Psycho Killer, Qu'est-ce que c'est
In class, when we were discussing Kamel Daoud's response novel, The Meursault Investigation, I was intrigued by the notion that the Stranger was not an immediate account of the events of the novel, but rather a novel written by Meursault in prison. It got me thinking about how Meursault could be an unreliable narrator.
Meursault's lack of emotion during most of the novel, and the way he shot the Arab made me wonder if Meursault was a psychopath. Meursault does not feel anything when shooting the Arab, save annoyance at the sun's rays.
Could Meursault be writing his memoirs to try to seem more human? The lack of emotion for most of the novel could be because he fails to keep his mask of humanity on, before realizing his mistake and overcompensating at the end.
I think that this interpretation of the Stranger adds an even darker element to the novel, as it calls to mind the disturbing memoirs of serial killers from their bars. The Stranger almost becomes a literary version of one of John Wayne Gacy's self portraits. This interpretation also examines Meursault's self perception, and just how twisted it is.
Meursault's lack of emotion during most of the novel, and the way he shot the Arab made me wonder if Meursault was a psychopath. Meursault does not feel anything when shooting the Arab, save annoyance at the sun's rays.
Could Meursault be writing his memoirs to try to seem more human? The lack of emotion for most of the novel could be because he fails to keep his mask of humanity on, before realizing his mistake and overcompensating at the end.
I think that this interpretation of the Stranger adds an even darker element to the novel, as it calls to mind the disturbing memoirs of serial killers from their bars. The Stranger almost becomes a literary version of one of John Wayne Gacy's self portraits. This interpretation also examines Meursault's self perception, and just how twisted it is.
This is an interesting way to think about it, although I would say that even though he had an outburst at the end, I would say that was normal and not overcompensation as for the rest of the story, he had barely any emotion. Also if he realized his mistake at the end, why wouldn't he just rewrite the first half of his story.
ReplyDeleteI think that discussing Meursault as a psychopath (or, more accurately, as someone with antisocial personality disorder) takes away one of the major themes of the story for me. I think that The Stranger has something to say about humanity: that we should all be able to see a little bit of Meursault in ourselves, like he's a more exaggerated version of the things we hate about ourselves (like the collective ourself, humanity) and how brutal and vicious we can be. I think that the revelation at the end is a true one, not that he would just be overcompensating.
ReplyDeleteMeursault telling his story/"writing the memoir" (interpreting the book through that lens) to prove his humanity is an interesting thought. He didn't provide much of a reasoning to the courts, after all; but then again, did he provide much reasoning in the novel? Apart from "it was the sun's heat"
ReplyDeleteI think this is a really interesting way of looking at the novel. I definitely see what you're saying because his defense of himself is very weak (no reason he should be innocent) until the very end when he freaks out at the sun. Maybe that really was his way of attempting to portray emotion.
ReplyDeleteOooh I like this idea. I can't help but wonder if the opposite could hold some value to it as well. Perhaps, after a year-long chaotic trial and who knows how long in prison, Meursault has lost his humanity and in his current state of indifference, his memories are clouded with apathy as well. If Meursault had some feeling in him before he shot the Arab, maybe it all left him by the time he wrote his memoir. As for the "probably not" loving Marie and not really caring to transfer to Paris, he could have had a lot more reasons which he explained thoroughly at the time, which he oversimplifies to a blunt point because he doesn't see a need to fully explain. I think both are interesting ways of looking at the novel- yours would add a creeping horror while mine would add humanity and sympathy. Really great idea and interesting post!
ReplyDeleteI think your interpretation is definitely defensible--he has a lot of the characteristics of a psychopath, and only barely manages to pass as an ordinary guy until he slips up and kills a man. At first, I would definitely have agreed with you that this was the story behind Meursault. Now, I'm not so sure whether Camus's intention was to make MEursault especially odd or whether the critique was more regarding the court system. By the end of 'the Stranger' I viewed Meursault more as Camus's thought experiment rather than a well-developed character. I thought the story was more about his surroundings than his own pathology, but I can for sure see why you interpret it that way.
ReplyDeleteJack, I thought the same thing! I don't know how much you know about memoirs from serial killers but The Stranger definitely has the same feel. I got this feeling because the starkness of Meursault's prose and the way his life feels like an account of a memory rather than real-time. Often Meursault (forgive me, I don't have a copy with me right now) uses simple past (e.g. something laid somewhere) instead of past perfect continuous (something had been laying somewhere). The use of simple past rather than past perfect continuous implies that one is recalling a memory and is therefore recalling the state of how it was rather than how it had been in the time. It's a technique used in forensics and by investigators to re-evaluate a testimony. The use of simple past implies that it just was existing, while past perfect continuous implies that it had to be done by an agent (e.g. the witness). Does this make sense? If not, look into it it's fascinating. Anyway, great argument, I totally agree.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Meursault could be an unreliable narrator. I personally think he is. He seems to be describing this extremely bluntly - almost the way Hemmingway describes things. His blunt narration sort of makes me trust him more. His narration really isnt influenced by his emotions or an agenda; it just seems like he wants to tell a story.
ReplyDelete