I am going to examine the major philosophical themes of Absurdism and Nihilism in The Outsider and Crime and Punishment respectively. Both novels revolve around characters who search for meaning to their lives and existence. Both characters are unconventional, solitary young men who during an oppressively hot summer commit murder and are brought to justice. In The Outsider, this struggle is conveyed through the Philosophy of The Absurd and in Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky uses the doctrine of Nihilism, the idea of existence without meaning, to demonstrate that through suffering and punishment, redemption can be achieved.
Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Using vivid imagery and strong characterisation, Camus draws on Absurdism as a philosophical movement and its search for meaning in the human existence. It is a vision of a godless life and existence as a set of random events where the only true meaning is the physical experience during one’s life and the inevitability of death. These themes are conveyed through the central character of Meursault.
In The Outsider, Camus, uses the first person narrative Meursault is portrayed as a modern day Sisyphus, who lives his life outside society’s codes and rituals. He is a man who ‘does not play the game’. He lives in a world of physical experience and is indifferent to all human relationships. Philosophically, this Absurdism is defined as ‘contrary to reason or beyond the limits of rationality; paradoxical, nonsensical, or meaningless.’ It contrasts with the Socratic view that man has a moral obligation to live ‘a good and flourishing life’. Camus suggests that life is absurd and man must accept and embrace this absurdity. Camus’ background contributed to this philosophy, ‘Poverty was never a misfortune for me, it was radiant with life’, ‘the sun and the sea cost nothing.’ He enjoyed all the central pleasures that life had to offer.
The Outsider was published in 1942 during the war years, at a time of revolt, death and exile, which helped reinforce Camus’ views of existence in a godless world, where death is an ever present random event.
Throughout the novel we are able to examine Meursault’s social and psychological characteristics. He is not only detached from society but also from the world around him. For him there is no yesterday and there is no tomorrow; there is only today, the now. Meursault is a passive character. He is indifferent to the emotions of death, love and friendship, bearing no responsibility for his actions and guided only by his experience of living his daily routine. From the beginning he shows no emotion over the death of his mother, ‘Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday, I don’t know’. Meursault shows no remorse when he receives the telegram wondering only whether she died yesterday or the day before. Furthermore the idea of the lack of meaning of human existence, is reinforced on the day of his mother’s funeral, as he refuses to see her body, acting as though it is just another day, he ‘smokes cigarettes and drinks coffee’.
After the funeral he meets Marie Cardona whom he seduces. She asks whether their relationship meant anything to him, he comments that he sees her as nothing special. ‘I told her that it didn’t mean anything but that I didn’t think so’. Their intimacy is just another opportunity for him to pursue his passions of the moment, reinforcing Camus’ notion that life is a series of actual experiences. Later, when Marie brings up the possibility of marriage he says ‘It didn’t make any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to’. The only way it would matter to him, would be if it made Marie happy. His indifference when listening to his neighbour Raymond and when he declines to accept an opportunity of going to Paris portrays him as having no ambition and as an observer of events around him.
Meursault’s senseless killing of the unknown Arab sends him to jail. What is poignant is that Meursault shoots again at the dead, lifeless man. There was no apparent motive and he seems to have acted in the ‘heat’ of the moment, with the sun overhead with its blinding rays, forcing sweat into his eyes. He shows no remorse and for this perceived moral injustice he is therefore sentenced by his peers to death by guillotine. While awaiting his sentence he appears happy in his cell. Up to this moment Meursault has been free, there has been no need to be concerned with the future and his only preoccupation was to experience all the pleasures that life can offer. He is unable to explain his actions in court as he sees no meaning in the natural world around him. The trial continues without him ever giving an opinion. He does not control his fate. He remains true to himself and his feelings and refuses to lie in court to escape punishment. Yet, when faced with death he begins to see the value of each
moment of his life. Because of death, nothing else matters, except being alive. He does not deny death as it is inevitable. Meursault is ‘an absurd hero’ as life is only given meaning when he is sentenced to death. The hope of a longer life (through an appeal) brings Meursault great joy, ‘For the first time in that night alive with signs and stars I opened myself to the general indifference of the world…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’.
In contrast to Camus, Dostoevsky, applies the third-person narrative, which at the same time he intertwines with Raskolnikov’s internal monologue, providing different interpretation to the events.
Dostoevsky, as a politically active young writer, initially embraced the ideas of Nihilism which reject authority of the state and religious conventions in favour of rationalism and individual freedom. It is a story of the fate of Nihilism and radical youth and a vision of the error and moral suffering of those who stand apart and above the law. In Crime and Punishment the central theme is the conflict between man’s rational and irrational side, between the premeditated and the unpredictable and the true extent of man’s freedom of action and choice.
Find Out How UKEssays.com Can Help You!
Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.
View our academic writing services
Raskolnikov seems to have two separate characters. “he is morose, gloomy, proud….. He has a noble nature and kind heart”. His rational and intellectual half, rooted in the belief of the “Ubermensch” makes him commit a premeditated murder. He sees Alyona, the pawnbroker as a “louse” causing harm to innocent people through her usury and justifies her murder by saying that a ‘tiny crime would be wiped out by thousands of good deeds.” For Raskolnikov the means justifies the end, ‘It was not a human being I killed, it was a principle”.
It also forces him to stand alone without companionship and influence of friends. He is totally self sufficient and above the law. He is a Napoleon. Although he tells Porfiry that he is not a Napoleon he goes on to tell him of his theory of the Extraordinary Man. This provides an insight into his actions leading up to the murder. He explains that such a man is not bound by convention and society and is free to act according to his own beliefs.
Through this we see Raskolnikov as an example of a radical nihilist, acting alone and to the detriment to society and human existence. Closely bound to this was Dostoyevsky’s idea that redemption could come through suffering and confession. Only then would man be able to achieve meaning to his life.
Throughout Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky’s use of characterization is crucial as it embodies the philosophical perspective of the philosophies presented. According to utilitarian ideals, punishment is the rational way to prevent further crime. Punishment deters potential criminals through threats of the consequences, however Dostoevsky believes that, where reason and utility fail, a change of heart and a moral code succeed. After the murder Raskolnikov falls ill and this fever heralds a change in his character. His rational side gives way increasingly to his irrational half and his sense of confusion and guilt leads to suffering. The ideas and convictions that he once clung to seem to have died with the woman pawn broker. He to declares to Porfiry that all great men with something to offer the world ‘ a ‘new word” can be above the law and will suffer for it…”suffering and pain are always obligatory on those of wide intellect and profound feeling”.
Porfiry, acts as Raskolnikov’s mirror and through him he begins to see that his salvation can only come through confession and suffering. Raskolnikov sees Sonya as a frail figure but who carries a heavy burden of suffering. He sees in her all ‘the sufferings of humanity” and wonders if she can ‘bear his own cross”. He asks her to read from the bible the Passage of the “Raising of Lazarus”. This story of how an unbeliever can overcome suffering and death persuades him to make a confession and seek redemption. When he confronts Sonya and confesses to his crime, she cries, ‘What have you done ‘ what have you done to yourself?’ And his response is just as apparent, ‘Did I murder the old woman? I murdered myself, not her!’ It signifies a rebirth in Raskolnikov’s morality and compassionate beliefs. He therefore rejects his old philosophy and accepts his guilt.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:
