Book Insight

Translating “Authentic” Through a Stranger

A little piece of Albert Camus’ The Stranger

The Stranger is a 1942 novel by Albert Camus. It tells about Meursault’s life, a Frenchman who lived in Algiers, who at the end of the story was sentenced to death for the charge that not be based on his offense — He was brought to the Court after he killed an Arab but sentenced to death for not crying over his mother’s death.

Meursault was a simple and straightforward man, and certainly “strange”. He acted unlike common people in facing the same things. For instance, while others are sad, happy, or emotionally are volatile on certain events, he will look it indifferently. He regards things as they are.

I found nothing when I read The Stranger for the first time. From the first page to the last page, I only found vapidness in Meursault’s life, except that he was close to a woman named Marie.

“Mother died today. Or, maybe, yesterday; I can’t be sure. The telegram from the Home says: Your Mother passed away. Funeral tomorrow. Deep sympathy. Which leaves the matter doubtful; it could have been yesterday.” — The Stranger by Albert Camus.

The citation above, which is the beginning of this book stand for that vapidness enough, as if there is nothing interesting that will be served afterward.

Some people may feel the meaninglessness of life after they read this book — some had banned young people to read it. Camus as if left us alone in a quiet crowd.

But, if we want to reveal the message, such a state exactly forces us to ask: what does all this mean? Why I’m here? And in contrast, it helps us in making our own decisions. Sometimes we need to do rereading on a book to get the messages — publishers will not publish useless scripts.

At this point, we understand that The Stranger is a small piece of Camus’ own thoughts about life and its meaning. He was an existentialist who argued life basically has no meaning at all and that’s why we must find our own.

The authentication in this Camus’ book served through Meursault’s way of life, that by his own will and consideration face reality. Even if it seems absurd at times as when he shot an Arab with a hard-to-accept reason for a result that isn’t simple — dazzled by the sun.

If we perceive “authentic” as something natural, genuine, then decisions that had been made by Meursault represent it enough. Why? If you notice, none of his decisions against of background by morals or general standards of how people should be acted. Simply, Meursault always acted with his own will.

Two things that have enabled such things were the question “why?” and Meursault’s honest manner: he never tried to exaggerate anything.

He didn’t have to cry when he heard his mother died or accompanied her to the funeral, he helped his friend due to he didn’t find a reason to deny it, he didn’t speak too much at the time of his trial as he didn’t have a reason to boast.

Most people, as also represented by those around Meursault, expect a more “feeling” or perhaps “small talk” attitude. But what’s the point? Cry over the dead and then what? Time will not move backward.

After all, there was no urgent reason for Meursault to cry — unless you, for example, want him to follow the “habit” of people in general which then urges Meursault to pretend.

Meursault’s authenticity could be seen as well from the way his difficulty to be accepted by people around him, except some of his friends and of course Marie because she craved to be married by him. Instead, I suspect that some of the excluded support Meursault simply as he aligned or didn’t contradict their interests in the relationship.

At this point, we could understand that “authentic” requires us to pass through the boundaries, and it means confronting all standing on the boundaries.

We have ever heard a strange sound from one of our friends in a class, it may be like an argument that there must be no country or government or morals are not important to organize society. You can imagine what will happen if the majority views are faced with minority views.

Being authentic is like being an ice-splitting ship in the arctic — splitting the vast frozen ocean to make new paths.

Being authentic is never separated from the confrontation of mainstream views because you will be considered as a stranger. But that’s the risk, and of course, it’s your own honesty, as Meursault did.

We can also understand why more people tend to stick to a certain common point of view instead of finding their own way, the reason is that on the other hand people don’t have to face any kind of confrontation, and that’s convenient, even though they sometimes have to lie to each other.

I’m not trying to be a defender for Meursault. The point is that we can discover the positive side of a stranger’s life story: how we understand our differences, how to act as we are, and how we find the strength to face the life that sometimes alienates us.

You don’t have to be a Meursault, because there’s no moral imperative whatsoever. But that Meursault has won over the pretense was certain.