Timeline for Is Camus 'Outsider' an argument for, or a critique of existentialism?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 10, 2012 at 14:37 | comment | added | SAHornickel | I'll answer that question with a question. Is his lack of intimacy from the reader or from himself? Approaching this from a (literary) existentialist viewpoint, I have to conclude that his coldness is his grief. We act the same way with ourselves all the time. When we're angry, we don't talk about our anger, we talk to ourselves, justifying our anger, ignoring our irrationality and the cause. Likewise, we try to find meaning in our grief. We try to justify it. But the grief is only our personal experience, regardless of the cause. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 14:26 | comment | added | Mozibur Ullah | So Merseult is pushed into creating his own ethical universe. Except that he appears to take that for granted. Although, the novel has an introspective tone; we're never allowed any real intimacy with him. If I recall correctly, in th early part of the novel his other dies. And he's dispassionate about it. Is this dispassion a symbol of the 'meaningless' of the universe, and not a part of Merseults ethical universe? | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 14:19 | comment | added | SAHornickel | I was trying to provide the logical outcome of absurdism. Our inability to find meaning in the universe implies the necessity of our own agency in defining meaning for the individual. It's so close to existentialism, but has that one derivative part which makes it different. That's probably why there's no literary distinction. It's just too vague a conflict. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 14:13 | comment | added | Mozibur Ullah | Actually 'The only evolution of meaning within the narrative is the slow progression towards realizing the meaninglessness of the universe and the importance of human agency.' is an outline of existentialism if I understand correctly. I thought here, you were outlining why it was absurdist from a philosophical point of view. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 14:09 | comment | added | SAHornickel | I'll try not to make my field sound simplistic; but existentialism in literature occurs when the narrative is played out internally. There might be events exterior to the character, but the conversation between the narrator and the reader reflects a conversation between the narrator and himself. In this, the reader is forced into a fictional introspection, evaluating their own feelings about the narrative through the experience of a character. In short, an existentialist book causes its reader to act the part of the character through the act of reading. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 14:03 | comment | added | Mozibur Ullah | Thanks for the clarification. Would you mind being expanding on why its an existentialist novel from the literary point of view. I'm thinking of contrasting this with 'Waiting for Godot', which if I'm not wrong is usually classified as an absurdist play, where even human agency is reduced to meaningless acts. That is Beckett is showing that the acts of an individual cannot create meaning. He takes for granted the meaningless of the universe, and imprints it on the human soul, or as Paul Valery said 'God made the universe from nothing; and it shows'. | |
| Dec 10, 2012 at 11:05 | vote | accept | Mozibur Ullah | ||
| Dec 10, 2012 at 10:58 | history | answered | SAHornickel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |