Welcome, friends! Here is a
link to a general summary of the myth of Sisyphus and
a link to Camus' version (or you can look to the right on this blog, farther down the page). In the same year that he published
The Stranger, Camus published the essay "Myth of Sisyphus," which i passed out in class last week. We can assume that the two were linked in Camus' creative process. As you consider this myth, consider the philosophical ramifications of being a stranger. If a person like Mersault can be the protagonist of a modernist novel, how then would you define him heroically? How has our idea of a hero changed? Did Camus redefine the hero, or at least the protagonist, in this book? I would like you to review Sisyphus' story and then discuss how the quote from the essay (below) may or may not apply to the modernist philosophy espoused in
The Stranger.
"It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men."
You should post 250 words here by September 10. Title your response with your first name and last initial.
24 comments:
To define a cold blooded, almost emotionless killer as a hero is quite the challenge. As a modernist hero, Merseault takes action without second thought, he doesn't even hesitate for one second about thinking that he might do life in prison or worse. He just pulls the trigger and blames it on the sun. I suppose in his defense one could say that it was self-preservation considering the Algerian man stabbed his friend earlier that day. Loyalty, in my opinion, would be the strongest emotion displayed throughout the entire novel which really isn't saying much. He respected his new found friend and enjoyed a nice day at the beach prior to his hostile engagment with the Arabs. Merseault is just an average Frenchman who succumbs to the pressure of shooting another man. I blieve that our idea of a hero is actually morphing into an idealistic anti-hero. Someone who doesn't really stand out at all, but steps up to the plate when fate calls them. In this case, the universe lays out a wicked scheme in which a man must die and in this dog eat dog world, Merseault wants to come out on top, and he does. As for Camus' similar thoughts between Sisyphus and Merseault, I find their endings to be extrardinary. For both men being mortal and anti-heroes, they have an astounding, almost heroic breakthrough towards the end of their stories. Both men realize that they could care less of their fates because in this absurd world everyone dies eventually, and the only thing that matters is when it happens.
Mersault from “The Stranger” is an abnormal character. He is apathetic and macabre. There are not many ways to characterize him as a hero but if I had to I could. I would say Mersault is a hero because he shoots the Arab that attacked his friend. Although it is a crime and he soon will be killed himself, for the crime, he accepts it. That Arab could have come back for his friend and tried to murder him, but Mersault put an end to that possibility. If we use mersault as an example of a hero our idea of a hero has changed greatly. We are using the “eye for an eye” tactic to describe him as a hero. The Arab attacks Mersault and his friends, so Mersault kills him. I think that Camus did redefine what a hero is in this book. He made Mersault a hero because he knew what he did and he knew he needed to be punished for it. Not only did he know being punished was right he accepted he would die. Mersault never tried to lie to anyone to tell them he “cried at his mother’s funeral” he never lied about anything that he had done. He never tried to make himself sound more appealing to the jury he just told the truth and accepted his fate. I do believe the quote “It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men” applies to “The Stranger.” Mersault’s fate was to die, no matter what. Everyone must die at some point in their lives. Mersault’s fate to die was decided by men, a jury.
MadelineD
Sisyphus and Camus’ The Stranger both stem from the same notion that no matter what you do, there is no free and happy way out of life. Both Sisyphus and Mersault are the absurd heroes of their stories, though they both differ in their tests and trials. Sisyphus was a trickster amongst the gods. He was cunning and conniving, and usually found himself in situations where his deliberate action caused trouble. Whereas, while reading the stranger, Mersault seems to know nothing of what he is doing. This is not to say he is absent-minded or dumb, but more careless with no sense of how his decisions affect others. Though the causes behind Sisyphus’ and Mersault’s actions differ between one another, each one has the same outlook as to where their decisions take them. Camus describes this well within his essay, “It makes fate of human matter, which must be settled among men.” Both Mersault and Sisyphus think that no matter what you do or what actions you make change the way your life ends. Some may say they are accepting, others may say they are just plain ignorant. However, this belief makes them both protagonists of their modernist tale. In a sense, they are rebelling against life and may even believe that they know more or are above the human race. They both take their punishments in stride; because they both feel that there is no point in fighting it. The human race in itself decides what is right and wrong and the punishments that should be carried out against those who don’t adhere to the law. In this way, Sisyphus and Mersault are both heroes within their stories.
The novel, The Stranger, is at first assessment a seemingly very strange and mind- boggling book. However, with further analysis, it is clear to see that this novel has major similarities with the classic myth Sisyphus. In the story, The Stranger, the character that is most easily mirroring Sisyphus is Mersault. The two characters have many of the same behavior qualities. The Greek myth of Sisyphus shows that he is known as a trickster among the God’s and is never up to any good. In the myth Sisyphus is portrayed as someone who does not feel apologetic towards the victims of his mischief and pranks. On the contrary Sisyphus is portrayed as rather insensitive and merciless. This is shown when Sisyphus is sentenced to the darkest depths of the underworld and performs the ongoing task of rolling a boulder up a hill, when the boulder would reach the top, and then it would simply roll back down to the bottom where Sisyphus would have to repeat his task. These characteristics are quite similar to those given to Mersault that seem to develop throughout the story just as they did in the Greek myth. For example, Mersault portrays no emotion towards the death of his mother. Rather, he sits near her casket emotionless; this is the first time that the reader can truly see the traits of Sisyphus present in, The Stranger. Another large comparison between the two is that both of the characters committed murder and had no signs of regret or remorse. However the two stories can also be viewed in contrast as well. Sisyphus, in the Greek novel is an antagonist, however Mersault can be viewed as a hero in modern writing. This can be seen with the fact that he was honest, and never tried to change his opinion, or himself to impress anyone. When he was on trial, he never tried to manipulate the court or state any lies. Rather, he understood his fate and was willing to accept the consequences. Although he did this without sings of remorse, this makes him seen as a hero. In contrast to the modernist writing, Greek literature views Sisyphus as a complete antagonist.
Mersault and Sisyphus can both be described as heros because Mersault was the one that shot the Arab after he was attacking his friend. Sisyphus was caught trying to steal secrets from one of the Gods. Our understanding of a hero has changed because we see them as doing something good rather than doing something bad like in the movies. The quote "it makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men" applies to both of the stories in their own way. Mersault killed the Arab and he got the death penalty for what he had done. This is what the law had set out in place for anybody that killed another person. Sisyphus was caught stealing secrets and he was forced to roll a stone up a hill only later to find out that it would roll back down the hill. Both of them faced challanges in their own ways throughout the stories. Campus did refine a hero to some degree and had the protagonist do something in a self defense mode. Both of these people in a way are heros
To me, Mersault is a very twisted individual. He doesn't appear to care about anything that happens to him and he also doesn't accept responsibility for his actions, in particular when he murdered the Arabic man. Although the Arab flashed his knife first, Mersault's actions were unjustifiable and inexcusable. Most people would not just shoot someone without a specific reason or they at least would express some kind of remorse for their actions. Mersault claims that he was hot and that the environment influenced his actions. This defense is very unbelievable because people who act irrationally cannot claim that the environment had any true influence on them because there is no reason to believe the same event wouldn't have occurred had the weather or any other environmental factor been any different. He also seemed very cold when his mother died and didn't even want to view her body at her funeral. He was a very emotionally disconnected person and didn't care who was hurt by him and felt no sorrow or sadness for anything he had done. He was basically unknown to everyone around him because he was so emotionally disconnected from those who surrounded him and he was never truly close to anyone, even his supposed friend. Mersault was a stranger because of how mysterious he was to those around him and he didn't care about what happened to him, even when he was faced with death.
I personally dint like Camus version of Sisyphus's tale because it seemed to assign unjust importance to a simple thing. that is not to say that I don't get the whole it doesn't matter what you do in life or death theme that is portrayed but i do thing Camus could have done it in a more efficient way. Perhaps if he rewrote Dante's Inferno he could more accurately portray his modernistic themes as well as wright something that is actually interesting to read. I am not his biggest fan. However you can not overlook the way that he did show his theme; as much as i will bash him for it, he did manage to force me to make an rather large intellectual leap in order to comprehend what i was reading.
The quote which you have presented us with essential carries the theme of most of Camus' work; however the quote goes as far to say that the only meaning man's work has is what we attribute to it. This is essentially the quintessential modernist idea which is what Camus' and other modernist works attempt to demonstrate. This quote could also be interpreted to mean that man is in control of what we do and how we do it. That is to say that we are what we make of ourselves and we should strive to make the best of what we have. Now, I'm not so naive I think that my second explanation is what the author intended I just wanted to add my two non-modernist cents into the argument
When people today think of a hero, they usually think something along the lines of, "When it truly matters, they step up to plate." That, however, doesn't really happen in Camus' The Stranger. In this story, the hero,Mersault, is portrayed as an apathetic, emotionless, existentialist. He can only be defined as being a "hero" in a very literal sense; the story is about him and his struggles and how he overcomes them. Through that, he is the hero of this story. This can somewhat change the classic idea of a hero that most of us have in our heads. We often think of a hero as someone that is generally good, does the right thing, and has a somewhat profound effect on the world around him/her. In a sense, Mersault did change the world around him; he took a man's life, he made a girl fall in love with him, and he made a friend with whom he probably had some influence over. As much as Mersault would probably hate to admit it, he did have an effect on the world at large. Perhaps not in a ground shaking sort of way, but in a way that those peoples' lives would have been different without him in it. Mersault's existentialist ideas came from Camus'fondness of the Sisyphus myth. The hero in that book, Sisyphus, shares some parallels with Mersault, if only in the way their stories end. Sisyphus is doomed to forever push a boulder up a hill and when it reaches the top, it rolls all the way back down. During this time, Sisyphus (in Camus' reasoning of the myth) is conscious of the world at large; at all that he is missing out on. He did so much with his life, yet it all amounted to this eternal purgatory. Mersault experiences a slightly similar, yet less cruel, punishment. He is charged with death sentence for shooting a man in cold-blood. During his confinement, he realizes that everything he's ever done with his life has amounted to nothing in the end; the odd part about this: is that he doesn't seem to care one little bit. He is completely content with that truth because that's what he's always known, he believe himself to be truly right. He is completely happy that he was right all along, and that is apparently good enough for him. He was a man and he decided his own face, he had complete control over it, at least according to him.
Meursault from Camus's the "Stranger" is just that, strange. He goes through life without much care in the world; he does not care about anything really people, possessions, and family. He has a girlfriend and it is just her who wants the relationship, he could care less, he goes to the funeral of his mother and shows no emotion at all. Meursault eventually kills somebody and just simply blames it on the sun. Now when I think of a hero I think of somebody like Superman, the classic good guy that looks to help those in need. It is hard to call Meursault a hero with the way he views life he just does not care but if one is looking for something heroic to attribute to Meursault the man he killed stabbed one of his friends so it could have been in defense of his friend. Meursault gets arrested and eventually comes to the realization of what he did and accepts his death before his execution. I guess this realization could make Meursault a hero in some sense because he goes through life without a care but then accepts is bad mistakes and his death. Meursault and Sisyphus are kind of related because Sisyphus like Meursault goes through life not realizing the severity of his actions and then after being condemned to eternal damnation he comes to his on realization like Meursault did and accepts is actions and consequences.
Meursault from Camus's the "Stranger" is just that, strange. He goes through life without much care in the world; he does not care about anything really people, possessions, and family. He has a girlfriend and it is just her who wants the relationship, he could care less, he goes to the funeral of his mother and shows no emotion at all. Meursault eventually kills somebody and just simply blames it on the sun. Now when I think of a hero I think of somebody like Superman, the classic good guy that looks to help those in need. It is hard to call Meursault a hero with the way he views life he just does not care but if one is looking for something heroic to attribute to Meursault the man he killed stabbed one of his friends so it could have been in defense of his friend. Meursault gets arrested and eventually comes to the realization of what he did and accepts his death before his execution. I guess this realization could make Meursault a hero in some sense because he goes through life without a care but then accepts is bad mistakes and his death. Meursault and Sisyphus are kind of related because Sisyphus like Meursault goes through life not realizing the severity of his actions and then after being condemned to eternal damnation he comes to his on realization like Meursault did and accepts is actions and consequences.
There is clear and evident similarities between Sisyphus and Mersault's character. How we can see Mersault as a protagonist is hard to believe based on his actions in the book. He without remorse or any forthought murdered and Algerian man and blamed it on the sun. The fact that he can be seen as the hero of this novel is hard to understand but a hero is seen differently by everyone. Mersault was an emotionless, blunt, and sort of cruel character in the "Stranger" and yet he is the hero, how is this so? Nowadays our person opinion of a hero or protagonist is morphing into someone who more or less get's results regardless of how they acheieve these results. In the Stranger Mersault does shoot a man in cold-blood but he was protecting his friend who was earlier assaulted by that man.145 Althought Mersault did commit this crime he did own up to it. I think this is how Camus redifined a hero, he stood up for what he had done and and didn't try to hide what he had done. Sisyphus and Mersault both did what the felt was best for them and did not look out for anyone else. Both men understood that we all die eventually and accepted it in an ignorant manner, they realized that our fate is that we all will eventaully pass on. In the end of both stories they gain an understanding and are ready for whatever happens to them. Camus is truly a brilliant writer having changed our personal beliefs as to what a hero is, this can be seen in both of these examples.
BrianT
It is difficult to express mersualt as heroic. A character who is uncaring, apathetic, almost without emotions, and who killed a man because it was too hot and sunny is not what comes to mind when i think of a hero. While mersault may not be a hero, he absolutely redefines the protagonist. In all types of literature we find that the protagonist usually contributes something to the good of society, meanwhile mersualt is out killing an arab without a valid reason. What makes his character even more unique was the fact that he showed no remorse or regret for his actions. In the end he doesn't try to fight his case, he simply accepts his fate, and accepts the fact that he killed a man like it wasn't a big deal. For this reason I don't think this quote applies to The Stranger because while sisyphus loved living his time on earth, Mersualt couldn't care less about his own fate.
It some what kills me to have to say that Meursault is a hero. The very first definition of hero was loyal and brave to a fault; a perfect example would be Beowulf. Slowly writers started to make heroes more like every day people and now the common man can be a hero. Meursault is not a common man he cares less than the common man causing him to almost seem like the bad guy. This book makes you question has our idea of a hero shifted past common man to something the opposite of Beowulf. Since we are little we are bombarded with the idea of a hero as one who saves this might cause us to perceive Meursault as an anti hero because he is in the world for himself and himself alone. As an existentialist Camus was rooted in the idea of the individual which is reflected in Meursault’s character. This is where Meursault and Sisyphus share the same qualities. Sisyphus tried to take the most out of life and even tried to escape the underworld his goal was to make his life good for him and was later punished for it. The same happened to Meursault. This idea perfectly relates to the quote, “It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men." It means that our fate is settled by us, Meursault and Sisyphus both made the decision to live life for themselves so in the end they were responsible for their punishment.
In both "The Stranger" and the myth of Sisyphus the definition of hero has not been what we usually would expect. The character of Mersault is the protagonist of the novel "The Stranger" but he doesnt seem like the typical hero the we come to expect. Mersault is a horrible induvidual and doesnt seem care what happens to anyone. After Mersault murders the arab man he doesnt even know why he did it. He just blames it on the sun. Most people do not view a hero as a person who has no emotion and doesnt care about human life. Mersault eventually understands the wrong he has done and accepts his death. The character of Sisyphus is similarin many ways to Mersault because he also didn't care about others and didn't understand the consiquences of his actions untill he was punished. Both of these characters show a different meaning to the word "hero" because they do not preform and good or decent actions but they eventually learn to accept the consiquenses given to them.
In Camus' book "The Stranger", Mersault is seen as a very strange person do to his reactions and feelings towards life and things around him. This is how you can say Mersault and Sisyphus are similar. Throughout "The Stranger", Mersault wouldn't show any feeling or remorse towards his actions or anything that happened to him. In the beginning of the story he doesn't show any feelings toward his mothers death. He simply accepts the fact that she died and moves on. He also doesn't care about his relationships with his friends or his girlfriend. Mersault only cared about himself and doesn't care about others feelings. This makes him seem like a "stranger" through the eyes of the reader because today, people would react differently to the things that happened to him. Camu was very smart on how he made Mersault and Sisyphus link together. Both of them didn't care what their actions did to others. Now to say that they both are heroic is a stretch. Today we think of heros as saving the world from evil and protecting the innocent. Neither Mersault nor Sisyphus are portrayed like that in their stories. You could say that Mersault "protected" his friend from the Arab by shooting him but his excuse for killing the Arab was because of the sun. Heros don't kill others for no reason at all, or for a little reason like the sun. In the end though, they both realized what they did was wrong and didn't blame anyone else for their actions and accepted their fate. This is how the quote "It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men" applies to the modernist philosophy in "The Stranger". Our fate isn't written or set in stone for us. Through our actions and what we do throughout our lives shape our fate. In both stories Mersault and Sisyphus both start off on the wrong foot but later understand what they did and both accept their punishments.
A hero in my definition is a person who puts the effort to help someone in need while knowing they are putting themselves in danger. In The Stranger, Mersault is a hero but seen in a different perspective. Camus made Mersault a hero to his friends. He killed this Arab man because he was going to harm one of his friends. Camus portrayed Mersault as an absurd hero who sees that life is short in an irrational world and chooses to accept it rather than fight it. He accepts that he did the crime of murder and accepts his punishment for it. He is not affect by the fact that he is sentenced death and sees this as the way he will leave this world. Mersault showed no emotion during that important and crucial part of his life. Sisyphus and Mersault are similar in the way that they see their efforts in life meaningless due to the fact that the end result is inevitable and unchangeable. Sisyphus knows that when he reaches to the top of the summit the boulder rolls down and he must bring it up again. Mersault knows he will die eventually and chooses to accept it early than usual. The quote, “It makes fate of human matter, which must be settled amoung men.” is represented in both stories by the main characters fate to be punished for their crimes.
Camus addresses the consciousness of Mersault and Sisyphus through their fate. Sisyphus knows his fate and he has the opportunity and does rationalize his fate, he has consciousness. Mersault, on the other hand, does not care about his fate. If we know our fate, do our lives hold meaning? Mersault remarks, “Nothing, nothing mattered, and I know why.” He knows he will be executed by a society in which he cannot exist, but he resigns and thereby assures himself that the middle is meaningless. Before his arrest, he knew he would die. Perhaps this knowledge justifies his living moment to moment. Mersault desires to confront his fate. This reveals Mersault to have the heroic qualities of Sisyphus. Camus addresses the consciousness of Mersault and Sisyphus through their fate. By the ability to recognize his past, Sisyphus shows how Mersault lacks unhappiness. Mersault has nothing with which to compare the pleasure he feels instantly, so he is at the least continually content and possibly perpetually happy. Conversely, Sisyphus understands his past yet chooses not to compare his past to the present or his known future. When the priest asks Mersault if he would prefer a different life to his own, he remarks he wants a life “where I could remember this one.” Camus has defined supreme knowledge through consciousness. we could be sure of someone else’s present mental state as it related to our own, we could confirm not only existence, but find true knowledge. Mersault exists only in the present, and it is only the society in which he lives that forces him to have a connection to his past actions. Similarly, Sisyphus is condemned to roll the boulder because of his past actions. In Mersault’s relation to society, however, he would prefer to treat the past as unstable and society must hold him accountable for it. Everyone is, either by their own cognition, or by the society in which they live, responsible for their past actions. The frustration of Mersault and the solipsist is that we cannot truly know that these actions ever truly existed. So it is because we have a consciousness that we are held accountable for our past, but because we are conscious, we can confront death. Society, then, becomes an external force that holds us accountable for our actions.
Mersault is very difficult to define heroically. By no means is he the classic example of a hero. In fact, he seems to be the antithesis of what a hero should stand for, for example, he killed the Arab only because it was so hot outside. Mersault may lack the qualities of a traditional hero, but that is exactly what makes him a modernist hero. Mersault is seemingly emotionless and extremely eccentric, and his characteristics really contribute to the strange feeling of the novel. The idea of a hero has not really changed too much, but Camus certainly does try to reshape the idea of a hero, but has certainly changed the meaning of the protagonist. Mersault does share some similarities with Sisyphus, for example, both men are cold, selfish, and outsiders. Both men are somewhat estranged from their respective societies. Sisyphus is said to be a highwayman who hurts and robs unsuspecting passersby without even caring, and Mersault is a murderer who shows no remorse for his murder and projects the blame on nature. They are also absurd men. It makes absolutely no sense for Mersault to do what he did, and the same goes for Sisyphus. The only difference in them is the way they treat death. Mersault is very accepting of his death, which adds to the oddness of his character. Sisyphus however, does not particularly accept his death as much as Mersault does. Sisyphus did not want to go back to the underworld after he returned, but Mersault seems to treat the world with indifference and apathy. Camus certainly did show his modernist philosophy through Mersault.
Mersault and Sisyphus are both protagonist that really change the way the reader looks at the term hero. Mersault doesn't become a one through any good deeds, but instead through his realization of how life really has no meaning. His actions throughout the book, along with societies reactions, show how he goes against the normal way of thinking. People believed him murdering another person to be a disgusting act that is punishable with death itself. Mersault felt nothing from killing the man, and comes to the sudden realization as to why before he dies. In his deep realization that everyone has the same fate of death, no matter what they do, Mersault was able to find happiness. He is a hero in a sense that he found a meaning to his life, and not from his actions that led to him finding that meaning. Camus brilliantly redefined the meaning of a hero in this novel, by changing the way we viewed one. Sisyphus' story has a similar ending realization, in which Camus viewed him pushing the boulder as accepting his fate, but also being in control of it. The quote from his essay on Sisyphus tells how both men's punishments lead them to see that their fate is their choice. That accepting this also brings a freedom with it, for Mersault it is his discovery of lifes meaning, and for Sisyphus its through his discovery that he decides to move the boulder (which is his way of controlling his life). Camus showed how these characters are heroic in their own way, and redefined what it means to be a hero.
The main character in "The Stranger" is a man named Mersault. Mersault does not show much emotion throughout the novel. When he was at his mother's funeral, he did not show that he cared. His girlfriend puts a lot of effort into their socalled relationship, while Mersault does not really care. He, also, killed a man, and he seemed like it was almost nothing. He blames those actions, toward the man he killed, on the sun. It is very hard to see Mersault as a protagonist by the way he acts. Mersault did shoot the man that was trying to kill his friend. He was trying to protect his friend, and Mersault now gets punished for it. In that sense, he could be considered a hero. Mersault acts almost the same as Sisyphus. Sisyphus does not really care about how others feel. He looks out for himself. Sisyphus is sentenced to the underworld, which is where he performs the same task over and over again. That task is pushing a boulder up the hill, and when he gets to the top, the boulder would just roll back down, and Sisyphus would repeat. Mersault and Sisyphus do not realize how bad their actions are. However, they both accept their consequences. Maybe that is how Mersault is a hero. Mersault never lied to the court, and he accepts his mistakes and takes the consequences. The quote, "It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men," in my opinion, means that man is in control of their fate, or destiny. Mersault might have been able to change his fate, but he came to the realization that everybody dies at some point. Mersault knows that he is supposed to die. He just accepts it.
Works of literature throughout the numerous centuries through change, development, and revamping have always typically contained to some extent a protagonist. The majority of contemporary protagonist however would have been viewed as the "good" guy. The character whom exhibits wide range of benevolent actions and would appear to extricate and persons who were in a difficult situation. Mersault is in the novel deemed the protagonist but he doesn't exemplify the characteristics of the typical hero. In many ways he is contradictory to what would be seen as a protagonist. Mersault is more of a fastidious man with very little actually pleasing him or stimulating some degree of emotional response. In doing so Camus in various ways has revamp the look of the hero. Mersault's life faces voluminous challenges around the duration of the work and he seems to change the perspective given to a protagonist. Previously there was almost a permanently established a daft assumption that the good guy was indeed good on all aspects of living. Camus reveals otherwise so that it is seen a protagonist can be anyone.
The quote that is relating to the book in deprived from the notion that man determines there own fate. This thought almost seamlessly fits in with the morals that are exemplified in the work. The quote is saying that man determines their own fate which is to a certain extent is true and believable. Seeing as though Mersault took his own fate into his hands with the malicious murder of the Arab man the quote has a lot of relative meaning to the novel.
I believe that Mersault is not the first protagonist to be a stranger to other characters and the reader alike, but he is probably the most famous in the modern age. His strangeness stems mainly from his incredible neutrality and terse dispassion, as well as from his distance from the ideal hero and anti-hero. He is driven by arbitrary means instead of selfish or selfless ones. What method is to be found in this walking madness? A possible answer lies in Camus' essay on the myth of Sisyphus, in which he describes fate as "a human matter", one that must be addressed by the human heart. If only a man can determine his fate, then perhaps Mersault based his actions on how he perceived his world; his actions were indifferent because he saw the world as uncaring. In other words, only Mersault could decide how meaningful and orderly his life was, and he found a sort of peace in the fact that he had realized this before his death. It is no coincidence, then, that Camus also wrote of Sisyphus finding himself accepting his absurd existence and determining his own reaction to his punishment. Even if he can no longer control his ultimate fate, he is still the master of his mind and self: and that is what he and Mersault truly needed.
I believe when people picture heroes they think of someone who has supernatural powers and a person that is perfect. Tree heroes that pop into my mind are the Green Hornet Batman, and Spiderman. All of these heroes are depicted as being human at one point but are no where near human. They all have some sort of gadget or advantage and that is why I think Camus simply opened up a new way to look at heroes. In the case of Mersault he did indeed murder someone and people do not typically associate that with a hero but we must remember he is human and humans make mistakes. Although the weather isn’t an excuse for murder (nothing is) he was in a stressful situation and the man stabbed his friend earlier, so I believe he simply made a mistake. After all Mersault did accept his punishment for the crime he committed. Sisyphus should also be looked at as a protagonist because he did what any other mortal would do. I don’t know one person who could visit the infernal darkness, return back to earth and go back to the underworld by choice. His fate is where he truly shows he is a hero and greater than the average man because he accepts that he will be tortured for all eternity and that is why Camus describes him as stronger than the rock and superior to his fate.
Julia P.
Most people around the world have different definitions for a hero. To Albert Camus, I believe, a hero is a person who does well in mind and can overcome fate. Although my personal definition of a hero differs, I believe that Camus thought a hero to be a good person who is strong in faith and spirit. I’m sure he thought that a hero could outwit others and have knowledge on how people act. I even believe that Camus saw heroes to have a lot of the feelings as his character Meursault in The Stranger. Personally Camus did not change my view of a hero, but he was able to define a new type of hero, an absurd hero. The hero part of ‘absurd hero’ is not as important as the absurd part.
Albert Camus’ idea of absurd is an extraordinary view. He used the absurdity of Meursault and Sisyphus’ situations to exemplify why they were heroes. They were absurd because their situations were out of the ordinary and would torture any human to insanity unless you were extremely strong of mind. This is what made these two characters heroes. Absurdity is the condition of having no meaning to one’s life. Meursault fell in this category after being sentenced to the guillotine and Sisyphus fell into it when punished to ceaselessly roll the rock up the mountain. The absurdity in their situations would especially drive one crazy who thought fearfully or sadly upon their situations. The two characters though were drawn to hate their fates and torments which in turn won them victories over their fates by concentrating less on the punishment but more on just the acceptance of the absurdity.
Post a Comment