In Albert Camus’ The Outsider, the court weighs Meursault’s acte gratuit, or assertion of individual will and freedom, against the outrage of the entire community. Likewise, Franz Kafka’s The Trial also juxtaposes the agency of the individual with the strength of the justice system, and displays how the trial suppresses K.’s psychological freedom and agency. As both novels demonstrate how the law subordinates the individual to the community, justice therefore appeases the public rather than vindicates or punishes the offender. As a result, the execution of justice in both novels becomes highly theatrical, as the novels measure justice according to its entertainment value rather than its moral standing. In The Trial, characters such as the court
…show more content…
First of all, the way in which he almost always carries the epithet “Public” immediately aligns him with the community, and suggests that he performs for the public similar to an actor performing for his audience. Furthermore, his style of speech and prosecution resembles that of a dramatic figure, as he constantly soliloquizes or delivers a highly emotional monologue to the jury. For example, when Marie is on the stand, Meursault describes how “The prosecutor then rose, looking very grave,” and spoke “in a voice which [Meursault] thought sounded truly emotional, and with a finger pointed in my direction” (Camus 91). Here, the prosecutor presents a “grave” and emotional mask, and adopts a dramatic stance that is reminiscent of Banquo’s ghost as he confronts Macbeth for his crimes. The prosecutor maintains his dramatic persona as the trial progresses, and performs excessive actions such as “wrap[ping] his gown about him” (93) before making prophetic announcements to the jury. These actions ultimately add to his theatricality, and cause the jury and spectators to become enraptured with his character rather than Meursault’s crime. In addition, the prosecutor’s emphasis on Meursault’s mother and the jury’s consequent outrage at Meursault’s indifference further demonstrates how justice devolves into entertainment, as the prosecutor ultimately wins because he …show more content…
First of all, both novels end in executions, as K. and Meursault are punished for their respective crimes. Both deaths, however, also include an audience; while Meursault wishes “that there should be a crowd of spectators at [his] execution and that they should greet [him] with cries of hatred” (Camus 117), K. likewise sees “a human figure, faint and insubstantial […] lean[ing] far out abruptly, and stretch[ing] both arms out even further” (Kafka 230). These third-party observers ultimate overshadow and detract from Meursault and K.’s deaths, as they redirect Meursault and K.’s focus from their own selves to them. Similar to their trials, the justice system orchestrates Meursault and K.’s deaths for the public, who now owns their deaths in addition to their individualities. The justice system thus distorts their executions into mere spectacles, and, as Meursault’s raging crowd exhibits, perform them to appease the communities rather than punish Meursault or K. for their crimes. The public natures of Meursault and K.’s deaths therefore illustrate the way in which the two novels reduce justice and law to theatrical performances that ignore any moral
First of all, the way in which he almost always carries the epithet “Public” immediately aligns him with the community, and suggests that he performs for the public similar to an actor performing for his audience. Furthermore, his style of speech and prosecution resembles that of a dramatic figure, as he constantly soliloquizes or delivers a highly emotional monologue to the jury. For example, when Marie is on the stand, Meursault describes how “The prosecutor then rose, looking very grave,” and spoke “in a voice which [Meursault] thought sounded truly emotional, and with a finger pointed in my direction” (Camus 91). Here, the prosecutor presents a “grave” and emotional mask, and adopts a dramatic stance that is reminiscent of Banquo’s ghost as he confronts Macbeth for his crimes. The prosecutor maintains his dramatic persona as the trial progresses, and performs excessive actions such as “wrap[ping] his gown about him” (93) before making prophetic announcements to the jury. These actions ultimately add to his theatricality, and cause the jury and spectators to become enraptured with his character rather than Meursault’s crime. In addition, the prosecutor’s emphasis on Meursault’s mother and the jury’s consequent outrage at Meursault’s indifference further demonstrates how justice devolves into entertainment, as the prosecutor ultimately wins because he …show more content…
First of all, both novels end in executions, as K. and Meursault are punished for their respective crimes. Both deaths, however, also include an audience; while Meursault wishes “that there should be a crowd of spectators at [his] execution and that they should greet [him] with cries of hatred” (Camus 117), K. likewise sees “a human figure, faint and insubstantial […] lean[ing] far out abruptly, and stretch[ing] both arms out even further” (Kafka 230). These third-party observers ultimate overshadow and detract from Meursault and K.’s deaths, as they redirect Meursault and K.’s focus from their own selves to them. Similar to their trials, the justice system orchestrates Meursault and K.’s deaths for the public, who now owns their deaths in addition to their individualities. The justice system thus distorts their executions into mere spectacles, and, as Meursault’s raging crowd exhibits, perform them to appease the communities rather than punish Meursault or K. for their crimes. The public natures of Meursault and K.’s deaths therefore illustrate the way in which the two novels reduce justice and law to theatrical performances that ignore any moral