Both Albert Camus The Stranger and Herman Melvilles Bartleby the Scrivener convey the idea that indifference to society is harmful to the self through the actions of their protagonists leading up to their deaths.
Kirandeep Kaur
Comparison of The Stranger & “Bartleby The Scrivener”
We are often told that silence is golden. However, this does not seem to hold true in “Bartleby the Scrivener” or The Stranger. In these cases, it seems to have the opposite effect, as the protagonists are faced with many challenges that become even more present because of their silence or indifference. Both Albert Camus’ The Stranger and Herman Melville’s “Bartleby the Scrivener” convey the idea that indifference to society is harmful to the self through the actions of their protagonists leading up to their deaths.
In The Stranger, Meursault’s indifference to society is obvious. He bears no emotions for anyone other than himself, not even for his own blood mother. His mother’s being put into a nursing home outside of town shows his lack of respect or care for her. He does not care for her as a son should for his mother. He is indifferent to his mother’s love for him and to society’s expectation that he should care for his mother. Even after her death, he bears absolutely no feelings or grief or remorse. To him, going to her funeral is just a hassle and a formality that he feels he owes to her as a son. “…I’ll take the two o’ clock bus and get there in the afternoon. That way I can be there for the vigil and come back tomorrow night. I asked my boss for two days off and there was no way he was going to refuse me with an excuse like that.” (Page 3). Instead of grieving over his mother’s death as any normal man would do, Meursault is more concerned with getting away from work. The mere fact that he refers to her death as an ‘excuse’ for leaving shows his lack of interest in actually attending the funeral, let alone grieving in it. This defines Meursalt’s character. When asked by his girlfriend Marie whether he loved her, his response was blank and lacked emotion. “A minute later she asked me if I loved her. I told her that it didn’t mean anything but that I didn’t think so. She looked sad.” (Page 34). Meursault is unable to express any feelings for anyone because he most likely does not possess them. Meursault’s friendship with Raymond is also interesting. Raymond openly admits everything about his life to Meursault whose indifference to society makes him trustworthy. This is because unlike others, Meursault won’t judge or look down on anything. Raymond tells Meursault of how he beat and abused his ex-girlfriend. Anyone with emotions or logic of any sort would find Raymond’s behavior wrong and demeaning but Meursault does not find it so. He couldn’t care less what or how Raymond was doing; Meursault simply goes along Raymond because he sees a potential friend in him. When Meursault shoots the Arab he initially blames it on the heat, but his doing so quite possible could have been a mere act of loyalty to his ‘friend’ Raymond. Meursault’s simplistic view sees nothing wrong with killing another man. He becomes deprived of all social values. These three actions are very important in his trial because they lead to his death penalty conviction. At his trial, these very instances are brought into play and his character is questioned. The magistrate is disgusted with Meursault’s indifference and proclaims him to be a hardened soul. The prosecutor alleges that Meursault’s lack of grief over his mother’s death threatens the morals of society. Meursault’s conviction is based not so much on his committing of a murder, as it is on his prior attitudes and actions towards the people around him. Had he not been indifferent to society, he would’ve cared for and shown emotion in these cases, therefore it is his indifference that damaged his image and morals and ultimately led to his death.
