Analysis of The Stranger, Letters to a Young Contrarian and Walden - Research Paper Example

Existence Perceive Essence Introduction Purposefulness of human existence, an interdependence between a human being and a god, role of destiny in the perpetual flow of events, connections between a society and an individual, existence of human soul and superpower have always been themes of great interest to people. Thinkers who devote a bigger portion of their life musing over eternal issues related to human existence are called existentialists. Even though the notion is rather new, ancient people engaged themselves in thinking over the purposefulness of human existence, trying to understand inner and outer drives of human thoughts, behaviors and deeds. The question of what is the essence of human existence has got many answers offered by different philosophers, writers, scientists, psychologists, etc. However, no one knows which answer is correct, if there is any at all. The aim of the paper is to analyze three different existential literary works, namely, Albert Camus’s The Stranger, Christopher Hitchens’s Letters to a Young Contrarian, and Henry David Thoreau’s Walden. These three authors have different writing styles. Moreover, the periods they lived or live are different and, hence, their world-views and philosophical interpretation of the purpose of human existence differ too. However, these three authors have one characteristic in common, which is the fact that they are existentialists. Everyone as Potential Stranger to Society: Interpretive Analysis of Camus’s The Stranger Albert Camus’s The Stranger (L’Etranger) was written in 1938 and published in 1942. Meursault, an anti-hero, often has to make choices. This fact is very important in the idea of existentialism. Meursault does not have a set of values a normal human being has. He does not believe in God. Furthermore, murdering of a person without any motive for that shows him as some abnormal creature. Even though he gets a life sentence for his crime, he accepts it as some form of “the benign indifference of the universe” (Camus 96). Paradoxically, in one of his essays Camus speaks of his novel The Stranger as of a “story of a man who, without any heroics, agrees to die for the truth” (qtd. in Scherr 187). Analyzing life path of the author himself, the explanation to the existentialist outlook can be found in the life hardships, unbearable poverty, WWII experience, as well as the horrors of the Nazi’s regime Camus had to go through during his life. Negative perception of reality and pessimistic mood of his works represent the logical outcome of author’s life difficulties. At the same time, however, the author was hoping for the better and never let despair take over him. His creativity and writing skills were directed onto fighting human indifference in defense of human dignity and justice. Camus’s The Stranger is a bright example of quality fiction writing and the depth of his philosophical reflection upon real life. The novel The Stranger is an existential novel with elements of realism, the absurd and even transcendentalism to some extent. Moreover, it has been claimed that the literature streams of existentialism and the absurd overlap in the novel (Baker 8). Some of the ideas expressed in The Stranger are clearly existential. However, according to Baker, even though Camus himself claimed not to be an existentialist, he experimented with different genres of literature, like many great writers did; he grew up in the same ideological climate as, for instance, Nietzsche and Kafka, and existential ideas are present in his works, including The Stranger (53). Even though one of the major themes of Camus’s The Stranger is irrationality and purposeless existence of the universe and a human being, the writer was a great moralist, because his attitude to life and morality of human deeds were never uninteresting to the writer. People engage in futile attempts to find meaning of their life. There is no rational order either in Meursault’s own life or in the lives of people surrounding him. The main character has no purpose in his life, for instance, his decision to marry Marie or to kill the Arab have no base. His life is unnecessary existence in a purposeless world. Furthermore, the author wants to make a distinction between Meursault’s life path and rational laws of society. However, even this society observes many events which happen for no reason. It is ridiculous when the attorney and the prosecutor of Meursault try to find logic in his committing murder without any purpose. They try to make up some logic out of his absurdist action. So, the attempts of the people on the trial process are actually directed onto defense of the rationality of the world and human order of life. It does not occur to them that Meaursault’s action is purposeless in the irrational and absurdist world they live in. Human beings are, thus, seen as some irrational beings that exist in the purposeless universe. Camus, thus, questions the aim of human life and, therefore, the purpose of human deed, especially wrongdoings like those he witnessed during his life in times of WWII. In addition, in his analysis Scherr concludes with similarities he finds between Meursault and Jesus Christ. Thus, the lawyers and judges behave like the Jews, especially the pries Caiaphas, when they seemed to be appalled by Meursault’s atheistic confessions. Besides, the antagonist’s supper with Raymond is resemblance of Christ’s last supper with the apostles, while the murder of the Arab is the symbolic reflection of the betrayal of Christ. Therefore, Sherr concludes that Camus attempts to show the reader that Meursault is an embodiment of divine personal or Christ our absurdist society can deserve (207-208). It does not mean that the character rejects Christian beliefs in general, it is that he cannot understand why the morality and unconditioned love of Christ, which is advertised by priests, does not have connections with reality and the universe which, hence, seems to be ruled by illogical, evil and absurd laws. What is more, the guidelines Camus presents to the reader in The Stranger are not simple ones. Baker concludes that the writer offers an existential questioning of human morality, and especially of such themes as “justice and truth, freedom and happiness, life and death, and availability and non-participation” (72), presenting the absurd apparent in a balanced view of the opposites. Even though Meursault is a man who does not see a purpose in his life, he clearly learns that he just cannot exist passively. During the trial he is made listen to the nonsense of the layers who were trying to make sense out of his illogical murder. He has to face what falls out of the category of his absurd existence. The author provides hope for the better of the humanity in a symbolic divine face Meursault can see on the wall of prison. The imprisoned admits his guilt, at least partially, in non-reflexivity of his actions (Baker 73). Despite the irrationality of Meursault’s life, the sings of his transformation are obvious at the end of the book in the way of his thinking: “all that remained to hope was that on the day of my execution there should be a huge crowd of spectators and that they should greet me with howls of execration” (Camus 96). Modern Existence Perception in Form of a Rebellion: Hitchens’s Contrarian Letters to a Young Contrarian by Christopher Hitchens represents one more existential piece of writing which incorporates modern world-view and interpretation of human reality. According to Rodden, Christopher Hitchens is both one of the most prominent and controversial public thinkers of our time (93). Letters to a Young Contrarian was published in 2001; that means that we are dealing with a modern writer whose thinking must be similar to contemporary generation and, therefore, very close to the contemporary reader. A person writing letters in this work is similar to Camus’s Meursault in his rejection of social norms and values and his indignation at what he does not understand. In the preface, the author is directly and openly addressing the reader starting with “My dear X” (Hitchens vii). The two major themes of Hitchens’s work are religion and race, no matter how hackneyed they may seem. Furthermore, since the main idea of existentialism is concerned with purpose of human beings existence, as well as the relationships between the humankind, the universe and the God, Letters to Young Contrarian is existential piece of writing. Hitchens has analyzed the humanity on a big scale and from a variety perspectives paid close attention to human progress and its effects on development of the inner sides of human soul. Ironically, the writer admits: “We still inhabit the prehistory of our race, and have not caught up with the immense discoveries about our own nature and about the nature of the universe” (108). Human progress is, thus, heading into the huge bottomless abyss. According to Dugdale, unlike many existentialists, Hitchens does not provide the reader with an advice on what to believe in after the rejection of monotheistic religions which are worth no more than fairy tale about Santa Claus. What the author actually does is to stop to ponder over the purposefulness of one’s existence, life goals and values and start living this life, not simply existing and doing daily routine as if being programmed. Moreover, Hitchens seems to be targeting only young readers, the generation which is non-resistant to change and open to new perspectives. Having lived through various life difficulties and having analyzed his life in-depth, the author is willing to share his valuable life experience with already formed and would-be contrarians. He alludes to many works of famous thinkers, such as Zola, Rilke, Byron, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Sartre, Bacon, Pascal, to name just a few. This work seems to be a complete analysis of author’s huge baggage of knowledge and mature experience. He wants future generation not to behave in a passive way, but to be active like a radical, a rebel, an angry individual, finally, like a dissident. Moreover, according to Hitchens, “the noble title of “dissident” must be earned rather than claimed”, because, as the writer further explains, this notion “connotes sacrifice and risk rather than mere disagreement” that “has been consecrated by many exemplary and courageous men and women” (1). Thus, the book is a call to action and a generous inspiration a father can afford giving to his offspring. Miller underlines that Hitchens has taken Orwell as some kind of intellect father, so it is obvious that between a father and a son there will be similarities (84). The exploration of contrarian positions the author offers is very vast; the list of contrarian options available start from noble ones and finish with irrational and risky rebellion. In the age of democracy and freedom, negotiations and options of consensus, the need for radical actions to make the life different in a rebellious rather than respectful way is perceived with much attention and interest, especially among the young readers. Because the book was written in 2001 and because it covers a vast area of human knowledge presented with the help of comparative and analytical approaches, it fits best the interests of contemporary readers and is, therefore, much more interesting than Camus’s work analyzed in this paper. The main point of such comparison is that Camus’s work is less interesting for today’s society, but not less valuable or meaningful. Also, the role of the narrator is also unique; it is that of a mentor or rather a mentoring contrarian. At the same time, however, not only this one, but many other works written by Hitchens have proven to be very criticizing and filled with rebellious spirit (Miller 83). It should be noted that his inspiration Hitchens has also drown from famous writers, especially George Orwell. Orwell’s role in Hitchens’s work is very important, because many of his ideas the author of Letters to a Young Contrarian has borrowed from this particular writer. And, even though, he highly respects the writer, Hitchens finds enough features to criticize him for. Hitchens admires Orwell for his integrity, great intellectual independence, and, finally, his sincerity (Miller 84). The writer points out to one of the Orwell’s interesting conclusions that “prime responsibility lay in being able to tell people what they did not wish to hear” (Hitchens 29). The range of subjects Hitchens covers in his book is as wide as those covered by his favorite writer, George Orwell. Christopher Hitchens is very knowledgeable individual in many spheres of life, starting from politics and ending with military service; his writing skills help him to pass his knowledge and wisdom to future generation, a new human race of contrarians. Thus, like a transcendentalist and a great writer-thinker, Hitchens does not simply advice to be contrarian just for the sake of being opposite to the major mass stream. The major point of being contrary is being opposite or against wrongness of thoughts, deeds and words or, in other words, being a lifelong truth-seeker. Solitude as Disobedience to Materialistic Society with Artificial Values in Thoreau’s Walden Another work which will be analyzed is quite different from those discussed above, it is Henry Thoreau’s novel called Walden. Unlike The Stranger and Letters to the Contrarian, Walden is a more realistic account of one man’s deed which could be exemplary. Moreover, the events, as well as causes and effects of the actions, are set in the period which is more than one hundred and fifty years far from modern times. Walden is a work where author’s philosophical and economical beliefs found their meaningful and interpretive analysis. For Thoreau, natural environment and independence from material world are much more valuable than technical progress and world of material wealth. His confinement in a cabin by the pond is described as solitude of a free and happy man. There is nothing artificial in his work, as his ideas and experience of living by the pond for two years, two months, and two days are original (Maynard 305). Certainly, observing nature and the experience the writer got in the process of his experiment found their detailed description, reflection and interpretation on the paper, in his literary work. Maybe, his ideas of solitude might seem too simplistic and not unique for a contemporary reader, the very essence and the very truth which lies in between the lines of this literary prose has significant meaning. Even though due to human progress and various discoveries, humans become more knowledgeable, they have not, unfortunately, become wiser, more compassionate, friendlier, or more helping towards other human beings. Only at the end of their lives some people (but not all) began to understand the true value of their life. However, in most cases, it is too late when they begin to understand this. Furthermore, the writer himself admits that he did not invent anything new, the nature and simple life is something people have experienced from their very appearance on the earth: “The very simplicity and nakedness of man’s life in the primitive ages imply this advantage at least, that they left him still but a sojourner in nature” (Thoreau 35). For Thoreau, sound of birds and movements of little bugs in the grass is much more dear than sound of shouts at the marketplace or constant hurrying of busy people. It is not that socializing with other people like friends and relatives is not important to him. On contrary, he greatly values true friendship and mutual support between people. The main idea is that people have shifted values in the wrong direction. Business dealer who seem to be individuals void of simple human feelings and understanding of others are on the verge of the gap called vanity and senseless waste of material wealth at the expense of moral wealth. Thoreau expressed only compassion towards such people during his age, era of industrialization and boom of technological progress (Bloom 119). In fact, Thoreau made accounting himself to present a precise list of both his expenditures and earnings. The writer even included the figures of how much money he spent on salt during two years. Some might think it is minor thing, but you have to admit that our life consists of thousands of minor things. Thus, having analyzed some of the economic tricks and affairs and having made little statistical calculations, Thoreau came to conclusion that he was giving much more that the state than he was actually receiving in form of salary and wages. Besides, even nowadays, we know that many laws are unjust and that we deserve much more than we have, but we can do nothing about it. Thoreau found solutions to most, if not all, of his problems in solitude by Walden Pond. The writer agrees that his statistics and accounting are not very accurate, but it does help to conclude that the money he spent on food was very little and since “it would cost incredibly little trouble to obtain one’s necessary food, … a man may use as simple a diet as the animals, and yet retain health and strength” (Thoreau 56). On the whole, according to Bloom, purposes of this transcendental work fall roughly into two distinct categories: first, what Thoreau detests and tries to reject; and, second, what he likes and tries to advocate (Bloom 81). Unlike Hitchens, Thoreau does not reject what he dislikes openly, he uses irony instead. He alludes to reader’s imagination in his advice not to buy a farm, but simply imagine that one can afford it and, thus, become rich. With the help of imagination a poor person can become very rich like a king. Additionally, people live in accordance with the idea of progress in economic, technological, and social spheres. However, on the basis of his life experience, as well as two years spent in the cabin in the wood, Thoreau doubts such idea of progress. He believes that any advances humans make very rarely lead to positive outcomes in the long run. Besides, being in a constant rush and pursuit of material wealth makes us enjoy our lives less, because we actually do not have time for that (Sagoff). Capitalistic world which was continuously expanding with great speed has created a number of materialistic traps that many people find themselves caught by even nowadays. Most human discoveries and inventions turn out to have negative consequences sooner or later. Invention of pills and different types of medicine cures many diseases, but it is harmful to many other organs, like liver or stomach. Or, for instance, invention of a bomb has lead to mass destructions, such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Developments in chemical industry have led to multiple pollutions of water, air and land. Discovery of an atom has lead to invention of atomic bomb and construction of nuclear power plant that also has many negative effects to human health, as well as pollution of the natural environment. Conclusion To summarize, it is necessary to stress that the three writers whose works have been analyzed in this paper have equally made important contribution into the sphere of literature and philosophy. The works of Camus, Hitchens, and Thoreau are very different in their layout, approach to life and interpretation of human experience. Yet, each one of them is concerned with purposeful existence of human beings, intrinsic life values, healthy morality and right direction to choose for future generation. Camus’s Meursault is somewhat unusual figure (he is actually a stranger in his society), but due to his strikingly irrational attitude to his existence the reader can see the difference between the real and imagined values. Hitchens presents his philosophical rejection of the contemporary order of life calling the young contrarian not to stay aside and take action in his Letters to a Young Contrarian. The narrator of Walden, or Thoreau himself, undertakes a serious experience of two-year solitude in the wood and concludes that most of us worship material gods like money, land, houses, etc. Each one of these three authors contemplates on the human existence and is, thus, highly concerned with the future of humanity in his own particular way. The concluding line of this paper can be a rhetorical question of Henry Thoreau, which he asked in one of his letters to H. G. O. Blake: What is the use of a house if you haven’t got a tolerable planet to put it on? Works Cited Baker, E. Richard. The Dynamics of the Absurd in the Existentialist Novel. New York: Peter Lang. 1993. Print. Bloom, Harold. Henry David Thoreau’s Walden. New York: Chelsea House, 1987. Print. Dugdale, Timothy. “Christopher Hitchens: Letters to a Young Contrarian.” Metro Times, 2002. Web. 9 Dec. 2011. Maynard, W. Barksdale. “Thoreau’s House at Walden.” The Art Bulletin 81.2 (1999): 303-325. Print. Miller, Cheryl. “Orwell’s Example.” Policy Review, 2002: 83-88. Print. Rodden, John. Every Intellectual’s Big Brother: George Orwell's Literary Siblings. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Place of Publication: Austin, TX, 2006. Print. Sagoff, Mark. “Do We Consume Too Much?” The Atlantic Monthly 279.6 (June 1997): 80-96. Print. Scherr, Arthur. “Meursault's Dinner with Raymond: A Christian Theme in Albert Camus's L'Etranger.” Christianity and Literature 58.2 (2009): 187-210. Print. Read More