[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 22 KB, 203x285, TheStranger_BookCover3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6618471 No.6618471 [Reply] [Original]

What went wrong?

>> No.6618490

>boo life is worthless and without meaning
>let's embrace it

literally dumbest shit ever

>> No.6618495

>>6618490
Amor fati my nigga

>> No.6618498

>>6618490
>implying life does have any meaning
>implying there isn't an infinite amount of universes devoid of meaning

>> No.6618504

>>6618490
This is the second time I've heard this shit. It's like we're getting the Christian equivalent of neckbeards.

>> No.6618505

>>6618498
read the bible man, it's all there

>> No.6618507

>>6618505
>on 4chan
>on the sabbath

>> No.6618511

>>6618505
Again. Christian neckbeards
>there is no god, man.
>read Dawkins, it's all there

>> No.6618514

>>6618511
Would you rather trust some autistic old racist or the word of God itself? seems pretty easy to me idk

>> No.6618594

>>6618504
>yfw we start tipping fedoras exclusively at christians

>> No.6618611

>>6618471
Nothing went wrong. Do you remember the atmosphere in the very last bit? More tranquil, sentient and powerful simultaneously than I've ever had in my own life, even though I'm not a literary character and therefore I subconsciously do believe in some meaning.

I wish life of mine and most of people around me went as ''wrong'' as in this novel.

>> No.6618628

>>6618514
Get your theology right. It's not even the word of god. This isn't the Quran.

>> No.6618815

>>6618628
Don't Mormons believe that the golden books in a hat out in the woods are the word of god? But why would a Mormon come to 4chan? For the memes?

>> No.6619078

>>6618504
How is it an incorrect interpretation?

>> No.6619087

>>6618511
>Dawkins

>> No.6619104
File: 35 KB, 368x400, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6619104

It's exposition. No style. If you already comprehend life's absurduty (as most of us non-christposters do) then it's uninteresting exposition because there's no style.

Nausea doesn't have exposition much and full on style; hence 10/10.

>> No.6619122

>>6618471
What went wrong? You read Camus, that's what.

>> No.6619135

>>6618611
yeah, camus CLEARLY wants you to kill people you dislike on a whim, and CLEARLY nothing went wrong when the guy got fuckin executed - meursalt is neither a hero nor a villain. i have no idea why you insist on painting characters in such black and white terms.

>> No.6619159

>>6619104
if you think the stranger is 'all exposition' then you clearly understand neither the absurd nor the stranger.

>> No.6619170

>>6619159
Go on. The trial, the tedious funeral processions, the lengthy discussion with the Police man or whatever he was again in that office about God, the.... Prove me wrong.

>> No.6619215

>>6619170
i mean, what's your point, that you think they're boring so therefore it's all exposition? i fail to see how that follows even a little bit.

>> No.6619224

>>6619135
I didn't. Camus' ambivalent take on this character is some common knowledge, it's just the point where the question is coming from - ''what went WRONG?'' - being kind of a wrong approach. If a character sympathizes with the author's philosophical beliefs, he obviously can't be objectively wrong in his doing.

Point being: even if things went wrong, the idea of the story is that the proper attitude was carelessness about the execution and the cause of it.

Now calm down.

>> No.6619254
File: 62 KB, 575x580, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6619254

>>6619215
It's boring because it's exposition. It's exposition because it eposition. Camus wanted to novelize "the stranger in society; the individual" and to novelize a concept is to flesh it out in the medium by exposition. Which is what it is. Ya dig?

>> No.6619264

>>6618505
You have committed suicide.
My condolences.

>> No.6619308

>>6619254
you think the stranger is a character piece about meursalt?! i couldn't disagree more. the point is that meursalt's experiences and his perception of them are filtered through a veil of impassivity. the world is a stranger to him, but he embraces it in each and every moment.

>> No.6619329

>>6619308
Except the point is that he DOESN'T embrace it in each and every moment. So he gets killed by the state.

>> No.6619332

>>6619170
The trial demonstrates the major theme of isolation. We are all alone in our heads. This is shone by the fact that most of the witnesses claim to have known Mersault and they claim to know that he is not capable of murder. This shows that Mersault is not some freak who is disconnected from all other humans. All humans are already disconnected and they only pretend to understand the minds of their fellows.

>> No.6619337

>>6619332
How's that not exposition?

>> No.6619342

>>6619337
Well by your logic the whole of the brothers karamazov is also exposition. By your definition of exposition there is no part of any work that is not exposition.

>> No.6619347

>>6619342
There's always "style" which isn't. Which Camus didn't have much off.

>> No.6619382

>>6619347

I think you've already understood you don't like camus, but you have yet to understand why.

>> No.6619392

>>6619382
Wrong , you don't understand why. I don't like his lack of style, extravagance, boringness,
>muh feeling that he think what his writing about is revelatory
Do you undrstanf now ?

>> No.6619404

>>6619329
where do you get that he doesn't embrace it in the moment that he kills the muslim? i think it's pretty clear that camus doesn't mean to endorse the shooting of the man, but i can't really agree with it being because meursalt doesn't embrace the absurd - it's because he embraces it with a sort of nihilism. the stranger is not a fable - it doesn't mean to idolize its protagonist. him getting killed by the state is pretty directly representative of why a nihilistic approach to the absurd isn't tenable.

>> No.6619408

>>6619392

>thinking that disliking camus' style and camus not having style are the same thing

>> No.6619421

>>6619408
He writes like a 5th grader. Unless your keen on giving all 5th grader the benefit of the doubt of calling their lackluster writing a "style" then you have no leg room.

>> No.6619441

>>6619421
lol what the actual fuck? do you accuse hemingway of also having no style? russian realists? because just so you know, the absence of flowery language and vivid descriptions does not imply a lack of style. camus is PURPOSEFULLY leaving all such things out of his text, because he finds them inconsistent with his narrator's perspective.

>> No.6619466

>>6619421

You cannot try to be taken serious and say things like "he wrote like a 5thgrader". It's ridiculous. You're losing all credibility. Dislike the mann and his style all you like, but have the decency to admit it's just because you don't like him, and not because Camus has no skill, because that's wrong. The man could write.

>> No.6619532

>>6619421
Camus was trying to emulate Hemingway when he wrote the stranger. The scene where Mersault kills the Arab was actually very vivid.
"I knew I had shattered the harmony of the day, the exceptional silence of a beach where I'd been happy. Then I fired four more times at the motionless body where the bullets lodged without leaving a trace. And it was like knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness.

>> No.6619548

>>6619532
You have misunderstood both authors

>> No.6619574

>>6619548
All I said was that Camus wrote a stylistically impressive passage and that he himself said that he was channeling the style of Hemingway. What did I misunderstand?

>> No.6619580

>>6619574
> that he himself said that he was channeling the style of Hemingway
Please provide precise reference

>> No.6619591

u hate him cuz u ain't him

>> No.6619698

>>6619580
not the guy who you responded to, but I think he's misreading sartre's essay on camus' book. Sartre basically says that Camus employs a quasi-American style in an effort to bring out the temporally-isolated nature of life. he doesn't say that camus has explicitly said that this is the case though.

>> No.6620483
File: 75 KB, 983x1013, 1431260807818.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6620483

>>6618507

>> No.6620561

>>6618471
>daily reminder that literally all Camus bashing is done by fat neckbeard virgins that cant stand a playboy getting into the failure-at-life club that is philosophy.

>> No.6620590

>>6620561
Camus belongs in the failure-at-life club because he spent most of his life "philosophizing" instead of living :^)