravity. He rejects religion; since each man must eventually die, what does it matter what he does while on earth. It is a man's hopes and dreams that weigh down his very existence; Marsault can only find happiness by cleansing himself of all such illusory notions.

  Needless to say, this is not an uplifting book, but it is an engaging, thought-provoking one. While Camus cannot be called a true existentialist in his own philosophical outlook, his fiction does epitomize many existentialist ideas. Marsault is a protagonist like no other in literature--you cannot like him, he is obviously guilty of killing a man in cold blood, and he is of a cold-hearted nature, yet you do understand some of his thinking, find yourself more and more interested in his dark outlook on life, and have to admit that much of what he believes makes sense.
  
  

• Unsettling book; uncomfortable translation

  
  By A31WE0G828ZWY5 on 2004-01-18
  Without a doubt one of the most important books of the 20th century, The Stranger is a classic piece of literature and one of the literary pillars of existentialism, a movement that continues to color the way we see the world.

  The storyline is very simple: a young and aimless Algerian immigrant to France, Meursault, unmoved by his mother's death, becomes involved in petty events beyond his control and ends up killing someone. The trial is a ridiculous farce, and the real art comes from the way Meursault dispassionately describes the events overtaking him: the funeral, the trial, the sentencing. The story is at once beautiful and unsettling.

  Of course, none of this is anything that hasn't already been said among the other reviews here. What prompted me to write a review about this now (after all, I had first read this story more than 20 years ago and have only re-read parts of it recently) is the new and much-heralded translation from Matthew Ward. Mr. Ward's work has been almost universally praised by critics, who have called it an essential update and a production that will make the book more accessible to American audiences.

  That may be so, but I can't escape the feeling that it also cheapens this great book. I realize that some traditionalists will always accuse a modern translator of a classic piece of literature of tampering with art. But even if I keep that in mind as I read The Stranger in its newest form, I still get that sinking feeling.

  Take the opening paragraph, for example. I have always considered the opening lines in The Stranger among the best in the western literary cannon, and they seem to lose firepower in Mr. Ward's version of the story: "Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe. I don't know. I got a telegram from the home: `Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours.' That doesn't mean anything. Maybe it was yesterday."

  Compare that to the classic Stuart Gilbert translation that is familiar to most English speakers to have read this book: "Mother died today. Or, maybe, yesterday; I can't be sure. The telegram from the Home says: `Your mother passed away. Funeral tomorrow. Deep sympathy.' Which leaves the matter doubtful; it could have been yesterday."

  Don't the short and choppy sentences of the telegram contrast strongly to the emotionless as-a-matter-of-fact narrative from Meursault in the second example? And isn't that lost in the newer version when both Meursault and the telegram have the same tone? The Meursault from Mr. Ward's translation always talks that way, giving the impression that he actually puts a bit of thought into what should be his dispassionate commentary, rather than just speaking in meandering run-on sentences as someone simply going through the motions would (and the way author Albert Camus described Meursault in later years).

  Also, who is Maman? I'm not sure I would recognize the word as a form of "mother" if I weren't already familiar with the story.

  In sum, the value of The Stranger is beyond doubt. But consider the issue of the translations strongly, and, if possible, consider one of the older translations that create a story closer to what I believe Mr. Camus intended and not something that may have been crafted to subtly reshape the story for modern audiences.
  
  

• The Stranger: Slow-paced is better?

  
  By A1W5OLUI3WY06 on 2000-03-02
  In sports, to examine the action closely, they do a slow-motion instant replay. The Stranger by Albert Camus is slow paced; there's one scene in the beginning where the main character, Meursault, describes in full detail his day, in which he looked out the window. That was all, Meursault just talked about the people who walked by that day. However, this single fault the book has is necessary in order to understand and accept Camus' existentialist message. Like a slow-motion replay of fast action, only when Camus slows down the life of Meursault does the reader see the entire picture. The famous image of the novel is Meursault shooting an Arab man on the beach. A fast paced action novel would not have given much detail-- which would have missed Camus' message. Saying that Meursault shot an Arab does not tell the reader anything, but having Meursault describe in full detail the unbearable nature of the heat that day, about the sweat running down his forehead and the sun pounding on his back, and by leaving out any thoughts about the morality of his actions, only then do we understand Camus' message. There is no God out there who care, he could shoot or not shoot, it would not matter either way. What drove Meursault to kill the Arab was not distorted morals, that it would be right for him to kill the Arab on a spiritual or vengeful level. Rather, Meursault killed the Arab because it was hot that day. He is driven by honest emotions only, and Meursault will be persecuted for this later on. Slowing down the pace also makes the story seem that much more real and detailed. I imagined the bullets Meursault shoots at the beach in the same slow motion style that was used in The Matrix. Also, the scenes in which he breaks his placid persona, such as the one in which Meursault attacks a visiting chaplain, are heightened dramatically by the slow pace. The outburst of emotion is far more exciting with a low key atmosphere surrounding it. This is important because the scene with the chaplain, where he discovers his own beliefs (existentialism), is one of the key parts of the novel. Normally I do not like a slow paced novel, but I'm willing to make an exception with The Stranger. By slowing down the action, the theme becomes easier to understand and the images become far more absorbing. Oddly enough, it would appear that the book's only inherent flaw makes the novel better on the whole, and therefore I would not be exaggerating if I said The Stranger was flawless.
  
  

• Is this book the existentialist bible? No.

  
  By on 2001-06-14
  The other reviewers base their interpretation of this novel on the belief that Camus was an Existentialist and that Camus presented Meursault as a hero. Concerning the last point, nothing could be further from the truth. Before interpreting "The Stranger", one should first read Camus' essays on his own personal philosophy of "The Absurd" and how he relates it to the myth of Sisyphus. These essays reveal that Camus' personal philosophy was distinct from Existentialism in that he imagined that Sisyphus could be happy even though he was condemned to roll a huge stone up a hill in Hades only to have it roll down again on nearing the top. Similarly, Camus believed that people could be fulfilled by searching for the meaning of life even though they know they will not be able to discover it. Consequently, Meursault is not a hero in Camus' eyes because Mersault has given up trying to find meaning in his life and accepts without struggle the lack of emotion and spirit in it. In other words, don't trust everything that was written on the back cover of the american paperback edition of this novel. The back cover contained incorrect information that misled many readers, including myself, about the true meaning of this work. Read Camus' "The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays" before interpreting "The Stranger" and new meaning will become apparent from this excellent and frightening novel.
  
  
• The original slacker...
  By A2MK2OKRPH0WYX on 1999-01-02
  When I shut Camus' "The Stranger", my mind was hushed. It was a very odd book that made me think. Unsure of the books meaning, I read some of the reveiws here, and, slowly, and opinion began to form in my mind. First off, Mersault, the narrator, is the most passive, static symbol I've ever encountered in literature. The nearest analog would be Billy Pilgrim from Vonnegut's "Slaughter House Five", I suppose, but Mersault is a different animal all together. His entire world is bloodless, and, using modern brain theory, left hemispheric; lineal, rational. Yet, it is this very bloodless existance that Camus is objecting to, at least in my reading of the novel. Mersault is a slacker, neither good nor bad. He is simply there. Sure, he's intelligent, but he's got no insight. He's caught in a reality beyond his control, a material reality that never changes. He's pleasent, interested in others, but unemotional and detatched. The only thing he responds to are changes in his material organism; heat, low blood sugar. That sort of thing. In a way, Mersault is no different from the other characters in the novel caught in life's games. The judge and lawyers, society at large, all seem to condem him, as easily as they'd have accepted him if there hadn't been a murder. Mersault's main problem is that he does not move a finger to change his life. Like a pure Aristotle, filled with cold scientific detatchment, he simply observes, never interfering with a reality that has become a lifeless, bloodless, material trap. Even though he sees the lawyers playing a game with his life that could result in his death, he does nothing to stop it. We, who've seen the murder through his eyes, understand that Mersault felt treatened by the Arab and his knife. We know he did not pre-meditate the murder. Yet he murdered. He did it coldly, but not in cold blood. Yet he doesn't make a move, becomes a pawn in a pointless 'game' between the self-righteous magistrate and the less talented defender. The question that troubled me time and time again, and probably everyone else who's read the book, is why? Why not take an impassioned stand? Why not inveigh against the absurdity of reality, why not fight for life? Why be happy to be imprisoned in society's little game of good versus evil? Why would Mersault not feel sad during his mother's funeral? Mersault simply allows life to work on him, observes what he sees coldly and accurately. His observations about the foolishness of the law, the fact that even the most self-important 'doormen' in this life are still inmates, all ring true. He notices how opposites fit together, yet depend on the other for their existance; Salmano and his dog; the magistrate and the defense; good and bad. Remeber how dejected Salamano felt after his dog, the cur he'd despised, was lost...This strange, dialectic stasis holds the world together. In some way, since Mersault is neutral, he is beyond it all, yet, like all men, is caught in its web. In the end, he becomes serious about the game, and secretly hopes that his execution will be attended by a crowd of spectators, howling in execration. In effect, what I feel Camus is trying to do in the "Stranger" is much more involved than the reading most others here have given the book. He's giving us a symbol of the limits of rational, Aristotilean thought. Pure science has given us the bomb, turned humans into machines. It has made western man maybe a little more intelligent than the animalistic Raymond, but at the expense of depriving him of a reality deeply alive, awash in blood and emotion. Our intelligence has made us robots, unable to see the face of God in the stones that imprison us, which the preist, probably the only truly passionate and sympathetic character in the book, hopes that the listless Mersault, the most modern of men, could see.
  
  
• The First Of the Absurds
  By on 2000-10-03
  The Stranger was the first novel of Camus' labeled "absurd," and it defines Camus for most Americans. The plot is quite simple, with none of the diversions common in popular literature. The main character is not a hero, has no "true" love affair and the pursuit of money and power never enters the story. The Stranger is an honest atheist, waiting for life to happen.

  The title l'Etranger, has been poorly translated. The U.S. title, The Stranger, implies that the main character, Meursault, has been viewed as a "strange" or "odd" person for some time. The other possible meaning is that no one knows him. Meursault is a stranger even to those who think they know him. These definitions do not seem adequate. The U.K. title, The Outsider, only serves to confuse readers even more.

  Meursault is the archetype of a middle-class man. He works as a clerk, rents an apartment and draws no attention to himself. He is, if anything, very ordinary. Meusault might even be boring. He lacks deep convictions and passion. If he is estranged from any aspect of French society, it is religion--he does not believe in the symbols and the rituals of faith.

  Estranged? "Cela m'est égal."

  Along with the title, Camus took care in naming the main character. Meursault's name is symbolic of the Mediteranean sea. Mer mean "sea" and soliel is French for "sun." The sea and the sun meet at the beach, where Meursault's defining actions occur.

  Meusault is an anti-hero. His only redeeming quality is his honesty, no matter how absurd. In existential terms, he is "authentic" to himself. Meusault does not believe in God, but he cannot lie because he is true to himself. This inability to falsify empathy ultimately condemns him. Meursault has faith only in what he, himself, can see or experience with his other senses. He is not a philosopher, a theologian or a deep thinker. Meursault exists as he is, not trying to be anything more or less than himself.

  Why did Camus' readers recognize Meursault as a plausible character? After two World Wars and much suffering, many people came to live life much as Meursault does. Or at least they tried to do so. These people lost the will to do more than exist. There was no hope and no desire. The only goal for many people was simple survival. Even then, the survival seemed empty and hollow. We learn how empty Meursault's existence is through his relationships. He is not close to his mother; we learn he does not cry at her funeral. He does not seem close to his lover, Marie Cardona. Of her, Meursault states, "To me, she was only Marie." There is no passion is Meursault's words or in his life.

  What sets Camus apart from many existentialists and modern philosophers in general is his acceptance of contradiction. Yes, Camus wrote, life is absurd and death renders life meaningless--for the individual. But mankind and its societies are larger than any one individual person.
  
  

• The Philosophy of Existentialism
  By A177F2917LXGWR on 2000-03-01
  Albert Camus' novel The Stranger is a wonderful piece of literature that takes you into the depths of a human consciousness that embodies the essence of existentialism. Meursault's, the main character, plight is caused by his obvious differences with society and societies morals. Society as a whole has a belief in a divine being that guides their life and gives bounds to their actions. They believe they are here for a reason and this keeps them sane. Meursault does not share this belief and he believes that life is meaningless and therefore he believes it does not matter what he does, he can either do something or not do something. If you like book about spicy love affairs and books that require little though this book probably isn't for you. If, however, you like a book with a clever idea written by one of the literary worlds great writers then this is the perfect book. The Stranger is an absurdist work that shows us a person who is so immersed in existentialist beliefs that he actually feels no emotion; he lives solely for physical pleasure. This lifestyle is only not hedonistic because Meursault doesn't really care whether or not he does something. He can either go to the beach or not go to the beach, either way he is fine. The reason for this behavior is that Meursault believes that life in meaningless so it really makes no difference in the scheme of things whether he does one thing or does something else. This entire thought-provoking concept creates a great novel that people of all beliefs will enjoy.
  
  
• A powerfully disturbing and bleak novel
  By A16QODENBJVUI1 on 2004-02-17
  Although Albert Camus had achieved some fame as a journalist in his native Algiers in the thirties and as a writer for the French resistance during WW II, he first achieved an international critical reputation with the publication of this classic novel in 1946. The portrait of the detached, unfeeling, uncommitted, amoral, perpetually abstracted Meursault is one of the most haunting in 20th century literature. For many, it is the supreme 20th century literary depiction of nihilism. Unquestionably it is one of the premier literary efforts of the century, though Camus managed several other books just as powerful and superb in their own way, in particular THE PLAGUE, THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS, and THE FALL.

  Meursault reminds me so much of figures from the paintings of Manet. In painting after painting, Manet depicted individuals alone in crowds, failing or refusing to interact or even acknowledge the others in the frame. In one famous painting, a lower middle class girl sits alone in her own little orb, sitting beside an upper class gentleman, neither acknowledging the existence of the other, both self-contained, seemingly detached from the busy world surrounding them. Behind them, a barmaid drinks a beer, equally oblivious to everyone and everything around her. They might all be on separate desert islands. Manet repeats this in painting after painting. Meursault seems almost as if he had stepped out of one of those paintings. He can at least communicate with others, socialize with them, but he cannot express strong moral sentiments or develop affectionate (as opposed to sexual) attachments.

  This is not a happy book. The story deals with Meursault's almost accidental killing of an Arab whose sister had been harmed by one of his acquaintances, but the novel trivializes everything--the killing, his subsequent arrest, his imprisonment, his trial and conviction, and his sentencing. The closest the novel comes to a happy sentiment is near the end when Meursault imagines how much nicer it would be to witness an execution rather than be executed, to have to puke in revulsion than to literally lose one's head to the guillotine.

  Camus would never write such a despairing book again. THE PLAGUE the next year would come close, but not close, while THE FALL would seem almost optimistic and upbeat in comparison. But for those who want to find perhaps the quintessential expression of what we like to think of as existentialism, this could stand as the premier literary instance.
  
  

• Case study or story?
  By AFE7EVYVM05PD on 2000-05-04
  This novel came highly recommended by a friend. I bought it at a used book store, fearing the worst and then regretting paying full price for a work of trash.

  Boy, was I wrong! The Stranger is one of the best books I've ever devoured. Albeit, it could have gone into more detail, given the story and the characters more 'meat', however, I can't complain about it's poignant quality.

  Mersault: Idiot? Victim? Extraordinary? This is left up to the reader to decide, which I loved. Mersault's actions made me think of the isolation that comes with being different and indifferent. Mersault did not CHOOSE to be indifferent, he was naturally. Or so I assume, because there never was an explanation for his decidedly rotten behavior toward the people close to him.

  I think this book's length was a factor in letting the reader make their own judgements regarding Mersault and his place in the theories of nihilism and existentialism. I STILL, after having read the book months ago, haven't made a definite decision. Hopefully, the conclusion won't come any time soon. I'm enjoying mulling the story over in my mind and talking about it with my book-loving friends.

  I recommend this book to anyone who is beyond the idle fluff of such writers as Dean Koontz and Jackie Collins. Feed your brain some oxygen. You'll never think the same way about life again. ...
  
  

• Welcome to nihilism
  By A35YWA2V4QHOJ3 on 2000-05-06
  This is the story of an "average" man who gets swept up into rather unfortunate circumstances. He kills a man in self defense, but is charged with pre-meditated murder. Camus uses this discomforting tale to explore the framework of 20th century existentialism.

  No doubt this is a post-modern work. The extraordinary degree of apathy demonstrated by the persona is something that reminds me of the blandness of the characters in Earnest Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises." Nothing means anything to him. Not life. Not marriage. Not the death of his mother, and not his own execution.

  Reading this book, one becomes transfixed with the horrible plight of this miserable man. We sympathize with the absurdity of it even as we shake our heads at his deplorable character and lack of judgment.

  This novel is terse, but it is powerful. The power is not lost in its brevity, but rather focused in it. I would recommend that it be read alongside the short story "The Wall" by John Paul Sartre. Both are what I would call trademark works of existentialism.
  
  

• Dull and mediocre
  By A3SQESQO5UCH0B on 1999-12-05
  This is a tedious novel and a ten year old could easily digest any of the "ideas" which are in the novel. "Existentialism" is a word loved by mediocre readers and highschool teachers of literature, who quickly latch on to generic and common literary catchwords. The poor, pathetic and dated "existentialists" base a who literary school on an outlook that is a mere passing shade of thought to me. The writing style, which some call "stark" and "uncomprimising", is simply void of artistry, and highly unoriginal. People don't read books like this for the pleasure of an amazing story, or beautiful imagery, rather Camus is read by psuedo-intellectuals searching for a witty and stark outlook on life. Notice how nobody talks much about the story but rather "what Camus is trying to say". He is not saying much and I did not need this story to illustrate to me an outlook which I experienced as early as the age of 13. Also anyone can write about "big ideas" because they are simplistic and easily grasped by anyone. It takes a true artist however to create the magic of a mood, the enchantment of an image, reality of a gesture and on and on. Camus is no such artist and is hopelessly mediocre as a writer and thinker.
  
  
• Hello
  By A3TN2OFQPH8FG0 on 2000-11-14
  The Stranger was the first novel of Camus' labeled "absurd," and it defines Camus for most Americans. The plot is quite simple, with none of the diversions common in popular literature. The main character is not a hero, has no "true" love affair and the pursuit of money and power never enters the story. The Stranger is an honest atheist, waiting for life to happen.

  The title l'Etranger, has been poorly translated. The U.S. title, The Stranger, implies that the main character, Meursault, has been viewed as a "strange" or "odd" person for some time. The other possible meaning is that no one knows him. Meursault is a stranger even to those who think they know him. These definitions do not seem adequate. The U.K. title, The Outsider, only serves to confuse readers even more.

  Meursault is the archetype of a middle-class man. He works as a clerk, rents an apartment and draws no attention to himself. He is, if anything, very ordinary. Meusault might even be boring. He lacks deep convictions and passion. If he is estranged from any aspect of French society, it is religion--he does not believe in the symbols and the rituals of faith.

  Estranged? "Cela m'est égal."

  Along with the title, Camus took care in naming the main character. Meursault's name is symbolic of the Mediteranean sea. Mer mean "sea" and soliel is French for "sun." The sea and the sun meet at the beach, where Meursault's defining actions occur.

  Meusault is an anti-hero. His only redeeming quality is his honesty, no matter how absurd. In existential terms, he is "authentic" to himself. Meusault does not believe in God, but he cannot lie because he is true to himself. This inability to falsify empathy ultimately condemns him. Meursault has faith only in what he, himself, can see or experience with his other senses. He is not a philosopher, a theologian or a deep thinker. Meursault exists as he is, not trying to be anything more or less than himself.

  Why did Camus' readers recognize Meursault as a plausible character? After two World Wars and much suffering, many people came to live life much as Meursault does. Or at least they tried to do so. These people lost the will to do more than exist. There was no hope and no desire. The only goal for many people was simple survival. Even then, the survival seemed empty and hollow. We learn how empty Meursault's existence is through his relationships. He is not close to his mother; we learn he does not cry at her funeral. He does not seem close to his lover, Marie Cardona. Of her, Meursault states, "To me, she was only Marie." There is no passion is Meursault's words or in his life.

  What sets Camus apart from many existentialists and modern philosophers in general is his acceptance of contradiction. Yes, Camus wrote, life is absurd and death renders life meaningless--for the individual. But mankind and its societies are larger than any one individual person.
  
  

• Camus' prose
  By A1RII7X4H0WNYT on 2000-11-26
  In "The Stranger", Camus develops moves further away from earlier works, in which he himself was too involved in the story. His newfound literary "distance" moves his writing towards the level of his later works, though still mired in a "nihilistic" indolence that characterized his earlier philosophy. The book is written without reference to cognitive states, thoughts, but speaks through its prime symbols, the sea, the sun, and death. In Camus' "A Happy Death", the main character is named "Mersault"-- reminiscient of the sea, like Marie's hair, and where many of the important events in "The Stranger" take place. However, Camus decided not to publish "A Happy Death" and changed his characters name to "Meursault"--'meurs' being the imperative of the french 'mourir'-- 'to die'. Death itself becomes a central and recurrent theme, the book beginning with one of the most famous lines in modern literature: "Mother died today". The Algerian sun plays counterpoint to the human absurdities that continue unabated beneath it: funeral processions, murders. Meursault's only defence is of the sort that 'it was hot outside', thereby tightening the circle of absurdity and the feeling of utter pointlessness which pervades so much of the novel. Camus moved on to other and more poignant themes, such as human solidarity, in his later works, but "The Stranger" stands as the expression of an entire country's sense of helplessness during and after the anti-climax of the second World War, and further, as an authentic and original expression of an author's convictions through the medium of literature as can be found anywhere.
  
  
• A threat to society
  By A50TKGB12LD8G on 2005-08-19
  This book is awful. Truly terrible and distructive. It took me years to figure out why and how to explain it and after a nightmare I had last night, I somehow thought of this book and now i know how to put it into words.
  
  Basically, if you liked this book, then I feel bad for you and the rest of society. If you didn't like it, then this is why. In order to like the book, you had to empathize with the main character and think, poor guy, not his fault. That was basically the only way to like it. Disliking it meant you were thinking, what the freak, what the freak is wrong with you. Somethings wrong and i cant explain it.
  
  What this main character is, is a psychopath. Not the slang term but the medical, murderer term that we use for people like Bundy and Dahmer. Think about it. He doesnt care about anything. He doesnt feel for anything other than a sort of detachment, and when he sort of just kills that guy for no reason, he doesnt even feel bad afterwards. And the only time he shows any emotion is when he's about to be punished and put to death for it.
  
  Good. Thats what you do with psychopaths. You punish them and keep them from hurting little kids. If his type of thinking is okay, "as long as I explain why i killed him and it was me not paying attention (apparently the sun was in his eyes as well and he couldnt find a way to word it), then I shouldnt have to die cause now i'm scared." Why dont we let everyone in teh whole world accept that as a valid excuse. We'll let every single person on earth go around shooting people for no reason
  and say, well, as long as he wasnt paying attention. No. We call those type of people unstable and crazy.
  
  Now, if the writer had made clear somehow from the very beginning, "I present to you my friends, the innerworkings, of the mind, of a madman" then i would say, amazing. Great. Good book. I was terrified. You win. Instead, the writer spends the entire time trying to say, no, uh, hmm, he's, like, the average joe but he just thinks... kinda... like wierd and stuff... and so i really want to like... justify when he does something... kinda crazy and stuff.... you know? and make people... think its okay to do that kind of thing.... for no reason... cause it'll cool... just watch.
  
  Like I said, this book is terrible. And it scared people that kind of said, uh oh. There've been times when the sun was in my eyes, and yeah, that really irritated me. Sure I didn't kill anyone but... oh shoot, I'm scared now and I dont know why. And people that thought, huh, sometimes... I guess I feel detached. I mean, I still have emotion and care about people and fall in love and feel all those other human emotions people feel but I mean... is this... something I should have looked into? cause what if I'm as crazy as this dude here.
  
  Someone that doesnt care about anything. Kills for no reason. Doesnt love or feel and thinks only of simple things and of himself. and only feels fear just as they're about to put him to death, and yet doesnt even regret that he had just ended another's life just as easily and just for the sake of it. A psychopath. So please dont feel bad for him. And as I said, the only way to like this book, is to do just that, because that's what the whole things about. Let's feel bad for the crazy guy cause he just didn't know any better.
  
  
• A novelette for the toilet.
  By AXCNBMLTW6HJV on 2000-02-28
  This book is short. It's simplistic. This book would make excellent toilet reading if only one could resist the persistent urge to drop it between one's thighs.

  When reading a novel, a good indication that you are insensitive to art is if you overemphasize the themes, or ideas. Art is not concerned with WHAT is said, so much as HOW and HOW WELL it is said. From an artistic perspective, the style and execution are what count---not the subject matter. And so, the literary, or artistic, value of this book and its philosophical value are two separate issues.

  While I understand its emotional appeal to adolescents, I never found existential philosophy (`a la Camus and Sartre) to be very appealing on an intellectual level; and, I find fictionalized walk-throughs of philosophical ideas to be dreary without exception. Real artists do not generalize human experiences and reduce them to vague, overdrawn abstractions. And so, I would object to this book if it preoccupied itself with philosophical ideas; but, there is nothing as concrete or thoughtful as an idea in this book. Still, the characters are contrived, forced to act out Camus' whimsical "existential" formulas like stiff-jointed marionettes in the hands of a club-fisted puppeteer.

  From an artistic perspective: the plot is impossibly dumb; the structure is a trivial linear progression of (non)events; the characterization is almost entirely absent, and the characters are uniformly vacuous and wooden; the settings are barely even sketched; the narrative style is that of a mildly retarded six-year-old; the descriptions are banal and monochromatic; and, the dialogue is imbecilic. This book isn't even bad literature---it is perfectly inartistic! On the positive side, because the writing is so simple, it makes good practice reading for those learning French (I have to justify that star).

  While I'm profoundly indifferent to this book, I recommend it to professors of litterature and philosophistry, and to others who splash around in the shallow end of the intellectual pool and pepper their conversation with verbal baubles like "abyss", "void", "Nothingness", "absurd", and similar gibberish. If you fall into this category but want to be cured, start by studying "Lectures on Literature" and "Lectures on Russian Literature", both by Vladimir Nabokov; and "Western Wind" by J. F. Nims. For the philosophically inclined, start with Copleston's "A History of Philosophy". Study them---but beware, you may end up agreeing with me.

  If you insist on stories with similar themes, try these:

  * "Cancer Ward" --A. Solzhenitsyn (Bethell & Burg translation)

  * "The Death of Ivan Ilych" --L. Tolstoy (Edmonds or Maude/B.G. Guerney translations)

  * "The Dead" --J. Joyce

  They're much better than "The Stranger"; but, what isn't?

  splash...flush...
  
  

• Life and Nothing But...
  By A2X9QA4JU5Q4VY on 2000-10-04
  THE STRANGER is one of those timeless classics sure to disturb new readers well into the next millenium. Albert Camus is dealing with truth here, and truth, like life, is not for everyone. And neither is this book. I wouldn't have it any other way. Camus' pitifully honest anti-hero Meursault finds himself on the wrong end of French justice following a carefully plotted train of carelessly indifferent but seemingly innocent decisions culminating in one senseless murder that is the real mystery of the novel. Why did he do it? Who is Monsieur Meursault, really? Naturally, the reason supplied by the author is strongly provocative and certainly unsatisfactory for most if not all. The writing is terse, economic, exact. A wonder, really. Readers should note what is said just as well as what is. This book did what few books can. I was left in a state of aesthetic arrest, neither drawn to nor repulsed by story or character, a sort of neutral zone where all fear and loathing have been replaced by pure wonder--much like Meursault himself. THE STRANGER only confirms for me what I have always suspected: in the hands of a master, writing is the highest form of art. What Camus achieves in a few pages most modern authors would spend chapters doing.
  
  
• The definitive statement of existentialism
  By A3RXPCEB81085O on 2004-07-25
  If you don't know anything about existentialism before you read this book, you will after you finish it. Existentialism is basically the idea that life boils down to nothing more than existence. One lives their life while they are alive and then they die, and in the grand scheme of things none of it really matters. Existentialist, whose greatest representative is Camus, do not generally believe in an afterlife, spirituality or deeper meaning to life. For just over 100 pages, you are hit in the face with these ideas while reading The Stranger.
  
  The plot of The Stranger could be summarized easily and completely in a single paragraph. It is really not a plot driven book, although it does have a few moments of suspense. The pithy prose is concise and eloquent in the style of Hemingway, but does not rival him (at least in this translation). The text itself reads quite easily, and you will probably find yourself flipping through pages faster than you usually do.
  
  Overall, The Stranger is a modern classic and well worth the short amount of time that it takes to read. One of the reasons I may not have loved this book is because it is not in anyway uplifting. The book really leaves you with a sense of emptiness as you turn the last page, as it's meant to, so reading it might not be an enjoyable and light-hearted experience. Those interested in reading Camus for the first time may also want to consider The Plague as a first read. The message is slightly more subtle in its presentation and the story is probably more interesting.
  
  
• Enigmatic, profound; definitive Existentialism
  By on 1999-10-15
  "The Stranger" by Albert Camus is an allegory of our times. A young Algerian, Meursault, commits an absurd crime one hot day on a beach. In a world without meaning, he commits a meaningless act. The retribution, however, for murder is profound and so is the walking philosophical problem that Camus has created with his character, Meursault. The reader waits for a logical conclusion but is confronted only with larger questions. "The Stranger" is a definitive Existentialist text because it enacts a conception of the problem of existence and proves its own point via anti-climax. Only Sartre's "Nausea" really compares to "The Stranger" in its impact on Existentialist fiction. It is a critical character study in the psychology of loss for modern times. The Algerian Meursault lives his life as if inside a house-of-mirrors and his pointless crime brings his chimerical existence into sharp relief, exposing the false reflection of his ominous life. With "The Stranger", Camus paints a convincing portrait in a terse style with believable characters who act out the psychological problems we all must eventually face.
  
  
• Absurd Freedom
  By A2RIT4SN6FN3YF on 2003-01-31
  The Stranger is as beautiful as any work of art can hope to be.
  It is in the latter parts of the book, where Mersault's words have a lyrical power not seen previous, that the English translation achieves the haunting effect that must be even more prevalent in the French. The first thing readily obvious is that the character has no emotional connection to what he experiences; he simply experiences. Thus, Camus utilizes an American style, terse and detached. Some reviewers were off put by this. "How could he not care that his mother died? " Attaching immorality to Mersault merely shows a total misunderstanding of the book.
  Camus believed in "absurd freedom," life has no inner value and is futilely cut short, but it is up to us to determine our life in such uncertainty. If one doesn't interpret life, emotion doesn't exist. But the values that society has incriminate you if you don't conform. They make you strange. They take no account of individuality.
  That is the peril of the main character after a bizarre series of events on a sun drenched beach.
  The power of Camus is that even though he creates such a bleak, hopeless human situation the characters still go on as best they can, perhaps even attaining happiness. "One must imagine Sisyphus happy," to quote The Myth of Sisyphus.
  That is also the power and beauty of mankind.
  
  
• Personality Contrasts in The Stranger by Albert Camus
  By A11I30W4T8V9TM on 2000-03-02
  Two strangers, sitting at the same table in a restaurant one evening for dinner. They only encounter one another because there is a lack of available seating, yet the direct contrast between them is beyond comparison. These two people are Monsieur Meursault and the women who becomes known to him as "the robot lady"; two characters in The Stranger by Albert Camus.

  From the moment the robot lady enters the scene, it becomes clear to the reader that she exists solely to give contrast to, the protagonist, Meursault's character. Her personality immediately exudes organization and regularity as she scans the menu, orders her food all at once, and immediately calculates the bill, plus tip, and places it on the table. During the meal, she proceeds to decide, in advance, what radio programs she will listen to each day of the coming week. Meursault describes her as having "a voice that was clear and very fast at the same time." He also notices that her movements are "jerky" and "robot-like" turning her into the epitome of everything he isn't.

  Unlike the woman he is seated with, Meursault does not exude any form of organization, and is certainly not one to go about preplanning his life. His character is easy-going and almost lethargic at times. He lives each moment for what it is and even edges on the point of hedonism. While the "strange little woman" makes her way through life with "incredible speed and assurance", Meursault is content to spend an entire day peering out of his balcony at the world below.

  It can be inferred that the robot lady would have a hard time accepting change or any sporadic event that chanced to disrupt her lifestyle or her schedule. Meursault, on the other hand, could care less about change. In essence he is absolutely indifferent to anything and everything that does not relate to his five senses.

  Yet Meursault and the robot lady do have one small thing in common: regardless of how they live their lives, they both live them only for themselves. The robot lady took no note of Meursault at the table, and though her peculiar nature temporarily aroused his interest, Meursault soon forgot about her too. This overlooked aspect is what ties the robot lady into the theme of the work. The world is indifferent Meursault later discovers, and just as his life meant nothing to this woman, to the existentialist mind, his life means nothing to the uncaring world either.
  
  

• The Stranger: A Tale for all Time
  By A1RQ2UAOLQ0SXG on 2001-03-05
  In the forward to the Mathew Ward edition of this book there is a comment by Camus in which he says that in writing The Stranger he was attempting to write an American book. By that comment, Camus meant that he wanted to write a novel that was easy to read, fast paced, but at the same time full of meaning along the same lines as most of Hemingway's novels. Well, he was definitely successful in accomplishing these goals with The Stranger. Through his character Meresault, Camus is able to make the reader truly see the absurdity of our existence, and he gets us to thinking that maybe, just possibly, we live finite lives. The Stranger though is much more than just a work of existential philosophy, it contains one of the most gripping court trials in literature, putting it on a par for suspense with most present day legal thrillers. Camus is not an author who is going to make you happy to be alive, but he will definitely make you think more about why you're here.
  
  
• Existentialism Embodied in Fiction
  By A39WM5BQ54J8XY on 2004-04-09
  The Stranger, or L'Etranger, has indeed been a staple of high school literature classes in the West for a very long time, and for good reason. Its main character, Meursault, is a young man with quite a blasé attitude toward the trivial things in life and is generally disinterested with the contrived conformities that society imposes on people. Even-keeled and even affable, Meursault enjoys interaction with people a great deal; in fact, he thrives on it. But since he sees all things as mere absurdities, he bores with the things of this life very easily. This is a guy who's truly detached from his emotions; as such, he has difficulty feeling, expressing, or even identifying the existence of emotion within himself. Seen through his eyes, there is no grand purpose in life. There is just existence and the experiencing of that existence. He has passion for nothing and lacks convictions of any kind. Regardless of what occurs in his life, "It's all the same to me" he says. In today's Western culture, Meursault would almost certainly be categorized as having been afflicted with Dysthymia, a condition whose effects are known all too well by many young people.

  The Stranger begins as Meursault hears word of his mother's death. He makes plans to go to the home for senior citizens where she had lived for a few years to fulfill the duty of attending her burial. Meursault is noticeably lacking any feeling one way or another about his mother's death, and he is generally disinterested with the whole affair, more or less pressing through it begrudgingly. Unbeknownst to him, this lack of sympathy will actually come back to haunt him and ends up contributing to his demise. When Meursault returns home from the funeral procession, he continues to live moment-to-moment as he always has. The choices he makes from here on out have a spontaneous vigor, but they only serve to worsen his fortunes even more. There are unplanned consequences for Meursault's actions in the near future.

  As the story moves on, Camus further demonstrates that Meursault isn't really a misfit, as some readers have come to mistakenly believe. Nor is he the product of an indifferent society; rather, he is an original thinker, a free spirit, and an individual who deliberately marches to the beat of his own drum. He doesn't consciously make a choice to be an outcast from society, nor is he rejected by society. He is merely a regular guy who accepts whatever the moment brings, goes about his life unconcerned with trivialities, and doesn't allow the uncontrollable circumstances of life to move him one way or another. He's at ease with that which is, and will continue to be, unknown. Meursault has faith in nothing except that which he experiences and senses. To him, the beauty of life is its absurdity; the illogical events of life and the lack of explanations behind them are embraced without fear or wonder.

  From the opening gates, The Stranger champions existential themes, and Camus is very effective in delivering this philosophy with poignant virtuosity. Among the advocates of Existentialism, Camus (along with Sartre) was one of the most important existential authors and thinkers of the 20th century. Well-known for his spirited, concise, and austere style, Camus was soon recognized among erudite circles around the world as a major literary figure. His belief that life's/mankind's condition is absurd clearly identified him with the Existentialists. He was a proponent of the idea that life, in-and-of itself, is meaningless; thus, life's meaning is solely dependant on whatever meaning we attach to it. Camus' writings are chock full of classic representations of Existentialism, which are embodied in the fictional personas or characters he writes about. The Stranger is no exception, as it plainly represents classic Existential themes.

  In fact, Meursault himself IS Existentialism manifested to its core. Camus takes great effort to focus on Meursault's uniqueness, indifference, and isolation in a hostile environment. Meursault is unconcerned with notions of morality. For him, the issue of right and wrong is quite relative to each individual's perspective on the matter; but more to the point, Meursault doesn't see things in the context of being moral nor immoral. In fact, he has no use for morality really; consequently he is decidedly amoral. There are no particular categorization, limitations, or boxing-in of possibilities. Indeed, for him, one man's horror is simply another man's delight and vice versa, nothing more, nothing less. Furthermore, because of the fact that Meursault sees the world in these terms, he is absolved from feelings of guilt or remorse. He's able to exist in almost any situation with the same nonchalant, careless manner and laissez-faire point of view on life. His modus operandi represents freedom of choice, regardless of societal principles or views of those choices, with an acceptance of accountability for their consequences.

  Though I enjoyed Camus' writing and lucid style, I did find much of the story to be pointless; which is precisely the point actually. Yet, I personally don't find much pleasure in delving into the type of premise that Camus chooses to explore with his philosophy on life; but that doesn't diminish the book itself. It's certainly an important read and much can be learned from it; in particular its themes are deeper understood once you've begun reflecting on it. If you're new to the Existential perspective, The Stranger is a good place to start getting acquainted with it. Even if you don't agree with the philosophy of Existentialism, you'll learn to understand it better and see things from a different perspective. As I see it, having a broad understanding of many things is key to developing an astute intellect and sound discernment.

  Take the time to enjoy this book for what it is. Just don't expect a fairy-tale ending. Once you've finished The Stranger, it almost certainly will provoke you to reflect further, but it will not lift your spirits and is as anti-climactic as life itself.
  
  

• " Read this or not. It doesn't really mean anything."
  By A2N9AQ5T27L1BT on 2001-09-01
  Camus gave birth to a character whose apathy seems to be the
  fruit of pragmatism and a desire for simplicity. Meursault is
  cursed with hyper-sensitiviy to the people and elements around
  him. He becomes exasperated when others say things that he has no
  concern about. Whatever palpable enthusiam he once had has been
  replaced by the need to sate physical demands and momentary lapses of curiosity. His unrestrained stolid demeanor infuriates
  his employer who perceives it as a lack of ambition. It hurts his
  girlfriend's feelings when she ask if he loves her. Meursault's
  cold response isn't filled with malice, just honesty about his
  indifference. If he were simply selfish he'd tell her what she
  wanted to hear to ensure she'd stay in his life. His actions and
  rationalizations are of a man in a phantasm aware of his pillow
  reality. From that vantage point what does morality, remorse, and
  love have to do with anything? Whether the sleeper does good or
  bad he'll wake-up just the same. Meursault is eventually beseiged
  by people who implore him to capitulate to god, and remorse to
  spare his body and soul. They may even care more about being his
  heroic redeemers in the tragedy more they than empathize with his plight. His ceaseless resistance denies them the chance to
  become transitory deities. Meursault is a man sinking in quick-
  sand who spits at the ones holding branches within his grasp. His
  defiance damns him in the eyes of his peers more than any crime
  ever could.
  
  
• The Order....disrupted by one
  By A280GY5UVUS2QH on 2001-11-10
  The North African sun flashing off an Arab knife. The whole book has the feeling of being a delirium though a lucid minded one, in the same way Kafkas stories combined those two (usually) inconsistent qualities. The main character seems overwhelmed by the world. He is a kind of victim of circumstance. The circumstance of being on the beach when the blade flashed in the sun which he felt threatened by and perhaps misinterpreted but also the circumstance of living in a world that makes no sense to him. Like Kafka before him Camus uses remarkable experiences to show the ambiguous nature of existence on every level. The courts themselves are senseless, arbitrarily handing out judgements with no real understanding of what occured either on the beach or in the lead characters head. The courts processes do not lead to understanding, that is not even their goal in this book. Camus shows that it is more important for civilization to retain a certain semblance of order in the face of chaos than to really offer a true order based on any true understanding. A brilliant book. The stars may look down indifferently on what we do here on earth but that fact and this book just make you realize how tricky and important a thing order, and justice can be. Lacking any absolutes to go by man exists in a world he can only partially comprehend. It is hard enough to comprehend who we are and doubly difficult, if not impossible, to comprehend another human . All systems of knowing and judging are flawed. Though Camus brilliantly shows society trying to deny this fact. Society persecutes, villifies, what it doesn't understand. All in the name of order.
  
  
• Indifference and the Absurd
  By AZ890RXMLIO5M on 2004-01-31
  I usually don't write many reviews, but I felt an exigency to write one in light of some of the reviews on The Stranger. Even those who have praised it seem to have missed out on Camus' message, the message which revolves around all of his work. Mearsault is not meant to symbolize some sort of alienated, misfit, product of society like many have said. Camus is not Kafka and Meursault is not Gregor Samsa. The "indifference of the world" is not something which is holding Meursault down, but rather showing him the true naked beauty of the world- one with lack of explanations and reason. The absurd is what arises when man's search for meaning in life is met by the truth that there is no meaning. This is not bad and it is not good, it simply is. Perhaps, a read of the Myth of Sisyphus might help make these ideas clearer and make The Stranger truly appreciated.
  
  
• A magnificent book, pity about some of its readers...
  By A1R3XK0S6LBZS0 on 2004-07-09
  I have never felt the need to comment on reviews posted by others on this site, but I feel that Ted Rushton's review (below) of The Stranger is a disgrace and I am amazed that Amazon have seen fit to publish his offensive and ill-informed half-witted drivel. Anyone who can use the moronic term "surrender monkeys" in a review of a book should confine themselves to the latest piece of trash by Frederick Forsyth and steer clear of authors of the calibre of Camus, whose ideas are clearly beyond him.

  Even if Mersault could be seen as exemplifying the attitudes of the French people - and he clearly exemplifies nothing of the sort - Mr Rushton's anti-French tirade crumbles when you consider some facts he omits to mention. Firstly, Camus himself was active in the resistance during the war and also edited, at considerable risk, the clandestine journal Combat. Secondly Camus' The Plague is an allegory of occupation and resistance and, despite Mr Rushton's assertions to the contrary, exhibits considerable moral bravery. Then he should consider Sartre's Roads to Freedom trilogy, three books which concern themselves unflinchingly with issues of engagement, commitment and resistance.

  In any case what philosophy could be more brave than existentialism, a philosophy that rejects the safety net of God and all other transcendental metaphysical fairy tales and insists that man is morally responsible for his own actions and the consequences thereof?

  And by the way, as an Englishman who has travelled in France I can assure Mr R that the French do not hate the English and we - apart from a few tabliod reading idiots - do not hate them either.

  The Stranger itself is one of the great books of the 20th Century: a masterful study of a man who refuses to conform to the false values and hypocrisy of mass self-assured organised society and ultimately pays the consequences for his bravery in refusing to "fit in". The court room scene is one of the finest pieces of writing you will ever come across, and the book as a whole is beautifully written, intensely moving, and ultimately uplifting.

  Buy the book and ignore Mr Rushton's vile "review"
  
  

• The price of living without passion
  By A1R6KGK8TRJAGV on 2005-11-29
  As with most great literary works, there appears to be endless interpretations of this brief but strangely compelling novel. My own reading of it came while listening to a Teaching Company course on Existentialism. My take on the book will undoubtedly reflect my own prejudices and biases. Nevertheless, here it is.
  
  I find I must disagree with the many reviewers who describe Mersault as an "existentialist" character. Far from it; indeed, Mersault seems the opposite of the existentialist ideal. Nietszche would have despised him for his lack of passion. Kierkegaard would have rebuked his unwillingness to take a leap of faith. Even Sartre would have found his inability to take responsibility for his actions despicable.
  
  Existentialism is far more than just "gloominess" or being fashionably depressed. It is an outlook on life that admits the ugliness of the world and still urges us to take hold of ourselves in the face of all the apparent reasons for despair. In this sense it is a very empowering and positive school of thought.
  
  Mersault is the opposite of the existentialist ideal. He eschews passion in all forms. Love, moral discernment, even opportunities for self improvement are nothing to him. He finds an odd sort of comfort in his nihilism. To him life holds no meaning, and this belief shields him from the sting of grief at his mother's death. It enables him to use Marie for his own pleasure while feeling no obligation, no inconvenient emotions, towards her. It allows him to overlook the shady character and misdeeds of his "friends." Even murder is a passionless act to him, one he regards with no more thought than taking a breath.
  
  The only time he displays strong feelings is when confronted by the chaplain. He flies into rage at the priest's compassion and belief in an afterlife. Such ideas threaten the relentless despair that comforts him. In the end he rejects with finality all forms of hope and takes solace is his belief that the world just doesn't give a damn about him or anyone else. It is this atttitude that not only enables him to think about being beheaded but to look forward to it.
  
  Camus, while not a believer in God, nonetheless had faith that life in worth living, that good and evil exist, and that the good is worth fighting for. In all of these things Mersault is his opposite, and is thus a poignant example of what existentialism has to offer. It is by rejecting his nihilism and passionately saying "Yes!" to life that we find the sense of meaning he so fervently dreaded.
  
  
  
  
• Classic
  By A2BG5T6QQXK0CW on 2006-07-13
  Well, I always feel uncomfortable about writing reviews for classics, so I will let my inferiority complex kick in. I am sure a bunch of very smart people have been writing about this book for decades or centuries, and I am sure they are all correct in their points of view; However, if you can read this book our of pleasure, and not a school assignment, I believe you will enjoy it greatly. Guilt, is one of the psychological tools that are used on us from an early age to try to get us to do the right thing, but, what would happen if a person would be immune to guilt? Read the book.
  
  
• The Absurd Stranger
  By A2SGC12TAX7I7E on 2000-03-01
  Albert Camus' "The Stranger" was interesting. The different sentence structure, indicating a man of simple education, made the book easy to read. However the concepts and ideas presented in the text were those that cannot be taken lightly.

  The absurdity that reoccurs throughout the book brings to light, my opinion of, Camus' meaning. Traditional Christian values are not always substantial enough for the modern man. The main character Meursault is not punished severely for his true crime but for his lack of emotions. As the modern man Meursault found nothing to believe in, his actions are based purely on his senses. He will do whatever gives him physical pleasure.

  The absurdity of Meursault's trial and of Meursault himself shows Camus' belief that the modern man has become more detached from himself and his emotions. The examining magistrate is also absurd in his idea that if Meursault does not believe in God his belief in God is invalid. There is no reason for another's belief to affect your beliefs. This absurdity shows Camus' disillusionment with religious fanatics.

  "The Stranger" raises interesting questions about the absurdity of people's ideas and of life itself. Why do religious fanatics act the way they do? Why would someone develop into an apathetic, purely sensual person, when they had a seemingly normal life? Meursault may be a phenomenon or the first in a newly emerging class of apathetic people.
  
  

• The Myth of Sisyphus: And Other Essays
• The Metamorphosis (Bantam Classics)
• The Plague
• Things Fall Apart: A Novel
• Waiting for Godot: A Tragicomedy in Two Acts