THE SUN AND THE SEA

In his personal narratives of his life in Algeria, therefore, Albert Camus gives to ‘sun’ and ‘sea’
respectively a distinct tonality and if we now turn to his imaginative writing. We can examine the
process by which they acquire a symbolical sense; achieve another dimension, in a word, while
retaining marked affinities with that emotional experience with which they are associated in the
essays. The importance that “sun” and “sea” achieve in this way can best be gauged, not from any
mechanical count of the frequency with which they recur, but rather from the context in which they
appear. Indeed both images tend to emerge fully as symbols only in passages of great significance in
the novels and plays. Situated in such passages, they represent the focal point of a symbolical event
or situation. The overriding metaphysical intention of the author may also supply, in certain
instances, a relevant criterion by which to judge the force of his imagery. In general, one may say
that physical relaxation and mental serenity are associated with evening and moonlight in Camus’s
work, while violent sensation and the impulse to destroy are related to the intense heat and light of
a Mediterranean day.

Albert Camus’s first novel, The Stranger (1942) crystallizes this tendency more precisely in a series of
related acts and offers a striking example of the process by which the sun is transformed into a
symbol. The decisive series of events in this novel begins when the central character, Meursault,
accompanied by two acquaintances, Raymond and Masson, takes a walk along a beach near Algiers,
after enjoying an early lunch. It is not quite midday but already the glare of the sun off the sea is
described as unbearable. The three men walk steadily until they sight in the distance two Arabs with
whom Raymond has already been involved on account of his maltreatment of a former Arab
mistress. Raymond instructs his two companions on the roles they are to play in the event of an
affray. The Arab draw nearer, and it is this point that Meursault observe (The overheated sand now
seems red to me). In this phrase, an obvious physical reference to the intense light of the sun on the
sand foreshadows, in a figurative sense, the violence that is to follow. The color of the sun under the
sun’s rays suggests the shedding of blood. A scuffle ensues with the Arabs in which Raymond and
Masson are involved. Blows are exchanged and then Raymond’s opponent produces a knife,
wounding him in the arm and the mouth. Both Arabs then retreat cautiously behind the brandished
knife, and, finally, take to their heels. While they retreat, the three Frenchmen remains stock still
(nailed to the spot by the sun). Masson and Meursault assist Raymond to return to the hut and
Meursault agrees to explain what has happened to Masson’s wife and his own mistress, Marie, both
of whom had been left behind in the hut. In the meantime Masson accompanies Raymond to a
neighboring doctor where he receives treatment, returning to the hut shortly afterwards. On his
return, Raymond insists upon “taking the air” and when Masson and Meursault alarmed at the
prospect of another fight, offer to accompany him, he flies into a rage. In spite of his outbursts,
Meursault does in fact join him. They walk for sometime along the beach, Meursault becoming
increasingly aware of the overpowering sun which is reflected off the sand in dazzling splinters of
light. The two men reach a tiny rivulet at the edge of the beach and find the two Arabs lying there,
one absorbed in playing a monotonous tune on a reed pipe. The oppressiveness and fatality of the
situations are suggested by reference to the sun and the silence, while the faint sound of the stream
and the notes of the pipe seem to express the potentialities, or at least the possibility, of life.
Raymond, wishing to tackle his Arab scuttles away suddenly and a fight is averted. Raymond and
Meursault return to the hut but Meursault, reluctant as ever to communicate with other human
being and dazed by the sun, does not enter the hut and returns along the beach for solitary walk. In
course of this walk, the sun is described in terms of a hostile presence. It is as though the weight of
the obstructs Meursault’s progress, and the heat that emanates from it makes his body tense
aggressively, as against a powerful assailant. The images employed here by Camus to describe the
reflections of light, (each rapier of light) suggest precisely the hostile nature of the sun. Meursault
longs for shade and sees ahead of him the rock behind which the Arabs had disappeared. Striding
towards it, he realizes with surprise that Raymond’s attacker is lying there alone. The encounter
between these two men now becomes a central point of a complex image of light, so that the sun
and the impulse to violence are invariably associated. The destructive act takes place under the aegis
of the sun and seems to be a simple extension of its influence. The shape of the Arab dances before
Meursaultl’s eyes in the flaming air and the sea is like molten metal. It is at this point that the
possibility of human initiative is suggested, but the sun overwhelms the human will.

It will be seen how the sun, in its direct and indirect manifestations, provides a sort of baleful focus
for these three related episodes and how the incidence of image of light increases as the events
reach their destructive climax. The sun, experienced with such pagan receptivity in the early essays,
again dominates these passages of “The Stranger” and unifies them in so far as it symbological use of
the sun lies in the metaphysical intention that animals Camus’s work the entire novel is an allegory
of that absurd universe which Camus had described elsewhere –The Myth of Sisyphus (1942)-in
philosophical terms. Meursault is the symbol of man perpetually estranged in the world and this
conception is reinforced when Camus, lending the sun this point destructive influence, absolves man
from responsibility- hence from guilt- by reducing him to something less than man, to the status of
an irresponsible element in nature. In this way, the notion of the absurdity of life, which is the
central and governing irony of so much of what Camus has written, is underlined and given dramatic
colour.

In ‘The Stranger’ sea-bathing is one of the main delights of the clerk, Meursault. The sea is the scene
of his first tentative caresses of Marie; it is a source of intense physical pleasure. As the action of the
novel unfolds, however, the sea ceases to be merely a place where physical restraint disappears. To
Meursault, awaiting trial in prison, the sea is identified with his longing for freedom. He associates
the condition of being free with the sea, and the pleasures it offers the motion of running down to
the sea, the sound of the waves, the sensation of his body slipping into the water. The sea thus
becomes the symbol of freedom as contrasted with the confining walls of his prison-cell. In The
Plague one of the consequences of the epidemic is the closing of the beaches and bathing pools of
Oran. Maritime ceases completely and the port is deserted, cordoned-off by the military pickets.
Hence, although the sea is there, it exists in the background and, as The Plague increases in severity,
the presence of the sea becomes less and less real in the minds of the inhabitants of the town. In the
early weeks, the sea continues to have a real existence for them. Since it serves as a palpable
reminder of a link with that outside world with which they are confident of resuming contact in the
near future. But, as The Plague establishes itself in all its terrifying permanence, the sea recedes
from minds that no longer dare to dwell on freedom and are simply concerned to survive within the
imprisoning walls of the town. As a symbol of the freedom, the sea diminishes in reality as the action
of the novel proceeds. That is why one of the later episodes of The Plague seems peculiarly
significant Dr. Rieux, accompanied by one of his voluntary assistants, Tarrou, concludes an
exhausting day by a visit to one of his regular patients, an old man suffering from chronic asthma.
They pass from the sick-room up to a terrace on the roof. It is November; the evening air is mild, the
sky clear and brilliant with stars. In this atmosphere of serenity, Tarrou is moved to give Rieux an
explanation of his motives for joining the voluntary organization created to combat the epidemic
and, further, to reveal something of his personality, his principal and his aspirations, which he
defines as the attempt to become a saint without God. This long personal confession creates new
bonds of intimacy, mutual sympathy and respect between the two men and, at this point, Tarrou
suggests that a bath in the sea would be a fitting pledge of their friendship. Reiux instantly agrees
and they make for the port gaining access to the quayside by virtue of their special passes. Here, for
the first time in many months, they become really aware of the shifting presence of the sea. They
plunge into the water and strike out together with regular, matching strokes. They feel themselves
to be at last: “alone, far from the world, at last free of the city and The Plague.” The swim ended,
they return to the town, full of a strange and secret happiness and ready to resume the fight against
the epidemic. It is impossible not to feel that this episode has the character of a symbolical ritual.
The plunge into the sea is at once an act of purification from The Plague (in so far as the epidemic
represents suffering, evil, and death), a rite of friendship and a means of recovering freedom or at
least, of being recalled to it. In this last sense, the sea might be said to reassert itself as a symbol of
freedom for these two men, to imbue them again with the need to be free. The sea that has been
hidden, remote and ineffectual suddenly becomes actual and effective as a symbol of freedom in the
heart of a city subjected to the arbitrariness and the brute determinism of The Plague.

the symbol of the sun in the stranger by albert camus

Many artists, authors, and composers have put the beauty and warmth of the sun in their
work. The Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh created landscapes that expressed his joy with
bright sunshine. The American poet Emily Dickinson wrote a poem called "The Sun," in
which she described the rising and setting of the sun. The Russian composer Nicholas
Rimsky-Korsakov included a beautiful song, "Hymn to the Sun," in his opera The Golden
Cockerel.Uniquely, Camus' usage of the sun opposes its warmth and beauty in The
Stranger. The sun is a symbol for feelings and emotions, which Monsieur Meursault cannot
deal with. There is a sun motif present throughout the novel, which perniciously
characterizes the usual fondness towards the sun. The sun is a distraction from Meursault's
everyday life and he cannot handle it.The sun first presents a problem to Meursault at his
mother's funeral procession. Even before the procession embarks, Meursault remarks of the
sun, calling it "inhuman and oppressive." Meursault has shown no emotion towards his
mother's death and he directs his bottled-up anxiety at the sun. To Meursault, the sun is an
influence on all his senses, as he cannot hear what someone else says to him. He pours
with sweat, symbolizing the flow of emotions. Meursault constantly thinks about the sun
when one would expect him to be mourning his dead mother. He says, "I could feel the
blood pounding in my temples," which is strong imagery.

At the beach with Raymond, the sun provokes Meursault to commit a crime. He says, "(the
sun) shattered into little pieces on the sand and water." While going to get a drink of water,
the foreign Arab uses a knife to shine the sunlight in Meursault's face. Meursault knew that
all he had to do was turn around and walk away. His emotions (again not shown externally
and reserved) took over. Camus states, "All I could feel were the cymbals of sunlight
crashing on my forehead and, instinctively, the dazzling spear flying up from the knife in front
of me. The scorching blade slashed at my eyelashes and stabbed at my stinging eyes." This
strong imagery forces Meursault to fire and kill the Arab with a revolver. What makes it
worse, he fires four more times to make sure the sun is dissipated for good.

In prison, Meursault changes his views on both the sun, and on his view of life, which are
similar. Meursault was first introduced to the harsh sun at his mother's funeral. Then, the sun
took him over and led him to murder another human being. But in jail, Meursault realizes that
the sun (and life) is warm and friendly. He discovers that you assign meaning to your own
life and that the sun does not need to cover his emotions anymore. In prison, Meursault
adulates the sun. He says, "I moved closer to the window, and in the last light of day I gazed
at my reflection one more time." The sun symbolized his emotions and inner-self, and he
knows this. He would not have admired his own reflection earlier in the novel.Although most
creative thinkers have used the sun as a positive being, Camus' existentialist approach sees
the sun as a barrier to Meursault's emotions. It is not until Meursault can comprehend this
and grasp that there is "gentle indifference to the world," that the sun motif is consummated.

I. INTRODUCTION In existentialism, it is widely viewed that life starts without any specific reason,
and is lived through with lack of energy and desire, and ends by chance. It is defined as irrational,
meaningless and absurd. Immediate perception of life seems different but ultimate stance of life is
similar to each other in terms of lack of energy and desire. Moreover, existentialism claims itself to
be superior on basis of human freedom characterized by freedom of choice and moral responsibility
of deeds, and thus it liberates human life from determinism. Apparently the existentialists tend to
enjoy absolute freedom independent of any external influence, and they even feel that
psychologically but in practice we see that they are controlled by their sense of sincerity and
autonomous quality. It can be observed here that the rationality and legitimacy of human will
depends on taking moral responsibility of an action. It means, to the existentialists, freedom, a
manifestation of psychological quality, functions as the sole principle of moral values guided by
personal sincerity and autonomy. But if freedom includes the concepts like „personal sincerity‟ and
„autonomy‟, defined through social essences, it becomes no longer uncurbed exercise of human will
rather it works like an illusion of freedom under a kind of self-imposed regulations. Albert Camus,
despite being an existentialist, does not want to define life as such rather he takes life as it is which
must be lived through, suffered, defied yet cannot be explained adequately. Meursault, the
protagonist of Albert Camus‟ The Outsider (1942), reflects conflicts in terms of his existence and
essence of society. Though he apparently seems to be psychologically free, he cannot wield his
freedom under social realities. Moreover, through his trial the novelist implies that social essence
stands against individual freedom and feelings. The judicial system appears to be fake and biased
where justice as a the system is a sarcasm and not interested in the murder he committed; rather
the system is considering him as a threat based on some peculiar traits. His non-conformity to the
current codes has been the real cause behind his execution, and it takes to another point that legal
system is not here to judge right and wrong, rather to ensure conformity and to nail peculiarity with
the best possible steps. Thus social essence as appeared in the novel ceases to accept harmony and
tolerance in varieties. It only accepts uniformity at the cost of individual freedom. As an existential
character Meursault seems to have been unaffected by socio-economic factors of the society. The
society where Meursault lives has a potential impact on him leading to his absurdity, causing him to
turn to alienation only when he loses all of his faith in all existing external structures or essences of
society.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

The Outsider projects a gripping story in two parts. Each word as well as each sentence of the story
is natural and reader-friendly but never dull in terms of pleasure and thought .The story is about a
simple man, Meursault who works in a private farm as an employee, leads a semi-confined social life
and enjoys nature and natural instincts. He socializes with a few people Raymond, Masson and
Salamano, and spends a quality time with his girlfriend, Marie Cordona. Following the storyline, two
events are found to be driving force of the book. The first is that, during his mother‟s funeral, he
shows some socially unacceptable attitudes by smoking, taking white coffee and not seeking his
mother‟s face. The second one is that Meursault cruelly but accidentally killed an Arab. This is how
the first part of the story ends. The second part is about Meursault‟s trial and legal procedure which
leads him to the capital punishment. Total absurd mechanism of judicial system reveals through
Meursault‟s minute observations and comments on various events. His feelings, rejections and
convictions have been juxtaposed against social and legal practices. His denial of repentance and
utter hopeless on forgiveness from God have made him villainous in the eyes of law and society. To
the moment, he keeps denying the belief in God and in papal authority. In the end, he was hanged in
public.Mamun (2012) explains the confrontation between an individual and the society focusing on
how the society judges and responds to an individual based on his personality traits strange or akin
to the ongoing social practices, and thus how the imposition of social order curbs individual‟s liberty
in the truest sense. He also demonstrates various encounters between Meursault and society
portrayed in the novel, and symbolizes those events with natural elements. However, his article not
only generalizes society and social elements but also equalizes nature with culture without providing
concrete components of society and their functions in practice. Hence in his article, the activities of
Meursault against society, social codes and practices appear to be inexplicit and intangible in terms
of his relation to the whole dynamics of society. His study ideally showcases constant and strident
conflicts within a society but categorically ignores the maw of society and its apparatuses which
exploit an individual in multiple ways, and push him to the margin. Shobeiri (2013) outlines the
concept of absurdity as Albert Camus explored both in The Outsider and The Myth of Sisyphus, and
brings a parallel analysis of Sisyphus and Meursault in terms of their absurd and happy attitude
towards the absurdity of existence, of life and of death as well. Terming Meursault as an absurd
happy man, he comments that, “Meursault‟s achievement of happiness is nether transcendent nor
sensual; it is, in reality, an affirmation of the dignity and value of life” (Shobeiri 838). He studies
Meursault‟s indifference and dispassion towards society, and analyzes the comportment of the
protagonist through his unconventional ideas about funerals, love, marriage, friendships, religions,
God, life and death. He also demonstrates a progressive development in the character of Meursault
from an undecided absurd man to a happy absurd man, a symbol for modern humanity who “is
neither a stranger to the world nor to himself though he is a stranger to the world of those who have
deluded themselves into believing in a transcendent spiritual union between people” (Shobeiri 844).
His analysis albeit detailed and insightful lacks multidimensionality as it presents one-sided version
of the protagonist as a hero fighting against all oddities of the society. Severe conflicts between
society and the protagonist, exploitative grip of societal norms, the victimization of the individuals
under the wheel-fire of society have not been taken into considerations. Islam (2015) brings a
comprehensive analysis of various existential characters, particularly a comparative discussion
between Meursault of Camus‟ The Outsider and Gregor Samsa of Franz kafka‟s The Metamorphosis.
While analyzing the character of Meursault, Islam comments characterizing him as a scapegoat of
modern civilization which enslaves people entirely and finally leads them to a horrible state of
alienation.

Maher (1998) explains political scenario of the time which strongly motivated Albert Camus to
create such a character called „Meursault‟. He actively justifies Camus‟ slight statement that
Meursault is the only Christ that modern civilization deserves. His interprets the character as a
representation of uncompromising truth, integrity and courage for which he refuses to play the
games of society. This is the core reason why society considers him as an imminent threat and
executes him. However, the article seems to have less interest to examine the multiplicity of
dimensions of the character Meursault. The discussion above about Meursault moves forward
following a linear and narrow perspective where he is regarded as „victim of society‟, „absurd happy
man‟, „scapegoat of modern civilization‟, and „modern day Christ‟. But we will attempt to study the
character Meursault in the light of the salient features of existentialism to see how he is a full-
fledged existential character and beyond. As Jean Paul Sartre in his article “An Explication of The
Stranger” comments that “he is there before us, he exists, and we can neither understand nor quite
judge him. In a word, he is alive, and all that can justify him to us in his fictional density”( Sartre 04)
III. MEURSAULT AS EXISTENTIAL CHARACTER AND BEYOND

Existentialism is popularly known as a philosophical movement which emerged in the 20th century in
Germany and France. The emergence of this philosophic stand was not propelled by any fixed
situation or cause, rather it came out naturally as a response married with deep experience of failure
for all western structures including social, political, economic, ideological and intellectual mode of
thoughts which were considered to be unwavering for good. With the spirit of renaissance and
French revolution, the western world started moving the progress of human civilizations based on
some key concepts of the Enlightenment such as truth, prosperity, freedom, peace and harmony.
These progressive democratic ideals got a tremendous shake due to the World War I, the collapse of
the empire, the Communist revolution of 1917, the Great depression of late 1920s and 1930s, and
finally the outbreak of World War II. Since all these external structures failed to sustain, the only
entity left was internal authority of self or human individual which started concentrating within
leaving all the external factors. This was the reason behind the genesis of existential philosophical
movement. Moreover, the origin of such thought can be traced back to the 19th century German
Romanticism, the brainchild of Kantian philosophy, which focused on human spirit as the centre of
thoughts. Thus, existentialism came to light as a new way of philosophical thinking centering human
individual as conscious subject. There are a few names who contributed to the development of this
movement further. They are Soren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger and Jean Paul
Sartre. Since human individual was the centre of their philosophical movement, they moved forward
addressing a few concepts including primacy of existence, anguish, absurdity, nothingness, death
and alienation.The base on which existentialism stands is „existence precedes essence‟. It holds the
primacy of existence over essence. It gives supreme priority on human being as a conscious subject
rather than an object that is controlled or anticipated by external systems or essence. From this
view, Meursault can be analyzed as a conscious subject both physically and psychologically. As an
individual exercising complete freedom, he consents to accept social norms and values but never
sacrifices his sense of existence. Example can be drawn here that he borrows a “black tie”, and
“armband” from his friend, Emmanuel to attend his mother‟s funereal so that he looks socially
appropriate. Another example of his accepting social norms is that he consents to marry his
girlfriend, Marie Cordona though he does not have faith in traditional concept of marriage. On the
contrary, even in both cases he shows his physical and psychological consciousness of existence and
gives utmost significance to it over any social norms. As he states:

He then offered to bring me a cup of white coffee. I‟m very fond of white coffee, so I accepted and
he came back a few minutes later with a tray. I drank. I then wanted cigarette. But I hesitated
because I didn‟t know if I could smoke in front mother. I thought it over, it really didn‟t matter. I
offered the caretaker a cigarette and we smoked (Albert 14). Here we see, having coffee and
smoking in mother‟s funeral go against the essence of society but he did not hide his feelings that
manifest his existence over essence.

Another mark of existential standpoint is the sense of anguish. It is commonly claimed that an
existential character would have an anxiety or a sense of anguish which is, in other words, the dread
of the nothingness of human existence. Apparently, Meursault does not seem to have anxiety in this
particular aspect. But a deeper level, he has a generalized uneasiness towards the existing social
structures, anxiety towards meaning of life and human existence. Meaning of life and human
existence had not been clear to him until the last moment of life approached him. For this reason,
we see that his realization of life, of happiness changed at the end of the novel. So he uttered,
“Finding it so much like myself, in fact so fraternal, I realized that I‟d been happy and that I was still
happy” (Albert 117). This statement adequately suggests as Maher (1998) writes that he is often
found to express his feelings towards happenings around him. He has some affection for mother,
romantic memories of girl-friend, love for nature, and a strong urge to feel the life with full
exuberance and freedom. He is not indifferent to life and the world what he is apparently
understood rather “the universe is indifferent to his fate, that life will carry on after he has gone
(280).”

The third point is absurdity of life based on its inexplicability, vagueness of its genesis and
uncertainty of destination ending in death. All of these questions make human existence wholly
absurd and contingent fact. In the novel The Outsider, we observe that Meursault reads a piece of
news from an old newspaper about the murder of a young man committed by his own mother and
sister for the greed of money without knowing his true identity. Later on, knowing the truth of his
identity, both mother and sister committed suicide. Reading it thousands of times, Meursault
decides that this incident is either “improbable” or “quite natural” (78). This interpretation explains
life as incomprehensible and totally illogical. This is actually his view on the absurdity of life and
existence.

Other two features which dominate the concept of existentialism are nothingness or the sense of
void and alienation. It is observed that the very character Meursault falls under no definition or
given structures. He is completely free from all philosophies, sciences, political theories and
religions. No angels or essences can explain his thoughts and activities. We see that he leads his life
in his own way. He is present in everyday life in terms of doing job, passing time with girlfriend and
friends but also remarkably absent in those activities. He feels himself alienated from people, society
and social institutions. The reason behind this alienation is that society and social institutions are run
by certain essences and power of reasons while he is driven by his consciousness of freedom and
responsibility. In case, Meursault cannot identify himself with those institutions which he
consequently considers worthless and vacant. Therefore, he prefers natural human relations with
others to any kind of socially defined relations. His alienation leads to the failure understanding
between him and other people of society. The evidence supporting this view can be taken from the
novel when the lawyer misunderstood him. He explained himself saying:

I‟d have liked to have kept him back and explained to him that I wanted to be friends with, not so
that he‟d defend me better, but, so to speak, in natural way. The main thing was, I could tell that I
made him feel uncomfortable. He didn‟t understand me and he rather held it against me. I wanted
to assure him that I was just like everyone else, exactly like couldn‟t be bothered (65-66). Death is
the most relevant and significant theme of existentialism. Most of the existentialists assume death
as the final form of nothingness. According to Jean Paul Sartre, “Death is as absurd as birth—it is no
ultimate, authentic moment of life, it is nothing but the wiping out of my existence as conscious
being.

Death is only another witness to the absurdity of human existence” (Lavine 332). Another very
influential existential philosopher Martin Heidegger holds that the meaning of life and existence
depends on death. He assumes death as the only way to free ourselves from the fear of death and
the triviality of life. Death functions as a pathway to achieve the fulfilment of human self. To
Meursault, death appears as a liberating force from absurdity of human life, and thus it gives life
meaning and accomplishment. As he expressed: “so close to death, mother must have felt liberated
and ready to live her life again. No one, no one at all had any right to cry over her (116).

Meursault is experiencing an existential crisis that has been revealed at the very outset of the novel
with his first statement where he says, “Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday, I don‟t know”
(Albert 01). It is certainly not the complexity of language rather it manifests existential crisis through
which he is going. Alienation, the pivotal theme of existentialism, is working as a force inside him
which has been magnified for being a citizen of colonial state where he always finds himself as an
alien. Another noticeable feature of his character is that he does not have faith in existing social
structures or centre of the society. All of these structures of society seem meaningless to him.
Therefore, he shows a sheer indifference to the society in general, and to the life under this society
in particular. His denial of shifting to Paris for a lucrative offer of job proves his indifferent attitude.
Replying to his boss, he says, “I said yes but I didn‟t mind. He then asked me if I wasn‟t interested in
changing my life. I replied that you could never change your life, that in any case one life was as
good as another that I wasn‟t at dissatisfied with mine here” (Albert 44). Here we see his existential
crisis is also manifested with this denial.

Meursault, the very character, is an example of honesty, truth and integrity. He never tells a lie,
never hides a truth, nor even exaggerates a truth. He speaks out his inner feelings as it is, a bare
truth. For this reason, very plainly he expresses his bearing about his mother‟s funeral and his
response to the question of love and marriage. In a conversation with his girlfriend, he says, “I
replied as I had done once already, that it (love) didn‟t mean anything but that I probably didn‟t”
(Albert 44). Important characteristics of a person are compassion and positivity towards happenings
in life. For an existential character, the most challenging aspect of life is his perception about death.
We see most of the characters with existential crisis are uncompassionate and impatient towards
death which they consider absurd. To them death is equally meaningless as birth and life living in
this world. Moreover, they also believe that “life is not worth living” (Camus 11). The very character
Meursault though does not realize any meaning of life till his proximity to death, at his final moment
he finds death the only way to make birth and life meaningful. Death viewed by Meursault in the
end as fulfilment rather than frustration or an object of fear. Here he can be compared with Christ or
Socrates regarding tranquility in accepting death. And this realization has made Meursault uniquely
resilient character who becomes a shelter for all those people who often remain anxious about
death or do not possess any obvious religious beliefs.

Summary: Chapter 3

The following summer, Meursault’s trial begins. Meursault is surprised to find the courtroom packed
with people. Even the woman he saw checking off radio programs at Celeste’s is there. The press has
given his case a great deal of publicity because the summer is a slow season for news.
The judge asks Meursault why he put his mother in a home. Meursault replies that he did not have
enough money to care for her. When the judge asks Meursault if the decision tormented him,
Meursault explains that both he and his mother became used to their new situations because they
did not expect anything from one another.
The director of the home confirms that Madame Meursault complained about Meursault’s decision
to put her in the home. The director says that he was surprised by Meursault’s “calm” during his
mother’s funeral. He remembers that Meursault declined to see his mother’s body and did not cry
once. One of the undertaker’s assistants reported that Meursault did not even know how old his
mother was. Meursault realizes that the people in the courtroom hate him.

The caretaker testifies that Meursault smoked a cigarette and drank coffee during his vigil.
Meursault’s lawyer insists the jury take note that the caretaker had likewise smoked during the vigil,
accepting Meursault’s offer of a cigarette. After the caretaker admits to offering Meursault coffee in
the first place, the prosecutor derides Meursault as a disloyal son for not refusing the coffee.
Thomas Perez takes the stand and recalls being too overcome with sadness during the funeral to
notice whether or not Meursault cried. Celeste, claiming Meursault as his friend, attributes
Meursault’s killing of the Arab to bad luck. Marie’s testimony reveals Meursault’s plan to marry her.
The prosecutor stresses that Marie and Meursault’s sexual relationship began the weekend after the
funeral and that they went to see a comedy at the movie theater that day. Favorable accounts—of
Meursault’s honesty and decency from Masson, and of Meursault’s kindness to Salamano’s dog from
Salamano—counter the prosecutor’s accusations. Raymond testifies that it was just by chance that
Meursault became involved in his dispute with his mistress’s brother. The prosecutor retorts by
asking if it was just chance that Meursault wrote the letter to Raymond’s mistress, testified on
Raymond’s behalf at the police station, and went to the beach the day of the crime.
Summary: Chapter 4

In his closing argument, the prosecutor cites Meursault’s obvious intelligence and lack of remorse as
evidence of premeditated murder. Reminding the jury that the next trial on the court’s schedule
involves parricide (the murder of a close relative), the prosecutor alleges that Meursault’s lack of
grief over his mother’s death threatens the moral basis of society. In a moral sense, the prosecutor
argues, Meursault is just as guilty as the man who killed his own father. Calling for the death penalty,
the prosecutor elaborates that Meursault’s actions have paved the way for the man who killed his
father, so Meursault must be considered guilty of the other man’s crime as well.

Meursault denies having returned to the beach with the intention of killing the Arab. When the
judge asks him to clarify his motivation for the crime, Meursault blurts out that he did it “because of
the sun.” Meursault’s lawyer claims that Meursault did a noble thing by sending his mother to a
home because he could not afford to care for her. Making Meursault feel further excluded from his
own case, Meursault’s lawyer offers an interpretation of the events that led up to the crime,
speaking in the first person, as though he were Meursault. Meursault’s mind drifts again during his
lawyer’s interminable argument. Meursault is found guilty of premeditated murder and sentenced
to death by guillotine.

In The Stranger, Camus seeks to undermine the sense of reassurance that courtroom dramas
typically provide. Such narratives reassure us not only that truth will always prevail, but that truth
actually exists. They uphold our judicial system as just, despite its flaws. Ultimately, these narratives
reassure us that we live in a world governed by reason and order. Camus sees such reassurance as a
silly and false illusion. Because there is no rational explanation for Meursault’s murder of the Arab,
the authorities seek to construct an explanation of their own, which they base on false assumptions.
By imposing a rational order on logically unrelated events, the authorities make Meursault appear to
be a worse character than he is.
Camus portrays the process of accusation and judgment as hopeless, false, and irrational. Society
demands that a rational interpretation be imposed on the facts and events of Meursault’s life,
whether or not such an interpretation is possible. Meursault’s lawyer and the prosecutor both offer
false explanations, leaving the jury with a choice between two lies. The prosecutor manufactures a
meaningful, rational connection between Meursault’s trial and the upcoming parricide trial, even
though no actual link exists between the two cases. However, the prosecutor has no trouble
imposing enough meaning to convince the jury that a link does in fact exist, and that Meursault
deserves a death sentence.

During his trial, Meursault comes to understand that his failure to interpret or find meaning in his
own life has left him vulnerable to others, who will impose such meaning for him. Until this point,
Meursault has unthinkingly drifted from moment to moment, lacking the motivation or ability to
examine his life as a narrative with a past, present, and future. Even during the early part of trial he
watches as if everything were happening to someone else. Only well into the trial does Meursault
suddenly realize that the prosecutor has successfully manufactured an interpretation of Meursault’s
life, and that, in the jury’s eyes, he likely appears guilty. Meursault’s own lawyer not only imposes
yet another manufactured interpretation of Meursault’s life, but even goes so far as to deliver this
interpretation in the first person, effectively stealing Meursault’s own point of view when making
the argument.

The trial forces Meursault to confront his existence consciously because he is suddenly being held
accountable for it. As he hears positive, negative, and neutral interpretations of his character, he
recognizes that part of his being evades his control, because it exists only in the minds of others. All
the witnesses discuss the same man, Meursault, but they offer differing interpretations of his
character. In each testimony, meaning is constructed exclusively by the witness—Meursault has
nothing to do with it.