Enjoy these type of videos? Please give it a like Support this channel: www.patreon.com/eternalised RU-vid Member Perks: ru-vid.com/show-UCqos1tl0RntucGGtPXNxkkAjoin Donate a Coffee: ko-fi.com/eternalised PayPal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/eternalisedofficial Official Merch: eternalised.creator-spring.com
Great book. The first sentence is legendary. There are some sentences and scenes that have been with me even ten years later, such as when Meursault remarks how easily humans get used to things when he's imprisoned.
Camus is the greatest, and the only philosopher to be followed, in my opinion. The idea of life being meaningless and the universe being indifferent do not mean anything bad. In fact, it makes us completely free to do what we want knowing full well that if we did something else, it would have made no difference. What we have done till now is not worse (or better) than what we 'could have done'. You don't need to beat yourself up over missed opportunities or notional losses or artificial goals. In the end, you lived one way, and you could have so easily lived another way. It doesn't matter. One man's dog can have just as much value as another guy's wife. It is not for Mersault to cry at his Mother's funeral because she lived her life and died, and no one has any right to cry over her. If you take life as it comes in a matter-of-fact manner, responding to your physical feelings and living deeply, that is in no way a 'lesser' life than if you had thought a lot, read a lot of philosophy, or whatever else you are 'supposed to do'. A lot of French philosophers drank at the Left Bank cafes, read a lot, debated philosophy and politics, and considered themselves deep thinkers. Camus played football, chased women, tried to look like Bogart, died in a car crash, and his football club came to his funeral. He could have lived like Sartre but he lived his way. It makes no difference and that is the point. Camus is someone who has stressed on an individual having absolute freedom in a completely un-free world, do it as an act of rebellion. Acknowledge the Absurd, understand everything is meaningless, and understand you still would seek meaning... and still live life to the fullest taking in all your physical experiences. You don't owe anyone anything, and nobody needs to cry at your funeral. Anyone who does this is going to be happy, just as Camus imagined Sisyphus to be.
Am I just dumb or did we not read the same book. I thought it was a bit dull and didn't explore the philosophy enough. But maybe that's just because I expected something else from it. The main character never questioned himself (example: the four shots in the dead body). But this all kinda makes sense, with the rumour, that the book is based on an autistic friend of camu
@@maxistoffregen6872I agree, while I didn't find it dull, I thought from a philosophical standpoint it begged the question in the narrative. It's sort of posits a nihilistic world view, but even in the framework of the story, it doesn't really make a strong case that societal norms are arbitrary, let alone that there's no possible moral underpinning that would in some sense be favorable.
A single thing to add, "maman" is a lot more similar to "mom" than "mommy". This would make his relationship with his mother more personal, as opposed to childlike
I believe the most comparable translation is Mama. The original British translation opts for Mom and Mother, but the Matthew Ward opts for a more American style closer to Camus’ intentions. Ward’s reasoning is pretty much word for word what is discussed here.
I always called my grandmother maman i always belived me and everyone in my family called her that becuase she a grandMA and a mother so maman would make sense
Great analysis on many levels dude. I absolutely hated this book when I first read it about three years ago. My girlfriend, at the time just a friend, was dying for me to read it. She thought I would understand it, relate and enjoy it. I was eager to please her. It was fucking horribly painful for me to read. Not because of the subject matter, it was because of the mundane prose! It reminded me of my own mundane thoughts or how it would be to be able to read someone's mind. It was so painfully boring! It was only after the climax on the beach that I was able to get over this pain and begin to appreciate it. I still hated it at this point but everything after the 'murder' had stuck with me. I couldn't get it out of my head. It was all so familiar. How many times have I found myself in a similar situation? Not that I make a habit of being arrested and tried for murder; how many times have I sat there after something ridiculous and consequential has happened, trying to figure out how and why I'm here now, only to be left with the emptiness that comes from acknowledging the lack of meaning; that there is no good reason for why things happen, that we are all alone in our own minds, that our thoughts and feelings are ours alone, that there is no such thing as freedom, etc. I love this book now but only in retrospect! I'm 31 now, I probably won't be able to stomach reading it again until 35, I absolutely plan to though! Thanks for the content!
I'm not into finding deep meanings from books, But man! I felt so empty after reading this book, i felt bad for the main character but at the same time felt nothing towards him. We need to express our emotions, these emotions are what makes us humans. Allowing our physical needs to overrule our emotions and morality like the main character here makes us no different than animals or in this case a "stranger". I felt so repulsed by the main character, because i realised I too was becoming like him. It was a wake up call for me to truly live my life and find joy and meaning in simple day to day mundane tasks and be happy for small things and be grateful for the people I have in my life, unlike the guy here.
on that last part, that's what he literally does every day, just like you mentioned, every single word. Yes I read the book, Society condemns someone who doesn't cry at his mother's funeral.
For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone, I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate....
Your videos are excellent. Many times you point out things I sort of felt from reading this book and others, but couldn't quite zero in on to articulate. Thank you.
finished this book today, really interesting style of writing. i didnt like the shortness of the sentences but i respect it from an artistic value standpoint. it fits the theme of the book. i still really enjoyed it and find camus interesting
i am currently in the beginning of the second chapter and i am being very bored with it :( like there is nothing happening, do u have any advice (it’s my first book)
@@darkness8488 honestly man it might just not be for you. its not a book where things happen like an adventure book. the style doesnt change so if you are bored i would just move on to something you enjoy reading. theres nothing wrong with that. i almost gave up early on but pushed through and found the message of the book in line with my belief system. if it wasnt i probably wouldnt have finished it
@@darkness8488 i don't think this is the type of book that will have a lot of action, after the second part it gets "better" in terms of things happening. after all, meursault is just an ordinary guy, living a dull life!
My favorite book from, him loved it I still remember bits from it even tho I red it more than 15 years ago. Loved the break down of Albert Camus Stranger book.
with this book there is so many questions in my head : why Mersault killed the guy because of the sun , why he didn't get upset when his mother's death, why he didn't get upset when he sentenced to death and how did he admited this world is meaningless or every life is meaningless based on every person is going to die and if he thinks that way why he didn't commited suicide before ?
The sun was more than the just heat. It was emotional distress.( said the sun was the same as the day of his mothers funeral) There is a whole case to be made that it was a blind act of vengance though it is not well received. I subscribe to this view but everyone makes up there own mind. It is part of the beauty of the book. He felt that for his mothers or anyone's death that love is of no consequence. In fact she found a new companion at the nursing home so was able to start life again for a while. Death is release to him. He latter said that no one should have grieved for her. People latter were outraged at his actions that were seen as callous and detached from caring. He wanted to live though the sentence was handed down late in the evening(8PM) He said he enjoyed some of the simple pleasures of life that were pervasive in his daily life. The fact is that we all die was the only thing that we should realise . In light of this fact many things obsessed over mask this reality for people. This gave a reprioritisation of what he found important and not important in the crazy/absurd reality humans are born into and face every day. One that many never consider. This is why to him certain things ''don't matter' or just aren't really that important. Most lives are basically the same and you cant really change them much he once said. Just because he felt that life was Absurd and that many things don't matter doesn't mean that nothing is enjoyable. Even though living with a detached manner and classified many things as 'not important' in regard to his world view, he enjoyed swimming in the ocean, the feel of the sun on his face, company of people and interesting conversations. Many of the pleasures like smoking, drinking eating and conversations and obviously sex, he enjoyed. Religion and belief in god he claimed was not worth the strand of a Woman's hair to him. He did agree to be married though he was indifferent to the obsession people have to pursuit of love. He just wasn't getting caught up in what he saw didn't matter. Ambition, the pursuit of love, etc. Just the truth of what matters in his view.
I’ve carefully considered Camus and his philosophy over many years now. I just can’t admit to myself I agree with it. I feel like people need to understand the extreme negativity that comes with this level of neglect for emotions, and a lack of value for life. Life is more than nature just playing a dirty trick on you. But, you could believe as Camus did that every moral construct is just nature playing some dirty trick on you. Sisyphus finds meaning in the absurd but Camus said that too is just a manipulation of nature. Even your consciousness is just a manipulation. Can you truly live this? Can you walk the walk? I can’t. There’s nothing there but apathy and death.
Personally i believe that one should read the book without the philosophy of absurdism in his mind because the book is much more than that and going into it with that framework narrows the greater meaning of the book with it's message about ethics, morality and our bursting flames of anger and evil that stem from that meaningless even with authenticity being part of the greater picture, it's greater message in my opinion is about the necessary duality and balance between good and evil.
I am on the second half of the book now. The Stranger is easier to grasp as well as read than what I expected. I'm here to see what other readers thought about the book and their interpretations
Good book, but I wonder if his prosecution based off of the lack of feelings would fly in today's courtroom. It's unusual because he was arrested for the murder but executed because he felt indifferent.
The issue with music is that you can't listen on higher speeds without inflicting unnecessary pain on your brain, and it can be a waste of time to listen to essay- based videos at 1x.
I remember readinf The Plague in school. Lets say that it was a very boring book for a bunch of 17 years old. But then we got to work on parts of his other novels and i think this type of books just need to grow in you. Once they sink in, and you already have some opinions on life etc then it hits you. Brilliant author for these who want to understant
Not as surreal as Kafka but the points of having to suffer fools & being sucked into the vortex by absurd circumstances are great novel writing devices.
I think that's perfectly explains my mindset. I am ridiculously calm in the face of absurdity, and even laugh at it, as I gave up any notion of attempting to control what is very obviously out of my control, when I was about 14, as I was a huge science nerd, and had just begun understanding quantum physics. It was incredibly relaxing, but with the new spiritual aspects of potentially controlling reality, I am having difficulties deciding to do that, as the lack of control was somewhat relieving to me, as I have a very staunch Outlook, and one Outlook only, maybe even considered a tenant, that I will do all I can to never violate the Free Will of others. I'm not sure exactly how the laws of attraction or the connection with the conscious mind to the Divine conscious field interact with this, but it is something I am not entirely comfortable exploring, in ways that could affect others, because even though this reality seems to be a luxury, and is, in my understanding, it is not a illusory to those who have yet to see things from this perspective, so I have a very serious impediment in attempting to alter things that may alter the course of reality for other individuals. The only sense of promise that makes anything other than internal work potentially doable for me is the multiverse theorem I know I just ain't manipulation because I did it in my youth, in order to avoid continued penises being shoved in my face, and an actual rape. It works, but made me feel significantly more disgusting than any of the sexual assaults ever did
Anyone without belief in spirituality or religion sooner or later realizes there is no real meaning in life. There is no outcome to the life we live. Camus points us to the physical world. The only outcome is our all inevitable death. How we take this philosophy may vary. Some it might seem depressing, feeling like whatever you do, you might as well have done it differently and in the end it doesn’t matter. One might loose the understanding of doing anything at all. But this freedom doesn’t mean senselessness. It gives you the opportunity to live life as you mean to, not bowing to anyone’s expectations or beliefs. The connection to the physical world doesn’t mean carelessness and emotional separation from others. It means one is free to chose what to do with them. The Stanger embodies the absurd philosophy. He lives purely in the physical world. He realizes the universe is indifferent. With that he chooses to give up. This is where I think we have to differentiate us from the Stranger. He doesn’t exist to preach his way of life. He exists to make us understand the concept. In the end, waiting for his inevitable death, he understands that there is no meaning in life, that it doesn’t matter if he dies today or sometime in the future. That brings him comfort, even happiness. Does that mean we should die today? I don’t think so. But it means it doesn’t really matter. Mersault is not the example you should be following, but understand him. From that you gain the freedom of making your life to that what you want it to be, whatever that may be. The universe is indifferent, but that doesn’t take away its beauty. We all live and die, but that doesn’t take meaning from emotional connection. Lern to life your meaningless life but don’t forget enjoyment. Just because your life itself has no meaning, that doesn’t mean the things you achieve and experience don’t. Maybe not in the grand scheme of existence, but to you and the people around you. And what more can you do? Come to terms with the fact that the universe might not care about you and embrace that every day death might meet you in the most unexpected moment. If you can live with that and understand how to handle it, I believe you have come one very small step closer to finding an answer to life. And even if you don’t, it doesn’t really matter.
Nothing comes close to a reality without God and religion than the ending in Camus’ ‘The Stranger’. What’s the purpose/meaning of life 🤷♂️ maybe ultimately absolutely nothing other then just existing. Why did Meursault kill the man on the beach? Maybe just because the sun was hot that day. But ‘no there must be a bigger and deeper reason!’ Or maybe not. Very rarely do debates between theists and atheists bring up the possibility there is absolutely no meaning. Maybe those who very much want life to have meaning believe in God for that search of meaning. Maybe those who don’t believe, don’t believe in God simply because they dislike the meaning theists give. As the saying goes ‘you can always tell an atheists because they can’t stop talking about god and religion’. Yet even the most famous contemporary atheists of today rarely delve into the deep philosophical lack of meaning and purpose of life. Camus’ ending in ‘The Stranger’ presents the very real possibility that maybe a life has no meaning other than being purely subjective. This subjectivity could very well be the joy of watching others enjoy one’s own death and pointless end.
I often wonder how people are able to get so much from just words on a page, it’s genuinely so cool- and I hope I’m able to understand these kind of texts the same way someday
Good book - my very short analysis of the character is of brutal honesty to the point where he doesn’t even attempt to favour the outcome of his actions. Does he purposely go out and kill a man ? No. But does make any attempts to explain his perspective & get any sympathy? Also no.
Camus himself wrongly summarized his book's character Meursault as " the only Christ we deserve": never trust the author, trust the tale. Camus himself had an illiterate mother whom he loved greatly, hence the character is not autobiographical. Camus in this novel( which he had tried writing before as " A Happy Death") wanted to create a mythical response to sun and poverty. He also had a great love of Dostoevsky and American fiction of the Hemingway variety or the crime fiction like The Postman Always Rings Twice, which he tried to emulate. Camus himself never read philosophy or philosophers to any depth( and was later derided by Sartre for this) due to the limitations of his education. However this may have aided his fiction by giving it more actuality than the Sartres ever could summon with their deadening abstractions. Although the Stranger may have made the greatest impact of his work on mass readership, it is often thought Camus's best work is The Plague, the Fall, The First Man and his essays( contained in works like Lyrical & Critical). The Stranger has the quality of Greek myth and has the elusive strangeness of great art.
This novel sucks. Even to one who is non-religious it should suck. Firstly, it’s too boring until the beach scenes, but mainly the protagonist is too boring: a dull, indifferent man who really cares strongly about nothing. Who can like such a man, especially one who seems so foolish & indifferent when in trouble? In fact, that he’s not believable is probably the main problem, as no one would be so stupid as to respond to the prosecution as he did as if being honest is the only thing to ever be. Had Camus made him more interesting, with some intelligent dialogue coming out of him so that one could believe he had the philosophical disposition that this novel is suppose to imply, it might have been a good novel, but he’s just too boring for the role. Not that the analysis in this video is bad, it’s especially good about the seeming irrationality of man’s meaning-seeking vis-a-vis the indifferent universe. But the thesis that every person’s life is ultimately meaningless is the real absurdity, which IMO led Camus to write such a bad book. Maybe most lives may seem meaningless but think of just the great performing artists one can see on just RU-vid, the wonderful virtuoso musicians performing Bach, Vivaldi, Jazz, etc. I would die very happy indeed to be one of them, screw the indifferent universe. There are, of course many truly great books out there ( I love Kazantzakis’s _Zorba the Greek_ , and Dostoyevski’s great novels) but this novel ain’t one of them.
you don't get camus's philosophy at all... if you wanted a more "intelligent" hero i suggest you read the plague by the same author. The point you made about the musicians is exactly Camus's philosophy: despite the meaninglessness of human existence, he wants each and every one of us to enjoy the world for what it is worth and appreciate it, instead of dreaming of escapism.
@@simonli4484 I think I get all that but my criticism was on a literary level not philosophical. I thought his novel needed to have his protagonist with more dialogue that shows him more intelligent & philosophical for all that to be the point.
Him being an indifferent everyday man is one of the entire focuses of the book. He's not supposed to be necessary likeable. Meursault isn't more intelligent because it doesn't take vast intelligence to see the absurdity of life. Also since you brought up "great musicians "as meaningful, you missed the entire point. Something can have profound meaning to you while also having no meaning whatsoever to the universe. You seem to have completely missed the point that it's us that assign meaning and meaning isn't something there by default.
When I read this novel I was struck by how much in common I have with a main character. It was simultaneously a depressing and an eye opening very personal experience, and in the end of the book I understood myself and a reality we live in a lot more
Funnily enough I feel the opposite, as in I understand his indifference to some things, but the true extent of it permeating into everything just makes him feel like an alien. I suppose he is an alien though.
This is a fantastic summary of a great book. Remember when I first read it in school, I never understood it. Since becoming fascinated by philosophy, it makes incredible amounts of sense
The sun seems symbolic of The Son. Interesting that his mom wasn’t religious and didn’t raise Patrice as such. He was left to his own devices to decide right and wrong - to decide meaning for himself. When Queen wrote Bohemian Rhapsody in honor of this novel, they correctly surmise the resulting philosophy was nihilism. The world didn’t seem to have meaning to Patrice Meursault. He wasn’t even a “moral atheist” like the main character in Camus’s La Peste (the Plague.) Christianity bothered Mersault. The sun agitated him like it did in the funeral home. He didn’t even feel sorry the lady who had just lost her last friend. He’s too busy complaining about the lights (metaphorically others’ judgmental ethics imposed upon him) to even find compassion for her or show any love for his mom. He didn’t love his mom apparently. He felt nothing for senselessly killing the Arab man on the beach. He just goes on complaining about the sun irritating him again. He’s essentially a nihilist. A society full of Mersaults would be replete with narcissism. It would consist of more murderers, more school shooters, more depressed people devoid of meaning who cannot look outside themselves to love others. Camus even said Meursault was judged for not “playing the game”. “Why love others?”, I could imagine our protagonist saying, “I need to just focus on myself.”
Well, I'd like to think that Mersault got to the absurdist conclusion that Camus originally proposes in the last pages of the book, after going through a Freudian-like talk therapy session by harassing and shouting at the pastor. He has been living hedonistically, not even bothered by the fact that the world has no meaning. I think that although Mersault believes in no meaning, he still is different from the kind of nihilist that Nietzsche warns us on, because he still seems to enjoy life. He may not care, but he also doesn't appear to be stereotypically depressed or desperate. He casually has sex with Marie and enjoys the sea despite maman's death, and chooses to nitpick interesting stimuli amongst everything happening around him, how he infamously finds the most "dull" occurings more entertaining than bearing with societal conventions. So although I agree with you that a society full of Mersaults definitely wouldn't function, I think you are undermining the value of how people describe the reason for Mersault's death sentence: "He didn't play the game." The focus was almost never on the murdered Arab but on the defendant's psyche. If he chose not to rebel (contrary to what Camus wants), and simply told the court what they would like to hear such as "I believe in God" or "I feel very sad due to my mother's passing" or "The Arab pulled a knife and I was only defending myself" and obviously "I regret what I have done," he would probably be free, as his lawyer said himself. But I don't think the main part most worth focusing is Mersault's strangeness or incongruence to society but rather how he is judged for absurd reasons: "A man sentenced to death because he didn't weep on his mother's funeral." Because instead of what I gave as an example, what he actually says is lines such as "I don't believe in God," "I don't care," and "Sun was too irritating." Something that may only be my imagination but is worth mentioning nontheless is that, society and the norms it imposes, refused by Mersault with certainty, are hypocritical. A common assumption in ancient Greek philoosphy and certain Abrahamic religions is that Man is rational at its core, sometimes with the addition that we are originally created as perfect beings but indiscriminately corrupted and whispered by the Devil (This is moreso present in Islam when compared to Christianity though). Despite this, despite creating a legal system and putting people who obviously may make mistakes on top of it, sometimes declaring the law and the state to be sacred, perfect and non-malleable, creating our entire religious basis as a society on the assumption that we move with logic, we judge Mersault with our emotions. We judge him because of his emotions, or for the lack there of. We coerce one meaning into everyone, assume we are perfect and logical beings at our core, judge people using a system based on this assumption, and then we give a death sentence to a man indifferent to life, with our emotions. This, according to me, is beyond the guilt of the "christ we deserve," and reveals a painful truth about our stubborn nature that refuses to admit its irrationality, hedonistic tendencies, and the vulnerability to be easily swayed by emotional manipulation.
@@korukuzey3248 thank you for your insight! i recently finished reading it so i'm eager to discuss. i definitely think the death penalty was unnecessary but do you think Meursault shouldn't have been punished? he hurt people. and while there is no inherent meaning in this world, it is unethical to hurt another. are we so wrong to expect someone not to hurt another? are we hypocritical to judge a person for their apathetic, almost psychopathic nature? regarding the trial, is it not fair to consider the past of a person? to truly figure out how or why they did it, don't you need to learn about their past, get an insight into their psyche? why is him being judged for his indifference absurd? sure, he was being judged for murder, but his indifference to everything was a sign of something psychopathic. it's important to look at both a person's mental state and the facts of what happened when deciding if they're guilty. we need to make sure we're fair when we decide, not just judging them based on their emotions. so i guess the judges were in fact somewhat hypocritical but did they not consider both? both his behavior and his crime? he might have gotten out of capital punishment by pretending to care, but he also might not have. that's why we have psychological evaluations, to truly know what's going in someone's head and why.
Thank you for this explainer video, I just read this book in French because I’m learning the language and it is hailed as one of the great works in French literature. As someone who went through an existential crisis and suffered from depression throughout all high school and college, I saw some of my former self in Mersault and am happy to report that I now strongly disagree with his (and Camus’) form of thinking. Mersault’s life was indeed meaningless and absurd because he made it so. He never loved nor cared for others, nor experienced life, nor pursued any passions. He obediently worked his soul crushing 9 to 5 and succumbed to addiction. Sounds like depression as I knew it. His disconnection from society and others allowed him to be callous to his mother’s death, to be complicit in the suffering of his neighbor’s maîtresse, using Marie for his own physical pleasure yet denying the unconditional love of Marie, killing the Arab in cold blood, and shutting out everyone around him. All evidence showed that Mersault simply did not value human life and his absurdist views perpetuated this belief, leading him to not even care what happened to his own life. Was it not fitting that society would eventually show him the same contempt that he did towards it?
All very valid criticisms of The Stranger which I am inclined to agree with, but I would argue your comment gets right to the heart of Camus’ philosophy-that because life is devoid of inherent meaning, you are left with the purest form of freedom to create your own reasons to keep going, to do what makes you feel happy and fulfilled. This idea is developed in moving detail in The Myth of Sisyphus, in which Camus discusses how to live a life worthwhile when existence has no inherent meaning. I strongly suggest you read those essays to get a fuller picture about what his philosophy is about. The example I like to use of an absurd hero is Andy Dufresne from The Shawshank Redemption. He has completely lost his freedom for life after being convicted of a murder he didn’t commit-in part because of his cold and apparently remorseless demeanor, like Meursault. Knowing full well of the absurdity of his sentence, Andy refuses to let that break him, and he improves the lives of everyone around him, finding his own meaning to keep him going. The big difference I see between Andy and Meursault-besides guilt-is that Andy had the chance to come to terms with the absurd to make him a warmer and more caring person. Meursault died before he had the chance.
Great summary. And I was greatful that you added Camus's comments regarding what he meant by writing the book. That saves really a lot research on what he actually meant by writing the book. I'm not sure but "catcher in the rye" came to me as a very similiar book. Because of the simplicity of the story, you can create millions of meanings which actually was not the purpose. Humans are very attracted to mystery, I think thats why the book Stranger attracted many people. I will check out you other videos... ✌️🙋🏻♂️👏
I knew a guy just like him with Asperger's syndrome. This is one of my favourite books, it was bittersweet philosophical and his romance with Marie sums up his character pretty apt.
My problem with Camus is that Sisyphus isn’t actually happy most of the time… so he diagnoses the problem of the human condition without giving a good enough cure
the first sentence doesnt really substantiate his indifference tho does it? i mean the telegram he got was extremely vague, stating "Mothers deceased, funeral tomorrow" so one genuinely wouldnt know when the mother died whether it was yesterday, today or 2 days ago... this says little ab Merisaults character and more ab the person who sent the telegram.
