Unconsciously mysterious and bland, Meursault keeps his personal life
and sentiments a mystery to the reader for the majority of the book. By having
an untrustworthy and dull “protagonist” to base an analysis on, the reader can
make misjudged or misperceived conclusions and or statements about the book's
context or the motives of its characters. I believe that if the readers were
given a more engaged and captivating narrator to follow their perceptions and
connections with the text would be drastically altered. They would be more
insightful and understanding due to the depth and details one usually receives from
a dynamic and involved protagonist. The sole glimpse of
personal life we ever see is in the first half of the book when Maman suddenly
dies. Initially surprising to the readers, Meursault seemed absolutely
unaffected by the death of his mother. He was even seen dozing off during her
vigil, which I personally find very disturbing. He never went through stages of
denial or regret, things most people think comes naturally to anyone in
morning, but then again he displayed nothing close to morning. Unbeknownst to
us, Maman and Meursault had what some would consider an intimate and tight knit
relationship. How can we assume he does not love his mother or care about her
passing without sufficient anecdotes or personal insight of the matter?
No comments:
Post a Comment