"Society is a masked ball, where everyone hides their true character and reveals it by hiding." ---Ralph Waldo EmersonSay no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essayA society constrained to specific social norms reprimands those who do not conform to these principles. In doing so, a supreme truth is revealed, unveiling the “good” and “evil” of societal ideology. Albert Camus's The Stranger presents Meursault as a passive nonconformist who will not "play the game" that society has chosen for him, and is therefore condemned for his inability to meet society's social expectations. Through irony, Camus reveals how the outcast, Meursault, is condemned because of his nonconformist beliefs. Meursault's nonconformist character is one who does not care about expressing his emotions. Camus uses the first-person point of view, which leads the reader to expect the narrator's personal response to the events of the plot. Ironically, the prose is devoid of such content. Meursault's life is reflected with the greatest objectivity: a reflection of the way he himself sees it. He “catalogues” the events of his life, doing everything possible to avoid conveying any emotion. "Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday, I don't know" (9). In the context of a telegram, the details he discusses concern only his uncertainty about the date; he mentions nothing of the effect the telegram had on him. Furthermore, during his mother's funeral, he "did not cry once and [he] left immediately after the funeral without paying his respects to her at her grave" (86). This does not mean that Meursault lacks emotion, but simply that he does not consider it essential to express it. However, society expects certain emotions that are supposed to be linked to specific events, including a physical representation of grief at one's mother's funeral. Meursault cannot accept this social obligation imposed on his life; he is a stranger to the society in which he lives. Another representative of Meursault's determination to care about expressing his emotions is his relationship with Marie. Asked about marriage, Meursault responds indifferently that he would do it if “she wanted it”. Furthermore, when asked if he loves her, he replies: “that it didn't mean anything but [he] probably didn't want to” (44). As traditionally perceived in society, marriage is a bond of love and affection; yet this future is physically marked by indifference and apathy on his part. In retrospect, Meursault serves as a vessel transmitting a truth to the environment in which he lives. Contradicting the strong importance it places within society, it reveals that emotion does not need to be represented externally, because true emotion comes from within and does not need to be represented externally. be publicly recognized. But society is immediately threatened by this truth, with which “no triumph over oneself and over the world will ever be possible” (119). Ironically, although not emotionless, Meursault's indifference to physically conveying emotions is seen as a lack of emotion within his society, highlighting him as a true outsider. As a result, the lack of concern for expressing emotion during events traditionally attached to specific emotional responses serves to provide validation for condemnation. Meursault's nonconformist character is further emphasized through the absurdity of his life. Indifferent, Meursault will make a decision because he sees no reason not to act in a certain way, even though he sees no reason not tomore. This indifference views the chronology of events in one's life as independent of each other, with none necessarily leading to the next. Ironically, both the reader and Meursault's society attempt to make sense of the events of his life: a fruitless effort when applied to an absurd existence. "The day after his mother's death, this man swam in the sea, began an irregular affair and made fun of a Fernandel" (91). The reader attempts to rationalize Meursault's actions by considering them as a possible way to alleviate the pain and suffering associated with his mother's death. Conversely, in the courtroom, the prosecutor announces that he will expose "the dark workings of this film". criminal soul traces the series of events that led this man to kill, in full awareness of his actions” (97). The prosecutor uses Meursault's previous actions that seemed simply nonconformist as proof of a monstrous personality that does not exist. In reality, neither the reader nor the characters in the novel can justify Meursault's actions. In Meursault's eyes, his life is absurd and meaningless, thus lacking reason and justification. With this, Meursault functions as a mirror revealing reality to society. futility of using something from the past to justify the present: a feeling echoed in other works by Camus. “It is also an idealism, and at worst, to end up suspending all action and all truth to a sense of history which is which is. not implicit in the events? Would it therefore be realistic to take the future as laws of history? To tell the truth, far from being romantic, I believe in the necessity of rule and order” (The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, 208). Through his actions, Meursault implores society to live in the world of the present. However, by ignoring the use of the past to explain the present and the future, failing to do so, society taints Meursault with condemnation due to his failure to do so. -compliance with societal values ​​and expectations. Camus further distances his protagonist from the society in which he finds himself. lives by his lack of faith. Society imposes religion on its subjects, making it the reason for human existence. In other words, without submission to faith, life is devoid of meaning and fulfillment: a conception that Meursault does not want. Recognizing him, thereby making him a stranger to his own environment, ironically adds even more absurdity to an already absurd life for him. Faith subverts the few strands of meaning present in Meursault's life, which paradoxically contradicts society's intention for his employment. Its secularism is expressed through examples of conflicts. In a tense dialogue between him and the magistrate on the existence of a supreme divinity, Meursault answers no. "He told me that it was impossible, that all men believed in God, even those who did not want to face him. It was his belief, and if he ever doubted it, his life would not have ended. no more sense" (68). Moreover, in his last moments of life, where the priest implores Meursault to submit to God, he explains that “he did not have much time left” and that he “did not want to waste it for God” (114). For Meursault, religion suppresses his free spirit. All that remains of an absurd but rewarding life is time too precious to be wasted on such an abstract ideal. Thus, Meursault once again becomes a reflection of the truth, denouncing the practice of organized religion. It presents to society the idea that nothing divine or absolute exists and that many people use faith as a crutch to avoid living and taking responsibility for their lives. Life is absurd: it is not “controlled, monitored or rewarded”. To live fully, we must face,.