In the Stranger, we see Meursault having little to no emotion at his mom's funeral which makes him seem strange but then see him mindlessly agreeing to things without really thinking and finally see him murder a man. The murder is the most severe and after he shoots once, he pauses and shoots again four more times. There was no reason for the shots except for the sun which doesn't really add up as a reason to kill someone. All these events that take place, lead the court to question his morality and his soul. This is eventually what leads them to decide that he is a danger to people and is the reason why they must kill him.
Based on Meursault explanation during the kill, he seems to be responding to the sun in his kill and not to the Arab man. He then goes through the court case honest but not really saying much about what happened because their were no thoughts around why he shot the extra 4 times. I think its interesting because even after they sentenced him to death, he still didn't seem overly upset. He also has a girlfriend Marie who comes to visit him while he is in jail and is a witness to him in court. She asked him if he loved her before the murder and he said it doesn't really matter but no, and then continued in the relationship with her. After he was sentenced to execution he says, "Anyway, after that, remembering Marie meant nothing to me. (pg. 115) This quote proves how he doesn't care about people and thinks everything in life is meaningless which relates back to the killing of how he had no thoughts or emotions about the Arab, he killed.
All the events discussed above lead me to my final point; should he have been sentenced to death or prison? Well based on what we know he has killed a man with excessive shots for no apparent reason. He doesn't have morals and agrees with whatever other people tell him. For example Raymond beats his mistress after he thinks he cheats and then he asks Meursault to testify in his defense in court and Meursault's says sure. Meursault also seems to feel little emotional connection to people like in Marie and Maman's case, we see very little emotions to either of them. These instances don't necessary warrant death but possibly life in prison because he seems to have moral issues but doesn't seem like he wants to go out and shoot and kill everyone. I don't know if he is necessarily dangerous but could have a mental illness such as anxiety which is why he would feel hot so often and feel the need to run from it. I think that Meursault didn't deserve execution because of his motives but he does seem a bit uncontrollable because of how he responds when hot (or panicked). Also we in America have a different view of the death penalty than Algers in that time period did. This could lead to why they choose death penalty over life imprisonment. All in all I think Meursault is safe in the house where he can be calm but if he is out without supervision he runs into large self-control issues. The walk on the beach is like the second time we see him fully alone without many people. The rest of the time he usually has someone with him or nearby and if he did something they might be able to stop him.
*spoiler!
His behavior while in prison is vary tame, and I don't think he would cause issues if he was to be imprisoned for life. I think the court acknowledges this, however they sentence him to death anyway, because his way of thinking is dangerous. His case is already very famous, and the court does not want more people buying into his way of thinking where everything is meaningless. This is why they put his morals on trial, questioning him about things like his mothers funeral as opposed to the actual crime.
ReplyDeleteBy sentencing Mersault to be executed, the court demonstrates society's response to nihilistic behavior. It seems like an overreaction, but in their mind it is important for the protection of society. But nihilism doesn't seem like the sort of thing that can sweep a whole society, so I doubt they really have that much to worry about. Especially from a guy like Mersault, who isn't enough of an achiever to sway society.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do not agree with the death penalty for any criminal. I find it unnecessary cruel, and life in prison serves the same purpose (protecting society from the dangerous person). In the case of Mersault, I find it even more absurd that they are subjecting him to the death penalty. From the descriptions of his time in prison, we see that he gets along pretty well with others and does not cause any problems. He could have easily spent the rest of his life in prison, which would prevent him from hurting anyone else. I believe that this would have been a more just punishment for him as opposed to the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if Meursault deserves the death penalty, given his nature in jail and his overall character as a person. I do see some of your points though on how his uncontrollableness could cause him to be potentially dangerous though, as displayed in his crime.
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, Camus himself was a strong opponent of the death penalty and wrote essays denouncing it. And I think we can see some of this fundamental objection reflected in the novel, apart from the question of what is "appropriate punishment" for a crime that is onstensibly without motive or logic. As Camus renders it, the death sentence is particularly absurd, a premeditated murder of Meursault on behalf of the court for no good reason at all--he will have his "head cut off in a public square in the name of the French people," which makes the whole thing seem not rational and judicious but bizarre, barbaric, and also arbitrary and meaningless. What do the "French people" stand to gain by having his "head cut off"? Especially when we consider that, based on the trial, it seems like he's being executed more as an "abyss threatening to swallow society" than as a murderer--it's his "weirdness" that they want to eliminate, in order to ensure the abstraction known as "the French people."
ReplyDeleteThe whole machinery whereby humans judge other humans in a court of law and sentence them to death, in this novel, appears to be so absurd and theatrical and free of actual substance as to be meaningless.
I'm pretty against the death penalty, so I would obviously say prison is better in this situation. But even looking from a more neutral position, I would definitely say the death penalty was fairly harsh here. For one, the crime wasn't planned far in advance and the victim wasn't completely innocent in this situation, two things that would usually keep someone from the death penalty in many places that still have it. I think you also make a great point about mental illness, which is usually something factored in when sentencing someone to the death penalty.
ReplyDelete