Is the community represented as civilized? Does it have a strong language? What is the relationship between civilization and language?
I don't think the community is represented as civilized or uncivilized. I think the author is representing the community in either way. He is simply describing the community as it is. To me, I think of the community as just how it is. This question is phrased to me as how the author chooses to portray the village. This may seem to be a minor distinction, but to me it is important. However, to me, the community is civilized to a point. There is a hierarchy, economic system, housing, families, ect. There are general rules that everyone follows. To me, this is civilized. However, I would not classify the community as the same as the United States. We are more "evolved". We have more technology, our rules are a little different, ect. Overall, the community is civilized to a point, but I do not consider them as civilized as us (the United States).
Friday, October 26, 2012
Monday, October 22, 2012
Literary Criticism
Is this text (The Stranger) an example of Camus resisting French coloinalism or supporting it? How would Kulkarni answer? How would you answer?
According to Kulkarni, The Stranger is an example of him not resisting French colonialism. He believed that Camus wanted Algeria to be mixed between the Europeans and the Arabs.
However, as Kulkarni stated, "In the 1930's when LE was conceived, no great anomaly was involved in adopting such a position" (Kulkarni 1529). There would be no reason for him to write about this situation. According to Kulkarni, Camus did not support French colonalism, but he was not writing his novel to protest their ruling.
I would disagree. I think Camus was writing in protest of French colonialism. As Kulkarni stated, he was in favor of the two groups of people being mixed. However, there is evidence that there were still problems. One of them that he focused on was the laws focus on Europeans versus Arabs. In the literary criticism, "In practice, no French court in Algeria would have condemned a European to death for shooting an Arab who had drawn a knife on him and who had shortly before stabbed another European" (Kulkarni 1528). Camus writes directly against this, as Meursault is convicted for this same crime. In his perfect world, the two would be seen as equals. In this sence, LE was written to protest this difference in the two groups of people.
According to Kulkarni, The Stranger is an example of him not resisting French colonialism. He believed that Camus wanted Algeria to be mixed between the Europeans and the Arabs.
However, as Kulkarni stated, "In the 1930's when LE was conceived, no great anomaly was involved in adopting such a position" (Kulkarni 1529). There would be no reason for him to write about this situation. According to Kulkarni, Camus did not support French colonalism, but he was not writing his novel to protest their ruling.
I would disagree. I think Camus was writing in protest of French colonialism. As Kulkarni stated, he was in favor of the two groups of people being mixed. However, there is evidence that there were still problems. One of them that he focused on was the laws focus on Europeans versus Arabs. In the literary criticism, "In practice, no French court in Algeria would have condemned a European to death for shooting an Arab who had drawn a knife on him and who had shortly before stabbed another European" (Kulkarni 1528). Camus writes directly against this, as Meursault is convicted for this same crime. In his perfect world, the two would be seen as equals. In this sence, LE was written to protest this difference in the two groups of people.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Meursault in Prison
What are the things he doesn't like talking about?
Meursault doesn't like talking about his time in prison. I think this is a part of a larger problem where he doesn't like talking about anytime where he has strong emotions. For example, he did not talk about his mothers funeral emotionally. He just listed the facts surrounding the case. This is the same with prison. Obviously, he has strong emotions and feelings because of his situation. He does not want to talk about it because to him, emotions are messy and complicated. He does not like dealing with them.
What explains the unspoken nature of these things? Why is there silence surrounding them? Is this silence positive or negative?
As previously stated, he does not like talking about these things because of emotions. I think this silence is a bad thing. It is not healthy for one to bury all these emotions inside and never talk about them. Meursault should not avoid these situations and instead embrace them. If he dealt with his emotions better, maybe he would not be such an outcast in society. Also, there is a good chance he wouldn't be in this situation at all.
Meursault doesn't like talking about his time in prison. I think this is a part of a larger problem where he doesn't like talking about anytime where he has strong emotions. For example, he did not talk about his mothers funeral emotionally. He just listed the facts surrounding the case. This is the same with prison. Obviously, he has strong emotions and feelings because of his situation. He does not want to talk about it because to him, emotions are messy and complicated. He does not like dealing with them.
What explains the unspoken nature of these things? Why is there silence surrounding them? Is this silence positive or negative?
As previously stated, he does not like talking about these things because of emotions. I think this silence is a bad thing. It is not healthy for one to bury all these emotions inside and never talk about them. Meursault should not avoid these situations and instead embrace them. If he dealt with his emotions better, maybe he would not be such an outcast in society. Also, there is a good chance he wouldn't be in this situation at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)