The Stranger...'s in our classroom.

Monday’s class brought many topics up for discussion of which left a great impact on me.

It occurred to me during the discussion that many people kept attempting to classify and mold Meursault into a character of which they themselves already hold an understanding. However, the reality of this book is that Meursault does not fit into the normal categories of which most classmates have an understanding of. They tried to assign him rationalities, feelings, and attitudes that were not present in the book. Some would try to say he had an “appreciation” towards everything while others said he was “dissatisfied”. However, the book is quite objective and straight forward, therefore, the readers tried to, however unsuccessfully, place themselves into Meursault’s shoes and give him their feelings. Although it’s understandable that we would think about our actions and feelings versus a character’s, it does not change the way the book is written or intended. Therefore, a reader must be able to disconnect themselves to some degree while reading if they do not relate.  I, personally, felt a deep connection and understanding with Meursault though. I believe the key to comprehending this book is to keep an open mind and take it for what it is.

Although this was not intended in the literal sense, I believe its reference was completely irrelevant to the discussion, no matter which meaning it was meant to be given. A classmate brought up “evolution” at some point during the discussion, of which many people expanded on and continued to debate about. Then, at another point, Neanderthals were also brought into the discussion. Being an Anthropology major, I found these subjects quite unnecessary during this debate.

For instance, evolution refers to natural selection, survival of the fittest, species surviving for generations resulting in new species and new characteristics. Not only that but features that were brought on by natural selection might not have occurred as a result of being advantageous but, rather, at random.

Neanderthals were merely another species in our linage. It’s difficult to say that we (Homo sapiens) are more successful than Neanderthals (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) because there is genetic evidence that some of us have Neanderthal DNA within our genome. Therefore, the argument that Meursault is either “more primitive” or “more advanced” is completely irrelevant to the novel. Meursault does not care about the past, as he has referenced in the book. He does not care about evolution or human history. Therefore, how this topic was brought up into the discussion completely baffles me.

During the discussion, I observed many differences between Meursault and us. Meursault is open-minded, he doesn’t cut his mind off to something because he does not approve; he doesn’t shut himself out because he might not like something. He listens to people, even if he doesn’t particularly care to. He can look at things objectively. While reading The Stranger, I felt that more people should try to be like him, be more objective and understanding. Yes, we all make our own decisions, but we also have to take responsibility for them. What happens in the past, stays in the past, cannot be changed. Meursault understands this and he doesn’t regret anything; which is why I can relate so well to him. I don’t dwell on the past, once it’s done and complete, I move on because I know there is no sense in beating myself up over spilled milk.

One last thing struck me on Monday. That is: the similarity to how Meursault was judged and the way the class judged him, which ties into my beginning points. The judges couldn’t understand why Meursault didn’t cry at his mom’s funeral and why he shot the man. He doesn’t fit into our societal norms which creates a sense of distress.