This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Melloncollie: The way I learned this book, it does make a case for existentialism. Existentialism, IIRC, isn't just about "meaning of life" blah blah. An important part is taking responsibility for your actions, which is why Meursault wants to be executed at the end. Or am I just spewing nonsense?
INUH: Close. It's been a few years since I read it, but the way I understand it, existentialism states that people's personalities are shaped by their choices in life. Meursault never really makes choices, just sort of being present and doing whatever occurs to him. This makes him not really a complete person. Something like that.
Melloncollie: Informative viewpoints, but Natter. Perhaps the valuable parts can be reworked into the main page somehow.
- Unfortunate Implications: White hero kills Arab man in French-occupied Algeria... so yeah. Arguably this would be a case of Warp That Aesop and/or Completely Missing The Point, given that Meursault doesn't care about race any more than he cares about... well, anything.
- Definitely Completely Missing The Point. Meursault's defense lawyer tells him to say that it was because the man was an Arab, and Meursault essentially says "It wasn't, so why should I say it was?"
- This troper always found it a little odd that they cared so much about this case in the novel. Why was race even brought up? There was racism all over Algeria, which is the whole reason why they rebelled. Racism wasn't considered a motive until the Civil Rights Movement (Well, for the other side it did). All he could have done was said "I shot him because I thought he was going to kill me" (which is partially true) and they'd have cared less.
- Definitely Completely Missing The Point. Meursault's defense lawyer tells him to say that it was because the man was an Arab, and Meursault essentially says "It wasn't, so why should I say it was?"
