We talked in class the other day about Camus' idea of Mersault, where he created a man "ostensibly without consciousness". After reading the first chapter and hearing this directly afterwards, I thought it was bogus, and a failed cause. But once Camus' goal was planted in my head, I began to notice the many techniques and mannerisms he used to achieve this soulless neutrality, and how they make Mersault's actions all the more impactful and strange.
Some of the first examples Camus uses to keep this neutrality are in his emotional life. For one, Mersault never cries. On page 3, while opening with the death of his mother, he actually becomes distracted trying to remember the date of her passing.
Maman died today. Or maybe it was yesterday, I don't know. I got a telegram from home: "Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours." That doesn't mean anything. Maybe it was yesterday.
(3)
Mersault's dismissing of this awful situation is eerily absent emotionally, and is multiplied several times when we find out his dad also died when he was little much later in the book. Although we cannot know the exact relationship between him and his parents, this exact detachment is brought up quite a bit in the rest of the chapter's funeral, and his prosecution later on. He also never mentions himself crying or expressing negative emotion to this terrible news, a point that resurfaces during his jury time when the crowd is against him. "For the first time in many years I felt this stupid urge to cry.", he says, responding to his prosecutor's total control over the jury. (90) His anger and reference to the long time it has been since he cried enhances his emotional detachment in the eyes of the reader, and certainly falls into Camus' neutral vision for the character.
One of my personal favorite mannerisms of Mersault that is used to maintain neutrality is his concise reply to all other character's questions, that are usually used to end the strain of conversation rather than express an opinion one way or the other. Specifically, he'll say "yes", occasionally "no", or something along the lines of "it doesn't matter". On page 4 he replies "yes" to a random soldier on the bus who asks if he's been traveling long, just so he "wouldn't have to say anything else." On page 33, in response to the shady Raymond stating that Mersault is a "pal", he says "Yes" On page 23, he even just "nods as if to say 'Yes'" to some happy soccer fans after they won a game. When Marie asks him if he would want to get married, he says that "it doesn't make any difference to me and we could if we wanted to." (41) He says "No" to when Marie says that marriage is a serious thing. (42) These are just a few examples of the all sorts of situations that Mersault stays in the neutral with quick replies. All of his social interactions are catering to this philosophy that nothing really matters, and it ultimately combines into a character with no consciousness.
As one last note, Mersault is pretty much the worst person that could be put on trial. Basically devoid of morals, brutally honest, and with no strong opinions to win over a jury, he's helpless. Considering he also committed first-degree murder for no other reason than "the sun was in my eyes", it is unavoidable that he'll get clowned by any competent prosecutor, and he does. So I give major props to Camus for setting up that destruction in the courtroom, because it put directly into context what the public thinks of this guy. However, he's not the total worst, since he isn't an Arab. He'd probably be sitting in the row right then thanks to racial conflicts in that area.
Also, I just realized I misspelled Meursault's name about 10 times. I'm very sorry towards any detail-oriented folks I might have offended.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Meursault's dialogue really shuts down any emotion or human connection that could possibly be expressed. By giving a lot of yes or no answers, as you point out, and hardly speaking much in general, Meursault definitely comes across as a pretty uninvolved individual. I wouldn't say his dialogue is completely void of opinion because some of his statements, especially to Marie about marriage, and to the chaplain, do express his opinion quite openly. They just aren't long or passionately argued opinions as we would often expect. I thought Jake's dialogue in The Sun Also Rises was pretty flat, but Meursault's is a whole new level of indifference.
ReplyDeleteYou're definitely right, Mersault often gives dismissive and brief answers. But I wonder if it's always because he's avoiding conversation or he really doesn't have any opinion on the issue. He gets worked up about only a few things really. It seems like he doesn't have an emotional core that would allow him to give more detailed answers in situations like the ones you listed above. This is definitely part of the reason why he digs himself a deeper whole in the courtroom as you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteI really like the point you make about Meursalt's neutrality. Another example of this would be his relatively calm reaction to discovering that he will face a desth sentence, with the book ending as he wishes for a large crowd at his execution.
ReplyDeleteI hate to be like, THAT kid, but I think Meursault's neutrality is much deeper than this. I'm sure u know what I'm talking about; this book seems to bring up this repeating idea of "yeah, he's neutral and kind of apathetic, but does that still make him an asshole? How can we know that there's deeper emotions under his skin or not? He's nonchalant but who are we to decide if that makes him a jerk? The only thing that defines him as a jerk is the fact that he murdered someone."
ReplyDeleteIdk how to articulate this line of thought, but I guess what I'm saying is his neutrality is definitely a really complex part of who Meursault is and his, like, deeper ideas and philosophies. But like as far as method, this is definitely true. Camus uses a lot of really cool literary patterns to not exactly say "MEURSAULT DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT," but rather let that idea wash over the reader, kind of subtly push the reader to understand that Meursault it, in fact, neutral.
This is an interesting spin on Meursault's humanity we hadn't discussed in 8th period. To talk about Meursault "without consciousness" is to look at him relaxing on the balcony, and consider the possibility that Camus is sort of setting him up an impossible example. This would be saying that Meursault is really not thinking as much as we would like to believe, when he is alone. Meursault is Camus' Straw Man, set up to be killed by an unjust death penalty.
ReplyDeleteYou make an interesting observation. I hadn't realized before that Meursault is kind of this 'yes man'. Not to say that he says yes to everything, but just that his reactions are very abrupt, he seems like he is very quick to judge a situation. I think this relates to how he is honestly a really self conscious guy. He always seems to be bothered if people perceive him or his actions in the wrong way. I think his constant need for approval is related to these constant instinctual replies.
ReplyDeleteYeah, you're exactly right about the "yes" that Meursault employs. I just don't see him having much to say. The day when he just sits in his apartment is the perfect physical example of his choice just do not do much, not say much. It makes his outburst at the end, the real speech his gives to the chaplain, so much of a departure from his usual self/actions.
ReplyDeleteThere is a strange kind of rhetorical power in Meursault's tight-lipped approach to conversation. It's a similar kind of cool that we see in Jake Barnes, where everyone else often seems so worked up about something, and he's this neutral, detached presence at the eye of the storm (how often he's silent in the midst of strings of often contentious and heated dialogue). With Meursault and his "neutral" one-word responses, there's this sense that other people talk and talk, and there's a kind of untouchability implied in simply nodding, or offering a vague gesture of agreement but not actually saying anything. And, from inside his narration, this seems almost like an ethical position: if he has nothing to say, he says nothing. It's amazing how rarely people follow this rule in daily life, actually. Pay attention to how often people say something whether or not they have anything to say, simply to keep the conversation moving, or not to seem like dead weight. Meursault doesn't seem at all concerned about such perceptions, and ironically, the people in his like therefore seem to really like talking to him. He's a great listener!
ReplyDelete