I guess French existentialism isn't really my thing? I didn't find the book as absurd as people make it out to be. I understand the idea and premise behind this, but it was just...meh. It feels like one of those books where it makes a bunch of lists as a classic and a "must read before you die" but ends up feeling like assigned homework that isn't nearly as influential as everyone makes it out to be.

If you want some books on philosophy and existentialism in particular, there are better options. I'm not trying to be mean and I don't think this is a "bad" book, but it's just not my thing. ( )

I remember seeing this exact book (with this intriguing cover) in my parents' bookshelf back when I was growing up. I knew it wasn't something I would be interested in as a child. And then I forgot about it, for probably 35 years! I happened upon it a few weeks ago and, because of the cover and the knowledge that at least one of my parents had been interested in it all those years ago, I decided to give it a try.
The writing itself is good. The storyline was pretty easy to follow. I neared the end of the book before I really appreciated the whole point of it. (It's not a long book, 154 pages, but it still took me a while to read it.) I thought it was a boring story of a boring man. And, I guess, it was. But it wasn't until I got to the very end that I *got it*. I won't spoil it for you. I'll just say that, at this exact, precise time in my life, this book was great for me. If I had read it 2 years ago, I'd have scoffed at it and put it down, or I'd have finished it but written scathing reviews of how pointless it all was. But at this moment in my life, there WAS a point, and I got it! ( )

I've never heard reference to this one, but it's a quick and gripping story of a man who makes questionable decisions immediately after his mother's death, leading up to his killing of someone in some sort of dual/defense of his friend. All his past actions post funeral are laid out as part of his trial, and he is condemned for behaving so oddly rather than for being a murderer. The different is put on trial rather than the crime. ( )

The English version of Camus's well-reviewed French book, L'etranger. An ordinary man is drawn into a increasingly absurd spiral of events, some beyond his control. Raises questions on what can man do when he is confronted with things that seem senseless.
My opinion: My very first philosophy based book. But no regrets reading this at all. Right from the first line, you are sucked into the vortex created by the book in your brain. You read and you question and you read and you question... A superb experience. I'm glad I didn't read this as part of any course because I don't think I would have enjoyed it as much.
Rating: 4/5



*********************************************
Join me on the Facebook group, "Readers Forever!", for more reviews and other book-related discussions and fun. ( )

I was almost hoping not to like this one because it's considered peak philosophy bro literature. Sadly I found it very frustrating to the point where I couldn't put it down. You want him to defend himself because you know what's happening, but he's so trusting of his government. The book makes me feel like Im slowly getting drowned in a box thats filling with water. ( )

ReadAroundTheWorld. Algeria

The Stranger was written in 1942 by Nobel prize-winning Algerian author Albert Camus and has been translated from French. It is hailed as a literary classic and masterpiece of existential philosophy and absurdism.

The story is set in Algiers. It begins with the narrator, a man called Meursault, going to pay his respects to his mother who has just died in a nursing home. In the second half of the book his friend Raymond gets into a fight with some Arabs on the beach. One of the Arabs is brother to Raymond’s ex-girlfriend, who Raymond beat up for cheating on him. Meursault talks Raymond out of shooting them, takes the gun, but later ends up shooting one of the men himself. He is put on trial, but the trial seems to focus more on his lack of emotion around his mother’s death than the events of the shooting.

Although I can appreciate the quality of the writing and depth of thought, I would have to honestly say I did not enjoy this book. The characters were not likeable, were repulsive even, and the story not particularly gripping. Maybe it was just too clever and sophisticated for me. ( )

120

The Stranger is cool and edgy existentialism if you're 15 years old. ( )

Albert Camus en su cúspide literaria. La indiferencia como estilo de vida. ( )

The Stranger has arguably one of the best commentaries on the subject of amorality. It establishes a clear link between the protagonist and his surroundings while showing a complete sentimental detachment between them, providing a perfect setup for the second half of the book. The seemingly mundane state of affairs described in the first half serves as an incredible contrast to the state described in the second book, and The Stranger relies heavily on this contrast to reflect on the perils of being sociable while being amoral. ( )

I wish i could be more like the main character. To think more about myself, the immediate context, the moment. To let go all the complexity you can't control anyway. Reading the slightly detached thoughts of the character feels like flying on a fresh breeze along a sandy shore. ( )

i found the character intros in pt. 1 to be hilarious.

Meursault pretty much only cared about his current mood and direct setting. During pt. 2, he acts in a textbook "external locus of control" demeanor. ( )

A strange look into the mind of a condemned man.
At first the story of a man who returns home when his mother dies - then his story when he is tried and convicted for shooting a man at the beach. In prison awaiting his death he ponders the meaning of his life mainly concluding it is absurd. ( )

I reread this book so that I could remember what happened before reading The Meursault Investigation, by Daoud. I still don't find this book particularly fantastic. The main character is ok, just a dude who is not particularly emotional and who is matter-of-fact about everything. But he is also really clueless about how people react to him, and he and everyone around him seem to like overreacting to stuff, beyond what I found realistic. The nonchalant way the main character goes about murdering the Arab on the beach was interesting and also the way he just accepts his death sentence the way he's accepted everything else. But I did not find anything much to make me think this book was amazing enough to be on major booklists. ( )

Meursault's mother has died, so he travels to her funeral at an assisted living facility outside of the city. When he returns home to Algiers continues drifting through life without any real motivation or preferences, until he ends up, for no reason he or anyone else can fathom, fatally shooting a stranger on the beach. He is then put through a rather futile murder trial.

This book has basically the vibes I was expecting, having read Camus before, but not the plot. It's hard to feel much sympathy for the narrator. He seems to genuinely have trouble engaging with the world but he also tacitly endorses animal abuse, domestic abuse, assault, racism, and lying to the police even though we know that he knows they are wrong. Oh, and the part where he shoots a stranger 5 times for no reason! The trial is slightly absurdist, as the prosecutor focuses on Meursault's relationship with his mother instead of his actions, but it's hard to argue he shouldn't be convicted for killing a person without any reason or remorse.

This edition was translated by Stuart Gilbert. The beginning of the book is very short choppy sentences, which led me to feel very removed from the narrator. That certainly could have been purposeful, based on the plot, but there's no translator's note so I'm not sure if it's just a translation quirk.

This book is not one I'm going to revisit, but I do still have a lot of thoughts. ( )

I admit part of this is me kneejerking against its reputation, although I genuinely didn't find much that made it worthwhile - it IS kind of interesting, although it's hard to understand the emphasis on "oh he doesn't react properly!" as opposed to him being a murderer and immediately joining in with a stranger's plot to violently assault a woman he's been pimping out. The narrator gives an affect of not caring but the enthusiasm with which he joins in with Raymond's violence is shocking - he refuses to help a long term neighbour find his dog, he refuses to care about his girlfriend's feelings, but a violent, racist pimp? Mersault is WAY up for that.

I suppose the like, deeper moral contrast is with Mersault killing a random Arab man supposedly because "it was hot" and the state killing him because he didn't properly fulfil his role as a French citizen. As someone pretty wholly opposed to the death penalty, there is something there. But it's hard to take the philosophising of Mersault seriously in the context that he did very much kill someone in cold blood, and if he had got away with it it would be because French settler society is horrifically racist.

I think there's a few interesting things to stew on but primarily Mersault is just like so many other racist, violent, misogynist men. I can imagine some of it was innovative at the time but similar ideas since make it seem shallow. There's something to be said for a portrait of an unpleasant man in a racist society but Camus doesn't really want to go into it. Frustrating book whose reputation surprises me. ( )

Fun fact: While I was reading the book, a lot of the behaviours and reasonings of Merault made me think of a person with Aspergers,and after doing some research it turns out that there is evidence that the character was based on Camus' friend who had Aspergers.

In The Stranger, the main character Meursault is a nihilist who believes that life has no meaning. He lives detached from the people around him and does not care about his life, family, or friends. He does not abide by society's rules or expectations. This ultimately seems not to be a choice he makes,but rather a lack of understanding on this part.

We see a transition happen throughout the novel where towards the end, Meursault is no longer indifferent towards the world's indifference. Instead, he embraces it. He realizes that regardless of what people think of him individually, even if they hate him, the human race at large is his companion because every life could turn out every way, and so they are all united even though they happened to turn out this way.

Meurault plays with the idea of human interchangeability. Yet, when he first mentions this idea at the beginning of the book, he does so in an apathetic and indifferent manner. Towards the end however, Meursault describes this passionately, as an ideal of human equality. That is because your life could have turned out any way, but it just happened to turn out this way, and therefore you must treasure it and accept it for what it is.

Aaah There is so much more to this book that I am probably missing. All in all, a powerful narrative that I will undoubtedly revisit in the future ( )

This is a book that deserves multiple readings and means different things to readers. I only read it once, and I am not sure if I understand it. But I think I know how the protagonist feels - the dont-want-to-care about things attitude, and doing things in the heat of the moment. Not to the extent of committing murder in the case of Meursault but sometimes, you don't know why you did certain things and you can't explain. ( )

"Like" doesn't really fit for this title. The work is darkly compelling with a man's whole world view outlined by plain sentence structure and chronological unfolding of ordinary horrifying events related in matter-of-fact first person. ( )

An old favourite that I finally got round to reading in the original French and while it's faded somewhat for me over the years already as I've grown older and grown away from some of what initially struck a chord with me, I still like it a good deal and had been planning to delve into it from quite early on - surprised it took me this long.

____

A really quick and easy read, I must have been close to the golden 98% comprehension while going through this as 200 pages has certainly never been so rapid for me in French. The simple prose meant just a few unfamiliar turns of phrase and some legal terminology required me to use the Kindle look-up, but otherwise this was quite seamless. ( )

Is Merseault evil? His behavior and reactions disgust officials of the state, who seem to argue that he's totally lacking in emotion, as evidenced by his failure to weep at his mother's funeral. The central question is whether the reader is supposed to feel this same revulsion. Merseault's girlfriend, Marie, stands by him at the trial, along with his neighbors and acquaintances. But this doesn't change the fact that The Stranger is a world without a moral compass, where a man can abuse his dog and pine for its loss at the same time - similarly to Merseault's feelings about Marie?

I guess the absurdism is that the amoral, godless Merseault is being judged by the morality of a society that Camus sees as being a hollow facade. This novel is provocative for it cynicism about these moral questions. ( )

The sitcom "Seinfeld" is famously known as a "show about nothing." Of course the "Seinfeld" episodes are always about something (though often not immediately obvious) and could also be quite dark.
I think Camus might have enjoyed "Seinfeld." ( )

How is morality determined? Is it possible to cut 'conscience' and 'love' into a formal framework? ( )

A quick classic - themes related with those in CRIME AND PUNISHMENT. ( )

My thoughts on this book are kinda all over the place. i did not enjoy the first half. i mean i sorta like camus’ writing style, the mundanity and simplicity really emphasize how Normal—im just realizing i have no clue what the main dudes name is—but how normal he is. and then he kills the dude and he still is so normal. idk. he has no thoughts or feelings really, not until his trial and his sentence. now his trial was mildly interesting, and i really enjoyed the part where he’s awaiting death, i honestly think camus could have dragged it out to the moment of the execution for more introspection, because that was the best part. so yeah idk. obviously though its one of those books that isnt really meant to be like the #1 coolest story you’ve ever read the whole time. a lot of classics are like this, where its like “why the fuck am i even reading this” for 3/4ths of the book and the end is like OHHHHH, i annotated a little bit and that helped me pick up the symbolism of marie and the motif of heat so yea ( )