Throughout The Stranger, fate is an underlying issue. When his morals and character are called into question, Meursault stays true to his values. It's as if he was not meant to act in certain ways. Despite what others believe he should do at his mother's funeral, he remains emotionless. But maybe instead of having the inherent actions, he appears to have more free will. Where other people may have acted in certain ways, Meusault chooses his own path. When Marie asks him if he loves her, he responds in a more negative way, whereas many men would've lied to be "nicer". But instead of following what is normal, he decides to do what is best for him.
After the murder, Meursault talks about his crime and talks to a preacher about his sins. When he refuses to believe in the same God, the preacher gets upset. So if Meursault doesn't believe in the traditional form of religion, then he could not believe that a higher being is deciding what will happen to him. It does make life meaningless somewhat though. It's hard to trust in what happens if life is all random.
But when Meursault talks about Maman's death, he says that it's not right for anyone to cry at his mother's death. It was her time and she was probably happy. He cannot know it was "her time" if there is not at least a little bit of fate in life. Some higher being determined when Maman's life came to an end, otherwise death could not be "her time". If it was all random, Meursault could have cried at her funeral because she may not have been ready. But if fate determines all that happens to us, how can we have emotion towards any of it if everything was meant to happen no matter what?
Hmm....there's a lot to respond to here. I would, for starters, question some of the assumptions behind a few of your statements. For instance, M might believe in a kind of fate, as you infer at the end of your blog, but he might believe in an impersonal force that determines fate, not a personal god. Would that fit into his character? I think that might be one of the things that Camus wants us to think about, is whether or not traditional beliefs in God are the only possibility for something like fate. Hindus, for example, believe in something like an impersonal force, which we help construct, and they call it karma. Sometimes we get caught in dualistic ways of thinking, like the world must be either complete randomness, or controlled fate. It might be neither, or one of many possibilities in between, right? That last sentence is a doozy; I think that even if everything was "meant to happen" we would probably all still feel emotion over it--that's just part of our motherboard. Thanks for the interesting thoughts!
ReplyDeletePerhaps for Meursault,a belief in fate lies in his acknowledgement that people are destined to die. In his argument with the chaplain, Meursault states that their are only two types of people; those who are condemned and those who are yet to be. Perhaps the people who ignore this reality of mortality are really the ones trying to avoid fate. Much of Meursault's view of the world is based on the idea that, in the face of death, nothing matters. He could pull the trigger or he could not, he could live one way or another, any choice he makes is still going to lead him to the same, final point. The chaplain's belief that, by relying on a God he can change reality, can almost be seen as a denial of the fate that awaits him. I do agree with Mr. Miles that a belief in fate does not necessarily mean believing in a personal god. Even those who believe that the world is based on random events would probably admit that, even without a god dictating occurrences, many situations still lie beyond our control. If it rains, my day could be changed whether a specific god controls the weather or not. What truly defines Meursault's character is not so much a disbelief in god but the realization that he will someday die. Beyond that reality, nothing else seems to matter.
ReplyDelete