Existentialism can be defined by ten main concepts. The first concept …show more content…
When the Arab held the knife to Meursault, the light reflecting off the knife and the heat from the sun made Meursault uncomfortable. Because of this uncomfortableness, Meursault shot the Arab.
The trigger gave, and the smooth underbelly of the butt jogged my palm. And so, with that crisp, whipcrack sound, it all began. I shook off my sweat and the clinging veil of light. I knew I’d shattered the balance of the day, the spacious calm of this beach on which I had been happy. But I fired four shots more into the inert body, on which they left no visible trace. And each successive shot was another loud, fateful rap on the door of my undoing (Camus 39).
Nothing caused Meursault to shoot the Arab, he made that decision on his own. In the next chapter, Meursault is confused why he needs a lawyer. “‘Then he inquired if I had chosen a lawyer to defend me. I answered, ‘No,’ I hadn’t thought about it, and asked him if it was really necessary for me to have one”’(Camus 40). Meursault doesn’t understand why he needs one, because Meursault admitted to murdering the man, so he knows there will be consequences. Meursault chose to kill the man and he knew he had to take responsibility for his decision. Both those reasons are concepts of …show more content…
On stepping into the box the man threw a glance at me, then looked away. Replying to questions, he said that I’d declined to see Mother’s body, I’d smoked cigarettes and slept, and drunk café au lait (Camus 56).
Along with his mother’s funeral, Meursault’s decision to see Marie after the funeral, was also used against him. ‘“Gentlemen of the jury, I would have you note that on the next day after his mother’s funeral that man was visiting the swimming pool, starting a liaison with a girl, and going to see a comic film. That is all I wish to say”’(Camus 59). Furthermore, Meursault’s friendship with Raymond also was used against him in the trial.
On his describing himself as a warehouseman, the Prosecutor informed the jury it was common knowledge that the witness lived on the immoral earnings of women. I, he said, was this man’s intimate friend and associate; in fact, the whole background of the crime was of the most squalid description. And what made it even more odious was the personality of the prisoner, an inhuman monster wholly without a moral sense.
Overall, most of Meursault’s decisions led to negative consequences and him having to take responsibility for it in