A Better Representative
Randy Hude

            In Robert C. Solomon’s The Passions he talks of the Absurd, drawing the conclusion that it is a "self-demeaning view of ourselves" (Solomon 51). While he writes about this at great length, and does manage to convince us of its bad points, he neglects to talk about the apathetic person. The character Meursault from The Stranqer is a perfect example of apathy. An apathetic person is one who does not care for anything, does not have real emotion; in other terms, an apathetic person can be said to possess only "archaic" mind. Meursault is an atypical Camus character since he is not merely absurd, but worse, apathetic. In this regard I feel Meursault is a better metaphorical character for our age than Sisyphus.

            Solomon declares that "Sisyphus is the absurd hero because of his passions" (Solomon 44). But here is the first distinction; the apathetic ‘hero’ possesses no particular passions, as Meursault states, "there’s no idea to which one doesn’t get acclimatized in time" (Camus 144). Contrast this easygoing lack of concern with Sisyphus, who has "scorn and defiance, rebellion and pride" (Solomon 13). Meursault is not what we would term a grown up, he is stuck in childhood. When addressing his mother early in the book, he refers to her as ‘Maman,’ "the child’s word...when speaking of his mother" (Ward vii). Almost every character makes excuses and takes responsibility for him. He is never really given a chance and it is too much of an effort to make on his own behalf. Even in the midst of his murder trial he is unconcerned, "I had only one idea: to get it over, go back to my cell, and sleep" (Camus 132). Meursault’s thought processes are of the type that Jonathon Lear terms ‘archaic.’ "Archaic ‘thinking’ is an early stage of a developmental process en route toward expression in terms of concepts and judgments" (Lear 7). If Meursault could voice his own opinion on the reason for the murder he would simply declare, "that it was because of the sun" (Camus 130). It seems that almost all of Meursault’s actions or feelings are reactions toward his physical state, "I was basking in the sunlight, which, I noticed, was making me feel much better" (Camus 63). Furthermore, he explains to the examining magistrate, "my physical condition at any given moment often influenced my feelings" (Camus 80). Meursault possesses no real sense of joy or feeling; whenever asked what he prefers he takes the other person’s side, "Marie came that evening and asked me if I’d marry her. I said I didn’t mind; if she was keen on it, we’d get married" (Camus 52).

            Solomon’s neglect of a distinction between the absurd and apathetic is worth a little more investigating. He states, "The Absurd requires a proud rebellious spirit that will question everything, that takes skepticism as the sign of a healthy intellect and cynicism as an equivalent of wisdom and worldliness" (Solomon 30,31). I could not note any such spirit in the character of Meursault, who thinks, "one life ... as good as another" (Camus 52). Solomon also claims that "the Absurd requires ... a view of the whole" (Solomon 36). Meursault does not have such a view, "I have never been able really to regret anything… I’ve always been far too much absorbed in the present moment, or the immediate future" (Camus 127). While one might claim that Meursault, in the final paragraph of the novel, lives up to Solomon’s conception of the absurd, "having lost nearly everything ... we turn... in a hopeless display of defiance," this is not true from the psychological perspective (Solomon 45). It seems to me that Meursault’s strange ‘happiness’ at the very end comes from his growing up and his self-realization; Meursault for maybe the first time escapes archaic thinking. His happiness comes from this escape, not from his act of futile defiance, since "there is less motivation for supposing that we are dealing with two fundamentally different types of thing, mind and (mind-independent) reality" (Lear 11). I do not view the final paragraph as Meursault living up to the absurd characteristics of scorn and rebellion, but rather his happiness comes from his acceptance of reality; Meursault in his condemnation is finally taking responsibility, and this makes him ecstatic.

            Finally, when viewing our modern age and formulating a character that can stand as a metaphor for people everywhere, I see in Meursault more characteristics in everyday people than in Sisyphus. Sisyphus is the given metaphor because, "Sisyphus’, futile task represents the futility of our own struggles ... his scorn and defiance are our only hope, our only happiness, our only honest passions" (Solomon 35). Meursault has a task just like Sisyphus, though he lives his life, like many of us, without overriding scorn and defiance: "I saw no reason for ‘changing my life’ ... by and large it wasn’t an unpleasant one" (Camus 52). Unlike Sisyphus, Meursault more or less accepts life, "I’ve often thought that had I been compelled to live in the trunk of a dead tree, with nothing to do but gaze up at the patch of sky just overhead, I’d have got used to it by degrees" (Camus 95). Solomon also seems to recognize that the apathetic fits more of the people today, "Camus’s conception of ‘keeping the Absurd alive’ is perhaps nowhere better illustrated than in our new generations ... who, between television and drugs, have learned the lesson we force upon them —ultimately, there is nothing worth doing" (Solomon 30). Possibly this is ‘keeping the Absurd alive,’ but if people were taken as individuals, each would feel more akin to Meursault, with his benign indifference and acceptance of reality.

            If holding a mirror to the people of the modern age, our society would more resemble Meursault than Sisyphus. Sisyphus brought on his own punishment, whereas Meursault accepts the punishment that is allotted him, as it is everyone. Meursault is convicted and condemned, not so much for murdering the Arab, but since he is a sickening resemblance of society. His lack of feeling and emotion, what the prosecutor calls ‘soul’ (he’d get along with Solomon famously), is what he is condemned for. And it is this lack, this apathy, which is so characteristic of our age.

Works Cited

Camus, Albert. The Stranger. Translated by Stuart Gilbert. New York: Knopf, 1960.

- -. The Stranger. Translated by Matthew Ward. New York: Vintage, 1989.

Lear, Jonathan. Love and Its Place in Nature. New Haven: Yale UP, 1998.

Solomon, Robert C. The Passions. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1993.