Is Meursault a dangerous person?
One of the questions that came up during our student led discussion time was the inquiry as to whether Meursault is a dangerous person or not. Many people seemed to have differing opinions on this question, bringing up different attributes about Meursault and his actions to support both views. I can see both sides of the argument, so here are a couple of the main points that were brought up during the discussion time.
The first attribute of Meursault that was discussed was his personality portrayed throughout the novel. A defining factor of Meursault’s personality seems to be his lack of emotion and attachment towards the world and others. One specific example is how he does not have much care towards his mother. When she passed away, Meursault doesn’t have any strong emotions towards the occasion, as seen through the passage, “It occurred to me that anyway one more Sunday was over, that Maman was buried now, that I was going back to work, and that, really, nothing had changed” (24). Meursault furthermore does not even know the age of his own mother. The nonchalant manner of Meursault seems to fuel ideas of his emotionless personality, translating into his crime and how he also seems to have an absence of emotions toward the person he killed, his sentencing, and his time in jail. These attributes are what the prosecution uses a lot during the trial to label him as a dangerous person. I think that in some ways, his lack of emotion or care does translate into his ability in performing the crime, but I wouldn’t label him as a dangerous person because of his personality.
Another aspect shaping judgment of Meursault’s character is that during the duration of the second part of the novel after he has committed his crime, it is almost easy for readers in some ways to forget the proximity of his crime, given how humane and normal that he seems. He seems to be depicted as a reasonable person through his thoughts and actions, going through the mundaneness of his life despite being in jail. Because of this, jail almost doesn’t even seem to be a punishment to him. The fact that there is a sense of normalcy in his thought process in spite of his crime brings up conflicting views on his moralness. In one aspect, these attributes of him support how he does not seem to have concerning or “criminal-like” thoughts, substantiating claims that he doesn’t seem to be a dangerous person. However, his behavior and thought process also shows how he himself in some ways does not see his crime to its fullest extent, further supporting his dangerousness.
Some of Meursault’s attributes and actions support ideas of him being a dangerous person, and others don’t as much. I don’t think there is one right answer to this question, as it can be taken both ways and interpreted differently according to the reader. What are your personal thoughts about Meursault as a person?
This is a great question to grapple with. Ignoring Meursault's crime, I believe society would have inevitably viewed him as dangerous to society. His personality and actions before he kills the Arab stray from social expectations and norms. I think his already perplexing identity in comparison to social expectations makes him seem more dangerous during his trial.
ReplyDeleteGreat post. Meursault's willingness to ignore the morality of his actions is dangerous to society. Everyone else is disgusted with Raymond's actions, but Meursault becomes "pals" with him. He does have a moral code but it isn't developed or revealed to us until his time in prison. Because of that I think that Meursault is dangerous to society; even if I don't think he deserved to be executed.
ReplyDeleteI think in the long run his apathy towards human life, both his own and others, might prove dangerous to society. Although he does not seem to have harmful intentions, there are so many situations in daily life where he might react violently, because he does not use restraint or analytical skills.
ReplyDeleteMeursault isn't "dangerous" but he probably also shouldn't have a gun. I wouldn't say that he has an "apathy" towards life but rather passively accepts the limited nature of existence. I think that maybe Camus is trying to indicate that the majority of society is somehow oblivious to our own end and by becoming more aware, we can lead better lives. Maybe he used Meursault, someone with basically no meaning in his life to demonstrate that his realization of the Absurd is more apparent; this coincides with Camus himself as being a big proponent of creating your own meaning in life.
DeleteI think his lack of emotions makes him unpredictable, which inherently makes him a dangerous person. He does do some good here and there, but I feel that overall, he is probably going to do more harm to society than help. I think that the crime he committed in the novel was understandable if we just ignore Meursault's apathy and look at it from the surface level, but there is just really no telling what else he may do if he was free.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think that Mersault is probably too dangerous to be roaming freely. His spontaneous decision to approach the Arab man shows that he does mind or even provokes conflict in situation where it could be avoided. On top of this, although Mersault may have killed the man in the most rational way that he saw was possible (as a form of self-defense), there were definitely other ways to solve the conflict. Seeing that he chose the most violent and devastating option possible in the moment definitely makes you wonder whether he is liable to do it again and whether he might be dangerous. Whatever the case is, Mersault definitely needs pyschiatric help and someone to keep him in check.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that he is somewhere in between. During the trial, his apparent lack of emotional responses is brought up many times to prove he is a dangerous person. I think that what really convinced people was that they couldn't quite understand him, and something outside of the norm is seen as a threat to society. Despite his trial seeming to focus on all the wrong things and being quite unfair, I do think his lack of reaction could be dangerous, especially when you look at the actual scene where the crime took place. If Meursault can so easily kill someone, probably because of the sun, then it seems like he doesn't quite understand the value of human life, which can be dangerous.
ReplyDeleteI agree that I can understand both sides of the argument of whether or not Meursault is a bad person. I think he is a logical character, and although he might not feel or show emotions clearly, he is still able to interpret other people's basic emotions. But, he seems to lose control when he feels uncomfortable physical emotions. Meursault never had any feelings toward the Arab man he killed, but he still did it. I think that Meursault's ability to lose control over a strong physical emotions does prove that he can be a dangerous person.
ReplyDelete