Thursday, February 7, 2008
The Stranger Question
Do Meursault’s actions after the trial follow the guidelines set forth by existentialism? “Despite my willingness to understand, I just couldn’t accept such arrogant certainty. Because, after all, there really was something ridiculously out of proportion between the verdict such certainty was based on and the imperturbable march of events from the moment the verdict was announced” (109). Following the tenets of existentialism, should not Meursault just accept this consequence for killing the Arab? On the other hand, is Meursault’s questioning the verdict not letting others decide his fate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I believe that Meursalt's actions after the trial do follow the guidelines set forth by existentialsm. Meursalt did indeed accept the fact that he was going to have a consequence or punishment to face for killing the Arab which follows the existentialist guideline that states, "we are responsible for our actions and must accept the consequences". I believe that Meursalt just doesn't agree with the specific consequence he is given. Although he doesnt agree with the consequence, that doesn't mean he isn't in turn going to eventually accept it in the long run. As stated before, Meursalt voices his opinion on this punishment saying,"there really was something ridiculously out of proportion between the verdict such certainty was based on" (109). This quote shows that Meursalt is simply just questioning the amount of justice that was served in accordance to the verdict given. He is only questioning it for the simple reason that he is once again an existentialist, and doesn't believe in others deciding his fate or rather allowing others to influence his own life of which he should be the only one in control of.
Post a Comment