Maman the Gap

How is it possible to write a novel based on the death of a character that is never described in detail? Well, this it exactly what happens in Albert Camus's The Stranger. From the first sentence of the book the reader heres about the death of Maman. I as an audience member, automatically assumed that Maman would be a major part of the book. I was correct in the sense that Maman would make way for the rest of the storyline, but wrong in the sense that Maman and her relationship with her son would be described in detail. 

This is Albert Camus's gap. Until Part II of the text the audience is unclear wether he even had any sort of relationship with Maman, it being bad or good. This lack of information drove me crazy because Maman is constantly being referred to. Questions like: Why didn't he mourn after her death? and Why did he care more about it being Sunday then a the day after his mothers funeral? crashed around in my head. Obviously this led me to believe that he has a terrible relationship with his mom and that he was probably mistreated by her when he was young. Camus gap makes the audience perceive something different from what is truly happening between the lines of the book. 

It is not until the second part of the book that Meursault expresses why he left Maman in the care center. The reason, a good one. He left her there because it would be more comfortable and she would have the chance to make friends and not be bored and stranded with Meursault in his apartment. All the negative thoughts the reader filled the "Maman" gaps with have to be dug up and placed with a sweeter, more positive filling. Still, no other context is given about Maman, so still no clear conclusions can be made about their relationship. 

During the trial the most brought up topic was Meursault and his mother. The beginning of the book starts with his mothers death and then comes the middle of the book which is blank including anything of Maman and the end which is entirely about her. The death penalty is given to Meursault because of his lack f reaction after Maman death, didn't reach the societal standards. This lack of information was necessary for the readers to have because it makes it easier to understand that what many consider societal standards could be just as plain and blank as Maman. There is not enough information to fill in the blanks about persons other than you. 

Waiting for the Stranger

While reading Samuel Beckett's play Waiting for Godot, I could connect it with the existentialist novel The Stranger by Albert Camus. The connection was not through the plot or any common events. It was the theme of the meaningless of life that struck me. In both the play and novel the idea that life has no meaning rises through a series of uncommon events that happen to the main characters. Vladimir, Estragon and Meursault all think that they are living for no reason. Meursault does nothing to make his life have any meaning, while Vladimir and Estragon are being just as pointless, by waiting for someone that "could" fix their problems, that will never show up. In both texts the characters simply are finding ways so that time passes. Anything one does will make no difference, in fact being dead or alive is insignificant. 

Though Vladimir and Estragon have similarities to Meursault they also have similarities to other characters in the The Stranger. Throughout the play Gogo and Didi beat each other and verbally abuse each other just as Salamano does to his old dog. In both situations there is abuse but they are dependent, so neither of the abused characters will dare to leave. For instance, Didi and Gogo talk about hanging themselves; they don't because they would not bare life without each other. 

Another connection I made was with the theme of death. In the novel The Stranger Camus proves Meursaults idea that life has no meaning by including many deaths that have no affect on his life. In a similar way Beckett shows the idea of existentialism in the two scenes in which Didi and Gogo are talking about hanging themselves. As mentioned before they decided not two because not both of them would be able in killing themselves. These scenes clearly show that none of these characters have an eager urge to live. They think it is indifferent whether they are alive or dead. Except in Didi and Gogo's case, they would be unable to live or die without each other. This is the biggest difference i found between the main characters of the texts. In Waiting for Godot they have a true relationship between each other that would be highly affected if the other wasn't around. Meursault on the other hand is a true stranger that has no tight relationships with anyone. For example, even when his lover asked him if he loved her, he said that he "didn't think so". So to make the Stranger equal to the amount society frowns upon him, Didi and Gogo would have to be added together. 

A Lonely World

The Stranger written by Albert Camus is a unique novel that explores an existentialist way of living. Camus is able to give his audience a better look of the existentialist mind through his character Meursault. Meursault constantly seems to be living only in the present. With no true references to his past, Meursault simply does what he feels is right in an instantaneous moment. He lives a spontaneous life, in which he spends no time thinking about his future and how he can make it better.

A phrase that really caught my attention was "We are alone.", because it makes me relate to Meursault's way of thinking and "doing". Meursault is the "stranger", the "outsider" that no one can understand. Everyone thinks he is absurd. For example the judge during Meursault's trial could not understand why Meursault felt no mourn when Maman died. Yes, he is alone in the way he thinks, because no one else has his same opinions, but he is also alone because thats his way of living. He has realized that no one in the world can make a difference in his life so he prefers to have no serious relationships with anyone and not have to worry about being "happy" with another person. For example, Marie asks Meursault if he loves her and he simply responds that he "didn't think so". Also, when talking about marriage with Marie he simply accepts the act by reasoning with himself that that is what is normal and what Marie wants...not what he believes is correct.

You may be wondering why I'm mentioning only Meursault. The reason is because, what makes us so different from him anyways. Yes, a lot of us care about what will happen in the future and most of us care when a loved one dies (keep in mind that Meursault is an extreme existentialist). Even though Meursault had a bizarre way of thinking and know one though like him, one will never find someone that thinks exactly the same. You may find similar ideals with someone else but the way you think is unique just like your fingerprint. Each individual has the option of thinking whatever they want. Wether it is accepted by the societal standards we live in, is a whole other story. If you don't believe it when I say you will never find someone that thinks just like you, think of the times you have changed your behavior and ideals just to be part of a group, and feel some sort of connection with anyone. Most humans need to connect with others to consider people as "friends" or to feel belonging to something in the world. Many times people alter what one truly believes, into something that will get societies approval. In Meursault's case, he does the exact opposite of the average human. He simply believes in what he believes in, and nothing will ever alter his way of thinking, because life is pointless. If we were to isolate every human from every other human in the world we will find no connections with anybody else whatsoever. We truly are alone, but then we mask it with contradicting beliefs to simply feel the approval of somebody else, something bigger.