Is Meursault Real?

There exists a common perspective on Meursault among several of the blog posts this week. I, like others, believe that Camus is able to articulate the entire story and entertain the reader without ever fully humanizing Meursault. Throughout the story, Meursault's indifference to all things around him make him seem as if he is less than human in his lack of emotion. Things that, arguably, bring the most pain and depression to an individual like the death of a parent seems to have no effect on Meursault and his life. Just after returning home from his mother's funeral, Meursault is preoccupied with Marie and, in a sense, he seems to go on with his life as if nothing profound has happened. Yet, maybe this is the ultimate expression of being alive. Maybe Meursault has something to teach us about life and how we respond to the world around us. But, I still feel as if Camus purposefully leaves Meursault in a state where he is acknowledged by the reader as an alive being, but is simultaneously lacking much of what constitutes a human's day to day life.

Only towards the end are we able to see a change in Meursault's emotional expression. Yet, the change is subtle and I think that Camus intended on ending the story with the main character still stuck in a position of indifference. By doing so, Camus is able to vivify his personal existentialist philosophy, and by leaving Meursault unidentified as a being that is separate in opinion and emotion than the reader, Camus sets up the story in a way that prevents the reader from seeing themselves in him. This opportunity provides the reader the chance to view Meursault's way of life and grasp Camus's philosophy without associating personal views and opinions that often accompany a reader's ability to connect with the main character.