- Are the opinions of the flat characters portrayed in the court sequences that of bitterness because of Meursalt's personal philosophy and if so, how does Camus portray those opinions effect the plot?
- Why does Camus's interpretation of Meursalt's philosophy change from part one to part two?
- Why does Camus's narration suddenly portray Meursalt with more emotion in the court?
- What is the effect of having dialogue interspersed within the paragraphs rather than begin new paragraphs?
- What is the connection between the setting and the actions of the characters placed in the novel by Camus?
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Journal #16: 5 Questions
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
#4: Having dialogue interspersed throughout the paragraphs creates the feel that it is a human's thoughts, giving the reader a more genuine account of Meursault's story.
#2. Through the structure of two parts, Camus follows the same philosophy by having Meursault awkwardly operate within society's boundaries in part one. The second part is used to demonstrate how Meursault ultimately transcends society's symbolic imprisonment.
In question two it is explained that Mersault's description of philosophy changes from part one to part two. I believe that it is based on the fact that in part one Mersault is relatively free to do and believe in whatever it is that he wants. This is contrary to part two when he is in jail and the court and society is surrounding him telling him what to do and what to believe in.
#2: By changing the interpretation of Meursault's philosophy between the two parts, Camus introduces an almost entirely new character to illustrate the change that takes place within a person who has just uprooted every moral he has ever known from one who lives an absurd lifestyle.
The interspersion of dialog within the paragraphs helps show us that what Meursault is telling us might be unreliable.
Post a Comment