Morality is the central question in Albert Camus' The Stranger. We are introduced to an utterly detached protagonist, Meursalt, and his struggles to come to terms with a world predicated on morality. Meursalt makes no moral judgments, not even on himself. He commits a heinous act of murder, and yet the reader is left feeling abandoned, left wondering exactly how to judge the man that feels no wrong.
Camus clearly comes from the perspective that there is no morality; rather, morality is imposed upon us by society. Camus characterizes his protagonist with sensory details, rather than moral judgments. Meursalt wonders why the world sees him as peculiar, because from his perspective, he is the only true moral basis. We see characters throughout the novel that defy traditional morality, and yet there are others who enforce it with an intense Christian vigor. One lawyer shoves the crucifix in Meuralt's face, demanding him to see God. To him, morality, and specifically Christianity, are fundamental to the human condition. Meursalt proves otherwise.
We often wonder what the root of evil is. How could someone be evil when morality is so utterly true? Camus offers an explanation. Some are born with a lacking. Others lose their sense of right and wrong altogether.
The Stranger offers only that some are born without an innate moral code. Camus criticizes that everyone is fundamentally without, but is never able to convincingly prove that. He sticks to what he knows he can prove: the amorality of one man. It is true that we do not understand the workings of the minds of individuals. Perception and judgments are independent for each person. Such people need society to demand morality of them if we are to have a functioning culture. Striving for what is morally right serves in the best interest of everyone. Therefore, we need morality.
However, Camus is unable to prove that everyone is born without a moral code. While he does show that morality is imposed upon the man without it, he does not comment on whether the imposers simply drank the Kool-Aid and became moral through osmosis.
The Stranger adds a valuable data point on the quest to uncover the source of the moral code. Morality does not exist in everyone's nature, says Camus. In this way, society defines morality for some who need it. To others, I believe, morality is innate. The question as to whether each person has the same moral code remains to be seen. Is morality a fundamental milieu, that one either has, or does not? Or does each person define their own moral code?
The Stranger was more useful than most in discovering the answer to this question. The more I debate it, the more I begin to realize that it may be a lifelong question without any clear answer. These are some of the most important questions, but also some of the most frustrating.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Investigation into the Morals of the Invisible Man
"For, like almost everyone else in our country, I started out with my share of optimism. I believed in hard work and progress and action, but now, after first being 'for' society and then 'against' it, I assign myself no rank or any limit, and such an attitude is very much against the trend of the times." -- The Invisible Man
Throughout Ralph Ellison's The Invisible Man, the nameless narrator struggles with the moral merits of following the "rules" set forth by the powerful entities within a society. He starts out his life with a mission to be the "successful" black man in 1950s America. He follows the rules and stays in his place in order to succeed within the channels that have been set up for him.
He struggles with why he must follow these rules, to submit to more powerful men. In a sense, it was only "moral" for the narrator to be who others expected him to be: Southern, submissive, and post-slavery black. The world does not reward this cultural morality, however, when the narrator is chewed up and spit out for circumstances beyond his control.
The narrator finds a new sense of morality, one that reflects the revolutionaries at the time: to rebel is to stand up for the morally right. This sentiment becomes a problem when he realizes that he was not following his own moral code, but the code of the revolutionary agenda.
This story brings some important answers to whether morality is derived from society, or whether it is innate. In one sense, the morals as defined for black men did come directly from the powers that be, or in a broader sense, from society. Certain expectations were imposed upon these men and women not because some fundamental sense of morality compelled them to do so, but because others simply came to expect such actions. However, in another sense, the narrator does find a moral code within himself, when he finally becomes invisible, assigning himself "no rank or limit" except those he deemed necessary.
The moral code set out by the imposition of society was easily laid out and followed; the narrator's own moral code was not quite as straightforward. Morality is not an easy question, and internal morality can at times be more murky than external morality. Perhaps this is why we tend to opt for the latter. Internal morality requires constant reevaluation and testing, whereas external morality is straightforward and consistent throughout groups.
It is up to the individual to determine how much of his morality he will acquire through osmosis, and how much he can generate within himself. This keen insight I will carry with me as I read in future books. I have yet to determine what factors cause individuals to choose their balance between the two.
Throughout Ralph Ellison's The Invisible Man, the nameless narrator struggles with the moral merits of following the "rules" set forth by the powerful entities within a society. He starts out his life with a mission to be the "successful" black man in 1950s America. He follows the rules and stays in his place in order to succeed within the channels that have been set up for him.
He struggles with why he must follow these rules, to submit to more powerful men. In a sense, it was only "moral" for the narrator to be who others expected him to be: Southern, submissive, and post-slavery black. The world does not reward this cultural morality, however, when the narrator is chewed up and spit out for circumstances beyond his control.
The narrator finds a new sense of morality, one that reflects the revolutionaries at the time: to rebel is to stand up for the morally right. This sentiment becomes a problem when he realizes that he was not following his own moral code, but the code of the revolutionary agenda.
This story brings some important answers to whether morality is derived from society, or whether it is innate. In one sense, the morals as defined for black men did come directly from the powers that be, or in a broader sense, from society. Certain expectations were imposed upon these men and women not because some fundamental sense of morality compelled them to do so, but because others simply came to expect such actions. However, in another sense, the narrator does find a moral code within himself, when he finally becomes invisible, assigning himself "no rank or limit" except those he deemed necessary.
The moral code set out by the imposition of society was easily laid out and followed; the narrator's own moral code was not quite as straightforward. Morality is not an easy question, and internal morality can at times be more murky than external morality. Perhaps this is why we tend to opt for the latter. Internal morality requires constant reevaluation and testing, whereas external morality is straightforward and consistent throughout groups.
It is up to the individual to determine how much of his morality he will acquire through osmosis, and how much he can generate within himself. This keen insight I will carry with me as I read in future books. I have yet to determine what factors cause individuals to choose their balance between the two.