The Stranger, Pt. 2

I've had a lot of trouble trying to start this post, and I think that's precisely because the book itself is so difficult to explain.

By the end, we are still left knowing little about the main character, despite having spent 120 or so pages with him. It's almost impossible to analyze Meursault's motivations through anything in the text. Reading it, I practically can't help but attach my own meanings to his actions, make assumptions, draw up a possible back story, in a desperate attempt to make him understandable and relatable.

I feel like this is one of the interesting things about sharing thoughts about The Stranger -- everyone seems to have a different perspective on Meursault and the meaning of the book, because his completely apathetic narration encourages us to fill in the blanks ourselves.

Reading the book again with a more analytical viewpoint has gotten me to analyze my own reactions to it in a way I didn't the first time. When I originally read it, I was just sitting back and feeling whatever I felt as the novel unfolded without really wondering what the author was aiming for. This time, I find myself wondering, maybe pointlessly: what was Camus' intention in writing this kind of character, if any?

Am I supposed to relate to him? sympathize with him? despise him? be utterly confused? Are Meursault's experiences supposed to ultimately show us that life is meaningless, or the total opposite? What reaction did he want us to have upon Meursault's final revelation, his "[opening himself] to the gentle indifference of the world," his acceptance of the inevitability of death? Am I supposed to ask myself these questions?

Can I call Meursault a "good"or a "bad" person? I'm not sure. In the case of the murder he commits, he seemingly has no premeditated motivation -- no heroic intention or willful animosity. It is something that just happens. Is killing with no reason whatsoever morally worse than killing with one, even one that is hateful, because there is not even a misguided attempt at justifying it?

Is it right for Meursault to meet his death without remorse when he has committed an unnecessary crime? I don't mean in the sense of religion, but just on a level of human conscience -- how is it possible to kill another person and feel no guilt?

It's a complicated thing to think about, and I don't know what moralistic conclusion Camus would want me to come to. Is The Stranger supporting nihilism, or is it one long direct argument against it? Of course I'll never really know -- and maybe in the end all I do have are my own questions.