In part one of The Stranger the author focuses on using the repeated effect of tiredness and acceptance which suggests that Meursault is not open to society. His view is limited to those he is in direct contact with or from what he observes. All of the different functions of society had not come to his awareness earlier in the novel. Camus also utilizes words that relate to the idea of Meursault finding a new perspective on different events. However, this does not change his general attitude or lack of strong emotion to things of importance. For instance, Meursault did not realize until later that, “some people in the neighborhood thought badly of me for having sent Maman to the home” (45) which gives us the sense that he relies on his own opinions more than society’s standards. The structure of part one is more spread out in order to introduce the major characters that will affect the protagonist’s life in more detail so we could understand why these characters interact in a certain way on part two of the novel.
In part two of the novel, Meursault begins to describe more of his surroundings due to the lack of contact with society for quite a while. One of the common images he evokes is of how the prosecutor analyzes an aspect of the events leading to the murder in regular intervals throughout the trial. At this point, the author’s word choice becomes more descriptive in some parts and ambiguous in others in order to emphasize Meursault’s main interests relating to the recollection of the murder. His thought processes indicate that he is observing with full awareness of his inner feelings.
In part two, some of the characters that were mentioned with less frequency in part one were described in part two due to the fact that the trial had required most of the characters who were in Meursault’s presence to attend. Each witness each gave their own views on the issue revealing the different shades of the protagonist’s actions. For instance, Thomas Perez who was only described through his expressions about the death of Maman, spoke with a complete and unbiased tone when asked about Meursault’s reaction. This shows a few more traits not known in part one (clarity, indifference, and innocence). Celeste is also described in greater detail through the way he clothes evoking short flashbacks in Meursault’s memory which gives the sense of locality despite the official tone of the situation. Later in the trial, Celeste is asked about his view on the murder to which he replies that it was “bad luck”. Although this is not a sufficient argument, it shows that a few people in society had a bit of attachment to Meursault through mutual expressions. They are willing to support a man who committed an act which is taken very seriously by the court.
Meursault describes most of the court scenes as taking place in the morning or late in the afternoon where the air was “already stifling”. The courtroom is where Meursault is given a final chance to see society in action. He views everyone as “a club where people are glad to find themselves among others from the same world” (84) which suggests that he has interest in human relations in a community where he is under judgment. He seems receive the impression that the courtroom is a place of clarification that has to conform to society’s standards. If the views on a certain topic do not match with the expectations, then it is excluded from the examination.
The motifs of the setting are changed at the time when the final judgment was to be made of Meursault’s fate after being claimed guilty without any doubt. Most of the motifs of hope and possible struggle for freedom are dashed when the judge offers the ultimate sentence; the death penalty (through beheading in a public square). The common motif that strikes the reader is a sense of confirmation and emptiness. The enormity of the sentence forces Meursault to give regards to this situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment