Kate Ede

The song L’Étranger tells the story of The Stranger by Albert Camus and also represents the themes alienation and the rejection of absolute systems in existentialism. In the song it tells the story of the book with a couple of references almost directly to the text. The references in this song to alienation and the general rejection of absolute systems are very clear and accurately represent the theme. This song lyrically tells a story and also represents a theme presented in many other creative works.

The song L’Étranger quite literally connects to the book The Stranger by Albert Camus in how the title of the song is the original title of the book, which is the stranger in French the language it was originally written in. To succinctly evaluate the meaning of the song a line or two from each verse will be taken. In the first verse the first two lines are “She died, she kissed me. Not sure I missed she.” These lines are references to the book in how on page one of The Stranger the first line is “Maman died today” so the she that died was the mother of the main character, Meursault. Then later the day after his mother died Meursault sees Marie, a young woman who used to work at his office, they end up going on a date and spending the night together which is the she who he kissed. Lines from the next verse that help tell the story are “Back on, daily grind.” And “Whys he know my name? Haven’t spoken much”. The first line is about when Meursault returns home after his mother’s funeral and is more concerned by the dampness of hand towels than the recent death of his mother, so he’s back, in his monotonous routine. The lines “Whys he know my name” and “Haven’t spoken much” are both talking about how one day Meursault gets home and a man, Raymond, who lives in his building that he hardly has ever talked to approaches him and treats him like an old friend which is strange behavior considering the so few amount of interactions they’ve had. From the third verse these two lines in particular help tell the story best, “I’ll give him a shot” and “I’ll decide what’s in store”. The line about giving him a shot is about a weekend trip Meursault takes with Raymond where they run into two Arab men whom are rivals of Raymond, they fight once, and then later Meursault shoots one of the men. Deciding what’s in store means he is deciding his fate by shooting this man he is deciding that he will go to jail that he will no longer be a free man. And lines from the last verse that specifically stand out are “Only wish to see a crowd. Eyes filled with anger now”. And “Fast as 1 2 3”. These lines are both very direct and literal references to the text, Meursault says on the last page of the book when thinking of his death “I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate” (123) which directly and pretty obviously connects to the lines “Only wish to see a crowd. Eyes filled with anger now.” And the fast as 1 2 3 is more of a literal reference as in the copy of the book that was studied from the last page number was 123, so this line is sort of an homage to that.

This song not only tells a stranger story than most, it tells of the themes of existentialism that are portrayed in the book. Granted, these themes are not portrayed as prominently as the story of Meursault and his untimely demise, but they are very much still there. Alienation is one of the 11 themes of existentialism and means that one is extremely alone, more than one thought, this is due to how no one can ever fully understand someone because people are inwardly infinite. Alienation is mainly represented by the second line in the first chorus which is “I’m so alone”. This line is repeated in the song and it is in the chorus which is what most people considered the main part of the song or the part that has the most emphasis put onto it because of the overarching meaning of it to the song as a whole. The idea behind this song is mainly that while Meursault was in prison he thought about his life and evaluated all of the times where something he said was taken the wrong way or the times he was misunderstood, since he was in prison for around a year or so he had plenty of time to reflect. The next theme is the general rejection of absolute systems, an absolute system is a code of law or code of conscience, it is in basic terms a set of rules for living. The first line of the first chorus is also more about the theme of the rejection of absolute systems it is “Don’t have a home”. In this line Meursault is not only talking about how he generally rejects absolute systems such as religion and family but he is reflecting on how he once had a home like he once loved his mother but with both, he doesn’t anymore. This song subtly depicts themes of existentialism while also telling the general story of an existentialist.

The song L’Étranger showcases the story of Meursault in a different medium, song, where mainly lines can mean nothing or one line could be an entire theme. The song, as previously discussed, tells the story of a man, a short period of his life, and his demise. It makes one wonder about how a medium typically filled with so much emotion, is about an emotionless man, who fell asleep at his own mother’s funeral, but some things work together, sometimes if only by a slight chance. It portrays themes of existentialism, which could also make one wonder on the same principle as the song, how could someone possibly remain nearly emotionless in a world so full of emotion. We must remind ourselves not to be like Meursault because it will eventually lead to our destruction and demise.

Anna Smith

“The General” and Existentialism

 

Dispatch is an American indie/rock band first formed in 1996.  The band’s lead singer, Chad Urmston, is known for singing both social and political protesting lyrics.  These lyrics often contain elements of existentialism, especially regarding absolute systems.  Existentialism contains many components which are all demonstrated in Albert Camus’ book The Stranger.  Dispatch’s lyrics of “The General” have overtones of both Camus’ writing and Ernest Hemingway’s iceberg theory and present themes of absolute systems, utilitarianism, and absurdity.

One of the most important elements of existentialism, and also a major theme in “The General” by Dispatch, is absolute systems.  Absolute systems are laws, regulations, or expectations that confine and limit one. Examples of absolute systems include the law, religion, or society. Existentialists break out of these absolute systems to live their lives as individuals.  In the song, the subject of the lyrics is a decorated general who has a realization that his soldiers should not be fighting in a war.  The lyrics describe “All the men held tall with their chests in the air, With courage in their blood and a fire in their stare, It was a gray morning and they all wondered how they would fare, The old general told them to go home”.  When the general tells them this, he is breaking out of an absolute system by giving his soldiers orders that oppose what he would be expected to give.  If he followed the absolute system of the military, he would not tell his soldiers to go home.   Another example of absolute systems in “The General” is in the line, which is stated multiple times, “Go now you are forgiven”.  The general is telling his soldiers that they do not have to fight and that if they leave, they are forgiven.  The listener can infer that he means that they will be forgiven by the military or perhaps God.  By telling them this he is excusing them from these absolute systems.  Absolute systems also relate to The Stranger.

Albert Camus’ writing and Ernest Hemingway’s iceberg theory link to absolute systems in their structure and style.  The iceberg theory is the style of writing in which the author gives minimal detail and information and simply tells the story so that the reader can infer what is happening.  The iceberg theory is an absolute system put in place by Ernest Hemingway.  In Camus’ The Stranger, the story of Merseault is told in a very to-the-point way that has very little detail because Merseault sees the world in black and white.  The reader is left to infer the symbolic meaning of Merseault’s actions and thoughts. For example, on page 47 Merseault narrates “My cigarette tasted bitter… She had put on a white linen dress and let her hair down. I told her she was beautiful and she laughed with delight.” Camus is barely descriptive in this section; it a simple set of thoughts from Merseault. This is how the lyrics of “The General” are also.  The lyrics tell a story in a simple and direct way.  For example, the lyrics state “He grew a beard as soon as he could, To cover the scars on his face”.  This tells the listener the straight facts and leaves them to interpret in their own way why the general wants to cover his scars.  These are just a few of the ways both “The General” and The Stranger have strong elements of existentialism and Ernest Hemingway’s iceberg theory.

Two other equally important components of existentialism are utilitarianism and absurdity.  These connect to each other because in the story told in the lyrics, the general sees that there is no meaning in the battle and that it is not worth fighting. Utilitarianism is the process of weighing one’s options to make decisions. In the song, the general has a revelation; the lyrics describe “He said, “I have seen the others and I have discovered, That this fight is not worth fighting”’.  This is a demonstration of utilitarianism because the general has decided that the cons of the battle outweigh the pros, and it is not worth their while.  He also states “Oh and I’ve seen their mothers, And I will no other to follow me where I’m going”.  The general uses this as his reasoning for why it is not worth it to battle because he has seen the enemy’s mothers.  A second reason the general states for why the battle is not worthy of the soldiers’ time is “You are young men you must be living”.  He is telling the soldiers that they need to live their lives rather than fight in a battle that is not worth fighting; a clear representation of utilitarianism.  Absurdity connects to the song in a similar way.

Absurdity is demonstrated in the lyrics in several instances and also in The Stranger. Absurdity is the idea that there is no meaning to anything in life and that anything could happen.  The lyrics state “But on the eve of a great battle with the infantry in dream, The old general tossed in his sleep and wrestled with its meaning”. In this section of the song, the general is coming to the realization that there may not be a meaning to this battle that he and his soldiers are fighting. He had spent his life becoming a hero in warfare, but suddenly realizes that it isn’t as important as he previously thought. The lyrics also describe “So take a shower and shine your shoes you got no time to lose”. This is a representation of absurdity because in the general’s realization, he sees that anything could happen so these young soldiers must live now and walk away from the battle. Absurdity is presented in The Stranger at times also. Merseault does not care about his relationships, future, or anything else. On page 41 he describes “When I was a student, I had lots of ambitions like that. But when I had to give up my studies I learned very quickly that none of it really mattered.” Merseault is telling us that he had ambitions at one point in his life, but decided that they didn’t matter after all. These are just a few examples of how absurdity is demonstrated in both “The General” and The Stranger.

In “The General” by Dispatch, elements of existentialism including utilitarianism, absolute systems, and absurdity are successfully used to tell a story. The lyrics also relate to The Stranger’s writing style and use of absurdity, and both pieces are demonstrations of Ernest Hemingway’s iceberg theory. These all come together to produce two pieces that represent existentialism and its many aspects.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3JjlkfX5Gk

Vika Sousa

Creep

Existentialism is a system where an individual person is free and responsible for their own life.  Existentialists have free will to decide what they want to do and when they want to do it. The Stranger, by Albert Camus, involves Meursault, a character whose emotions are unknown and hard to recognize. “Creep,” by Radiohead, displays a great deal of emotion throughout the song. It has a slow beat to demonstrate the sad tone of the way the signer is feeling. The song “Creep” by Radiohead is existentially different from the character Meursault in Albert Camus’ The Stranger because it expresses powerful senses of emotion and freedom, whereas Meursault shows no emotion throughout the book and follows multiple absolute systems.                                        “Creep” is a song full of emotion. It begins with a slow beat, the drums and guitar playing at a soft tone. The music transitions into the lyrics, “when you were here before,” giving the listener the impression that the speaker is talking about a woman. The speaker moves on throughout the song with the same beat and the lyrics “you’re just like an angel, your skin makes me cry.” These lyrics give the reader an intense image of how the speaker is feeling about this individual. It gives the reader a sense of passion and engagement, then follows through with the same slow beat with the words “in a beautiful world”. The emotion catches the listener making them understand that the signer feels there is meaning in the world, and that it is worth living. The song moves to a verse with the beat moving at a faster pace as more instruments are added. The vocalist sings “but I’m a creep, I’m a weirdo, what the **** am I doing here? I don’t belong here.” This indicates the speaker feels he has no value in life and is a stranger in his own life. After the pattern plays out twice, the volume increases and grows into a shout “She’s running out the door she runs runs…” creating a sense of freedom. This individual has control of their life and is able to escape the limitations of philosophy religion and science.                   The Stranger has no sense of emotion to the character Meursault. He has lived his life as a part of absolute systems that he has no idea exist: they are inescapable. The phrase “you’re just like an angel, your skin makes me cry” is an example of the existential difference between the song and Meursault. He has no emotion towards Marie, and only talks about the physical attractions towards her.  Meursault’s is not interested in the passion and engagement. “When she laughed I wanted her again” (page 35) Meursault describes Marie and physically wanting her, not the way she makes him feel. “In a beautiful world” contradicts the aspect of absurdity. In the book Meursault would think that nothing changes and everyone just goes on with their lives. He doesn’t look at the world as beautiful, he feels there is no actual meaning of life.  Meursault is given an opportunity to go to Paris for work and thinks nothing of it. “Then he asked me if I wasn’t interested in a change of life. I said that people never change their lives, that in any case one life was as good as any other and that I wasn’t dissatisfied with mine here at all” (page 41). This quote shows that Meursault’s way of life doesn’t seem to matter to him. Lastly Meursault is stuck in this absolute system that he cannot escape. He is not able to become free because he is oblivious to the idea of his life being an absolute system. “She’s running out the door” give that individual their sense of freedom that Meursault is unable to escape in the book.                                                          In conclusion the song “Creep” displays emotion and freedom throughout. Its tone is slow and sad. The tone of the song is different form the tone of the book because “Creep” is full of an emotional tone, whereas The Stranger excludes the emotion. The existential difference between Meursault and the signer of the song is that Meursault is in the state of absurdity and anxiety. Meursault in the book The Stranger is unable to express his emotion and incapable to free himself from the absolute system that he is living in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFkzRNyygfk

Taylor Hennas

Existentialist Mix tape

                Albert Camus, an Algerian author, wrote The Stranger in 1942. The book is based on an existentialist Algerian character named Meursault. The Stranger is divided into two separate parts. The first part is a first person narrative of Meursault’s thoughts before he kills an Arab man. The second part is a first person narrative of Meursault’s thoughts after he commits his crime and how his execution will go. Both parts are written with existentialist themes in mind. Existentialism is a theory in which one makes decisions that will benefit oneself, follows no system that doesn’t accommodate oneself, and believes life has no universal meaning: every life is the same and death is death. Many modern bands, like The Shins, write music about philosophies like existentialism. The Shins are an American indie band from Albuquerque, New Mexico, formed in 1996. Music written by The Shins consists of hidden meanings of how every life is the same. Similar to The Stranger, the song “Nothing At All” composed by The Shins illustrates existentialism through the principles of absurdity, alienation, and absolute systems.

Similar to The Stranger, “Nothing At All” represents existentialism through the principle of absurdity. Absurdity is that there is no actual or universal meaning to life. Every life is the same. An example of absurdity in “Nothing At All” is the first through third line, “Well there’s an idea inside of me, That we’re nothing at all. There’s nothing threatening controlling me, In fact there’s nothing at all.” This quote illustrates absurdity because ‘that we’re nothing at all.’ means there is no true meaning to life, it has no specific definition.  This example of absurdity connects to The Stranger. “I said that people never change their lives, that in any case one life was as good as another and that I wasn’t dissatisfied with mine here at all.” (43)  This quote is Meursault’s response to his boss’ offer. This quote shows Meursault’s belief in a certain way of human existence. This comment also implies that each person’s life is essentially equal to everyone else’s. These are both examples of absurdity but that is not the only principle of existentialism represented in both of these articles.

Another principle represented in both The Stranger and “Nothing At All” is alienation. Alienation is a fact that a human being is a stranger in their own life. No one can completely understand the human being. An example of alienation in “Nothing At All” is in the fourth stanza, “I’m just a shell empty as can be, Yeah, I’ve got nothing at all.” This illustrates alienation because “I’m just a shell empty as can be” means this person has no emotion. Having nothing and no emotion mean a human being can be stranger in their own life. This lyric representing alienation also connects to a passage from The Stranger. “A minute later she asked me if I loved her. I told her it didn’t mean anything but that I didn’t think so.” (36) The quote also illustrates alienation because Meursault is talking about his feelings towards Marie after she asked him if he loved her. He does not truly understand his feelings therefore he is a stranger in his own life. No one can completely comprehend Meursault’s emotional behaviors. Both examples of writing connect to alienation, but also connect to absolute systems.

The Stranger and “Nothing At All” represent a theme of existentialism through the principle of absolute systems. Absolute systems are philosophies such as religion, the law, etc. Existentialists, such as Meursault or The Shins, do not believe in absolute systems. An example of absolute systems in “Nothing At All” composed by The Shins is in the beginning of stanza two. “You got a feeling nothing here is free, ‘Cause you grew up in a mall.” The Shins are referring to growing up in an environment where laws are enforced. Nothing is free, and no single person can do whatever they want to do. This example is similar to a passage from The Stranger. “It took me awhile to realize my life would change dramatically, since this was my first time in a police station.” (62) This passage is describing Meursault’s thoughts after he shot the Arab and went to jail. This is an example of absolute systems because Meursault did not obey by the law, an absolute system, and he is being punished for it. Meursault thought existentially before he shot the Arab because he wasn’t thinking about the consequences, he did not think twice about what he was doing; Meursault just went with it.

Similar to The Stranger, the song “Nothing At All” composed by The Shins illustrates existentialism through the principles of absurdity, alienation, and absolute systems. The Shins and Meursault from The Stranger are similar because they both have an existentialist view on life. They both believe life has no true meaning, every life is the same, absolute systems are optional, and decisions that help oneself are beneficial. The Stranger written by Albert Camus was one of the first books written with an existentialist theme. Maybe most modern music, like The Shins, is based off of The Stranger?

Brian Mitchell

If someone told you that the government is killing people to show others that killing is wrong would you believe it? The death penalty practiced by the United States government has killed many people, some being innocent, and is very wrong and should be abolished. The death penalty seems like a good idea up front but it comes with many flaws.

The Death Penalty

The death penalty has ended the lives of about 1,330 American citizens since 1976 and I believe this process should stop being practiced in the United States. This is because of the many flaws that this sentence contains, including wrongful execution, being unconstitutional, and its ineffectiveness at being a deterrent to other criminals. The book The Stranger by Albert Camus displays the practice of the death penalty and how it affects the mind.

Thirty-nine… that’s how many people that should be alive today but are unfortunately not due to wrongful execution. Wrongful execution is when a person is convicted and sentenced with the death penalty and then executed then later evidence proved that they were actually innocent. This occurs because of many different factors including inadequate legal representation. Many defendants who are convicted and may be facing the death penalty are usually poor and cannot afford proper legal representation so they take whatever is given to them which may not be adequate at all. Many lawyers of these individuals are very incompetent by being asleep, drunk or asleep in court which will cause the defendant to be convicted. An example of this is from a case of a man named Jimmy Ray Bromgard. Bromgard, arrested when he was 18 and he spent 15 years in prison accused for the  rape of an eight-year-old girl, a crime post-conviction DNA testing proved he did not commit. Bromgard’s trial attorney performed no investigation, filed no pre-trial motions, gave no opening statement, did not prepare for closing arguments, failed to file an appeal, and provided no expert to refute the fraudulent testimony of the state’s hair microscopy expert. Other than the forensic testimony and the tentative identification, there was no evidence against Bromgard. With any adequate legal representation Bromgard would have been easily proved innocent and not wrongfully convicted. This is shown in The Stranger during Meursault’s trial when Muersault says “In fact, there seemed to be a conspiracy to exclude me from the proceedings; I wasn’t to have any say and my fate was to be decided out of hand.” (Camus, 98). This shows the inadequate legal representation from Muersault’s lawyer because his lawyer is not letting Meursault to do anything and is basically deciding is fate for him. A second factor that could cause wrongful conviction is police and prosecutor misconduct and error. This is when the prosecutor illegally withholds vital evidence from the defendants causing them to lose and giving the false outcome of the case.  According to the University of Missouri-Kansas, police misconduct was a factor in 50% of the DNA exonerations and prosecutorial misconduct was a factor in 45%. With these factors and many others, wrongful conviction and execution are surprisingly more common than most think and shows that the death penalty should be abolished.

Another reason that the death penalty should stop being practiced in the United States is that it is unconstitutional because it violates many amendments. One of the amendments that the death penalty violates is the 8^th amendment where it states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” As William J. Brennan, Justice of the US Supreme Court stated, “Death is not only an unusually severe punishment, unusual in its pain, in its finality, and in its enormity, but it serves no penal purpose more effectively than a less severe punishment… The fatal constitutional infirmity in the punishment of death is that it treats ‘members of the human race as nonhumans, as objects to be toyed with and discarded.” What Brennan is saying is that the death penalty is inhumane and very cruel and unusual because the government is not treating the people like citizens they’re treating them like objects to do with however they want and that is truly wrong and unconstitutional. Another way the death penalty violates the 8^th amendment is from what is called botched executions where something goes wrong while attempting to execute a person, causing extreme pain and discomfort. An example of this is during the execution of Romell Broom by lethal injection in 2009. What had happened was according to Death Penalty Information Center, “Efforts to find a suitable vein and to execute Mr. Broom were terminated after more than two hours when the executioners were unable to find a useable vein in Mr. Broom’s arms or legs. During the failed efforts, Mr. Broom winced and grimaced with pain. After the first hour’s lack of success, on several occasions Broom tried to help the executioners find a good vein. “At one point, he covered his face with both hands and appeared to be sobbing, his stomach heaving.” This is very cruel and unusual, no matter how rare these occurrences are, happening once should be enough to realize that something needs to be done.  Another amendment that the death penalty violates is the 14^th amendment where it states that all persons will have equal protection under the law. In 2001, the New Jersey Supreme Court released a report stating that the death penalty law is more likely to proceed against defendants who kill white victims. Also, in 1997 there was a study among death eligible defendants in Philadelphia and it concluded that there was a 38% increased chanced to receive the death penalty if the accused was black.

Even with all the criminals being executed today, the death penalty is not a very good deterrent to other criminals.  A recent study by Professor Michael Radelet and Traci Lacock of the University of Colorado found that 88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. This is a surprisingly large number and shows that the death penalty really is not as effective as most people think. Along with the same study, Radelet and Lacock discovered that nearly 78% of those surveyed said that having the death penalty in a state does not lower the murder rate. In addition, 91% of respondents said politicians support the death penalty in order to appear tough on crime. Both of these statistics strongly show that the death penalty is not the best thing for the United States. Politicians use it to become more favorable among the people and may not even personally believe in it and that most of the leading criminologists think that the death penalty does not deter other criminals from committing crimes. The ineffectiveness of the death penalty at deterring criminals can also be seen in The Stranger. In part one, chapter six when Muersault kills the Arab he does not think about being punished and sentenced to the death penalty showing that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent. These examples from real life statistics and from The Stranger show how ineffective of a deterrent the death penalty is and should be removed from the United States as a punishment.

People who are in favor of the death penalty will say that the death penalty gives the victim’s family closure and peace. This is true but, being locked up for life gives just as much closure and peace, knowing that the criminal is eternally stuck inside a prison cell. Also, to most people it is more of a punishment to be locked in a cell for life than to be killed and put out of the pain of sitting in a cell for life. Also, People who are for the death penalty will say that it works very well at keeping other criminals from committing crimes because it will scare them from doing anything illegal. But, most criminologists say that the death penalty is not a very good deterrent. Another point that pro death penalty people might say is that race has no influence but this is not true, as said earlier, just by being a minority there is a drastic increase in chance that you will be convicted.

The death penalty should be removed from the United States because of its many flaws. The three main flaws that the death penalty has is wrongful conviction and execution, to many people are dying wrongful deaths. Also, it is unconstitutional; the death penalty violates many amendments of the constitution. Lastly, it has very little effect on other criminals as a deterrent; criminals will still commit crimes even if the death penalty may be their demise. The death penalty has little benefits when put up against all the faults that it has and needs to be abolished from the United States.

Matt Coppola

The Death Penalty is an acceptable form of punishment for perpetrators of especially heinous or diabolical crimes. It acts as a deterrent, gives the victim a sense of closure and is more cost effective than sentencing someone to life in prison without possibility of parole. The essay focuses on these three key points and then explains how opposition of the Death Penalty is misinformed on the actual facts.

The Death Penalty is an Appropriate Punishment

 

The legality and ethics of the death penalty has been questioned since the conception of organized society. The death penalty is a form of punishment in which a person who has been convicted of a serious crime is executed under the precept of the criminal justice system. The death penalty has been in existence for thousands of years and is currently used in 21 countries, China, Iran and Saudi Arabia executed the most inmates in 2012. In the US, it is legal punishment for capital offenders in 32 states. A capital offender is someone who commits one of the 41 Federal capital offenses, the 41 offenses are somewhat consistent between all users of the death penalty. Some examples of capital offenses include 1st degree murder, treason, and terrorism. The Death Penalty is an appropriate punishment for perpetrators of especially heinous and diabolical crimes. It effectively deters crime, victims gain well deserved closure, and it is far more cost effective to execute than it is to house in prison for life.

Death is a far more severe punishment than imprisonment for life. Death is a common trepidation between humans and even the most hardened criminals fear it. As Ernest Van Den Haag Late Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University stated, “Murderers clearly prefer it to execution — otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death.” Earlier this year, Ohio man Ariel Castro was accused of the rape, kidnapping and 10 year imprisonment of 3 other Ohioan women. In order to avoid the Death Penalty, Castro agreed to plead guilty to 937 counts of his 977 count indictment. The plea bargain stated Castro would spend his life in prison without parole plus spend an additional 1,000 years and in turn, he would avoid the Death Penalty. In another instance, Colorado movie theater shooter James Holmes also accepted a plea deal in which he would spend the rest of his life inside a mental institution rather than be put to death, James Holmes, killer of 25, accepted the guilty plea after submitting it to prosecutors. New Mexico shooter, Jared Loughner pleaded guilty to 19 counts at his court hearing, which ultimately spared him the death penalty. The sentence could not include the death penalty, because the guilty plea bargain was made with an assurance that it would not be sought. Felons who commit heinous crimes will do anything to get out of a Death Penalty conviction. This shows that felons are not at all willing to die for their crimes. This correlates with a statement made by Michael Summers, PhD and author of the book “Capital Punishment Works”. He stated “recent research … conducted by the FBI… shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year… The study examined the relationship between the number of executions and the number of murders in the U.S. for the 26-year period from 1979 to 2004.” There is an obvious negative trend of murders when executions increase. Based on Justice Bureau statistics, when the Death Penalty was reinstated in the US after continued debate in the late 1970’s there was a drop in the number of murders committed. When the numbers of executions began to diminish, the murder rate began to increase. Since 2001, there has been a decline in executions and a rise in murders. These cold hard facts and statistics are proof that the Death Penalty effectively deters criminals from committing crime.

 

Secondly, the Death Penalty ensures that the victims of these especially heinous crimes get the appropriate closure they deserve. It’s unfortunate that the emphasis of criminal justice systems worldwide are focused on protecting the criminal rather than the victim. When a criminal gets life in prison he is indiscriminately cared for during his entire sentence while victims are left out to dry, usually without any state support. In Albert Camus’s “The Stranger” the main character Meursault is suspected in the shooting death of an unnamed Arab man. He is provided for and even gains an audience with a priest while the victims family aren’t provided with any support. Judicial systems worldwide have consistently favored the offenders over the victims. The Death Penalty does not only provide retribution for the Victim, it also returns order to society. When a serious crime is committed the order of society is tragically disrupted. As J. Budziszewski, PhD Professor of Government and Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin stated “Society is justly ordered when each person receives what is due to him. Crime disturbs this just order, for the criminal takes from people their lives, peace, liberties, and worldly goods in order to give himself undeserved benefits. Deserved punishment protects society morally by restoring this just order, making the wrongdoer pay a price equivalent to the harm he has done. This is retribution.” Deserved punishment protects society morally by restoring order and making the criminal pay the price of his crime. Society will return to normal after the criminal has been dealt what he deserves. Life without possibility of parole does not meet the expectation of the crime committed, therefore society will not return to normal. Once the criminal has been awarded an equal and fair punishment for what he has committed, then the victim get well deserved retribution and closure from a dramatic and life changing moment.

Lastly, the Death Penalty is economically superior to life without possibility of parole. As Dudley Sharp, director of the JFA (Justice for All Foundation) stated “Many opponents present, as fact, that the cost of the death penalty is so expensive at least $2 million per case, that we must choose life without parole at a cost of $1 million for 50 years. Predictably, these pronouncements may be entirely false. JFA estimates that LWOP cases will cost $1.2 million, $3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty cases.” It is fact that LWOP cases cost substantially more to process than Death Penalty cases. It is also fact that it costs $69,000 dollars per year to house a prisoner. The Death Penalty is a substantial omission from these great life sentence costs. It costs a fraction of that to execute an offender than to pay $69,000 per year to house, feed and support them. Overall, It costs far less to execute prisoners than it is to provide for them for the rest of their lives.

 

Many people believe that the death penalty is a barbaric and inappropriate form of punishment around the world. They are misinformed and incorrect. In the 1970’s the Death Penalty was subject to evaluation by the US Supreme Court. Justice John G. Roberts stated that “whenever a method of execution has been challenged in this Court as cruel and unusual, the Court has rejected the challenge. Our society has nonetheless steadily moved to more humane methods of carrying out capital punishment.” The courts have consistently ruled that the Death Penalty is completely constitutional. It does not violate any constitutional amendments. People who oppose the Death Penalty also argue that It destroys and does not protect. This is false, the Death Penalty protects other people from crimes that the criminal may commit if he is left alive. Many Death Row inmates are career criminals who have previous records. The Death Penalty prevents these criminals from going on to commit even more crime. Opposition of the Death Penalty are most commonly misinformed about the cost. They believe that the cost of a Death Penalty trial is more than the costs of housing the prisoner for the rest of their life, which is also incorrect.

 

The Death Penalty is a strong and effective punishment for perpetrators of especially heinous and diabolical crimes.  It effectively deters crime, victims gain well deserved closure, and it is far more cost effective to execute than it is to house in prison for life. Once these perpetrators have been executed, order will return to society. People who unfortunately oppose the Death Penalty are usually very misinformed. The controversy and legality should be put to rest as the Death Penalty is superior to Life in prison without possibility of parole.
Matt Coppola

Jae Clarke-Randolph

The death penalty is a good thing for society today, it is able to keep people safe, save money, and it deters people from committing serious crimes.  In the essay it persuades the ready to agree with the death penalty.  The readers will end up agreeing with the death penalty due to the valid points made that people against it will end up changing sides.  The overall writing of this is a very persuasive essay that convinces the reader to agree with the death penalty.

 

Jae Clarke-Randolph

10/28/13

 

Death Penalty should be Applied in Serious Cases

The death penalty, questioned by most due to how immoral and unethical it is. But I see the death penalty as a positive for society.  I see that if somebody commits a very serious they should be given the death penalty as an option so they cannot harm anyone again because if somebody goes to prison they can get out somehow and continue to keep murdering.  In no way the death penalty should be questioned because if somebody commits a serious crime that involve murder, rape, etc. then the death penalty should be applied in that case.  The death penalty should be used because it can save lives, it can also deter criminals, and is also a lot more cost effective. I am on the side of having the death penalty because it helps gets rid of the dangerous criminals off the streets.

 

The death penalty is able to save innocent peoples lives and it can also help save prisoners lives as well.  It is able to save lives in prison because then the criminal can still kill the prisoners in the prison.   It is a better protector than a life sentence without bail or a life sentence in general, because the criminal can somehow get out of prison and can start killing people again, because you don’t know if he is crazy in the head still.  If the murder is living in prison they will always find someway to escape the prison and go on another rampage again.  For each inmate that is put to death, there is three to 18 murders are prevented.  Dudley Sharp said, “Executed murderers never murder again.”  I agree with him because if the murder is gone there is no need to worry about being killed by a murderer finding you because he is gone.  There is no way to tell if criminals are still prone to being violent if they are taken into prison.  With criminals being executed by the death penalty it helps saves people’s lives.

 

What most people fear the most is to be dead, so what should deter criminals is the death penalty and that will deter murder.  Deterrence is a way that the death penalty is a good idea to keep in mind. By making a criminal an example of what could happen to others who try to commit very serious crimes.  Death will deter the criminals because most people do not want to die for their consequences if the law apprehends them.  With criminals knowing their consequences they will be more hesitant to pursue that crime because the risk of the death penalty.  A life in prison is less feared and not as much of a deterrent because murders/criminals know it is possible to escape prison, and go back to a life of crime.  The risk of apprehension and a much bigger risk of dying deter the criminals from committing crimes due to the fact they could be killed.  Therefore, we have to continuously to execute these murderers to ensure that people do not try to commit these crimes.  If murderers were executed for what their crimes they wouldn’t do it, but since they are sent to prison, murderers do not even care so they continue to commit these crimes.  Deterrence is a good reason to have the death penalty because it can stop harsh crimes, but also people will think before they act.

 

People say that the cost of putting a criminal in prison is a lot cheaper than having them die from the death penalty, but overtime the cost of a life in prison without bail is costs more than a death sentence in the long run.  The death penalty also makes the taxpayers dollars; no longer support the criminals in jail.  Upfront the death penalty is more money, but as years go on the death penalty becomes cheaper than a LWOP (Life without parole).  A criminal will always appeal their sentence and it will end costing the same as it would if they received the death penalty.  Criminals will appeal no matter what, and in that process is where the cost of the death penalty becomes less money than a life sentence because of the money that is put in the appeal process.  The price of keeping a person in prison, for life is a lot more money, than having them be executed. The cost efficiency of the death penalty is questioned by most, but studies do show that the death penalty is cost efficient and is a good choice for instead of a life sentence for these criminals.

People will say that my facts are completely wrong and that I shouldn’t think that the death penalty should be a good idea and it isn’t moral but I believe the morality of the death penalty is completely reasonable because in the cases of murder, rape, torture, etc. it is in reason to have the death penalty.  I am right about the death penalty because of my reasoning’s.  There is no doubt that the death penalty does save lives because you’re keeping a possible murderer out of the prison where they could kill the prisoners, or they could escape the prison and start killing people again.  The cost of death will deter the criminals because no one wants to die, but criminals will deal with being in prison and could possibly escape prison.  People will argue that the cost of the death penalty is a lot more than having somebody put in prison but in the long run the cost of the death penalty will be less in the long run.  It is very obvious that the death penalty is something that should not be questioned and should be used more often.

 

The death penalty should be used when the cases are very serious because then the criminal should be punished to the fullest extent.  The points made earlier have persuaded you to agree with me especially on the case of how the death penalty can save lives.  How the death penalty saves lives is because if you put them into prison they can still be hostile and kill the other prisoners, also the murderer can escape the prison.  The fact that a person can do that makes the death penalty a completely reasonable thing and should be used because of that possibility.  The cost of the death penalty is a reasonable choice when compared overtime with a life sentence without bail because of the appeal process that a prisoner will make which then will add up to the same amount.  Deterrence is a good way to have the death penalty due to the fact that nobody likes to die, so by making the death penalty the highest means of punishment criminals will think before they act.  The death penalty is by far a very reasonable way to convict criminals and by no means not moral.  Hopefully in the future more states will opt in for the death penalty because they see how good it can be.

Emma Fleuette

A judicial executioner named Jude begins a procedure just like he would with any other- until something very out of the ordinary happens.  What occurs has a lasting impact on his, and the patient’s lives. When things finally settle down, another game-changer happens to cause Jude to question every belief he’s ever had. In a surprising plot twist, Jude begins to see the existentialist point of view.

 

The Judicial Executioner

 

`The patient sitssits in the chair, rigid, leather straps fixing him in place.  The IV in his arm administers the appropriate drip of painkiller.  He watches as I sterilize the needle.  “You know,” he says, “I’d never have done it if I’d known what would happen.”  I turn my back to him as I work.  “You did know.”  I sense his nod.  His eyes bore into the.  I can feel his eyes boring into the back of my skull.  “If you could, you’d do it again,” I say, and turn around, syringe in handready.  He stares at the two inch piece of metal and then he lowers his head, not in fear but because the drugs are finally kicking in.  “It doesn’t matter at this point,” he responds, speech slurred, “but yes, I guess I would –  in a heartbeat.”

This private confession, conducted in the sterilized whiteness of the lab, should shock me.  But the novelty of hearing sinners confess what I already know to be true has worn off.  The patient’s eyes droop and his breathing steadies.  The monitor registers his heartbeat, each beat chasing the one before.  Once he’s stable I begin the procedure.  The needle pierces his skin and the injection is effortless.  It takes me less than 5 seconds to administer a whole dose.

The patient’s body begins to tremble.  He’s not awake but his eyes shoot open and his jaw drops.  His head shakes and silent screams rack his sturdy body.  The muscles in his legs and back spasm and contract.  The patient’s body strains against its bonds, tries to free itself.  He writhes and twists in agony, his movements becoming more and more violent.  And then his body falls silent.  He is motionless.  And I am stunned.

It has never ended like this.  After the climax of pain the patient froths at the mouth before the bleeding begins.  Not this.  Not this state of relaxed, easy sleep the patient appears to be in. This patient, this man, is one of the fortunate ones.  The 1 in 5,000.  Of course, that’s merely a statistic.  He just got lucky.

I push the button and two guards and a janitor file in.  They stop when they see the man in the chair, not covered in blood.  Or foam.  Or dead.  Already the man is beginning to wake up, the painkillers wearing off.  He moans and cries out, but the noises are abruptly cut off.  His eyes widen as he processes the fact that he is, indeed, alive.  The cries of despair turn into cries of pure elation, and then they stop altogether when he remembers the pain.  The man, eyes still wet with tears, holds still as the guards and I unbuckle his restraints.  The guards help him into a wheelchair.  His movements are stiff and painful; he cringes at every jostle and bump.  But he holds his tongue as one guard wheels him into the corridor outside the lab.

The janitor scurries down the hall, murmuring a rushed “Congratulations,” before disappearing out of site.  The second guard asks “Jude, what do we do now?”  I look at him for a moment before admitting that I don’t really know.  The guards look at each other, and the first one says that they will bring the man to Dixon.  I agree —–   Dixon will know what to do.

We arrive at his office after several twists and turns through the compound.  I rap on the door twice, loudly.  I hear a shuffling of papers and chairs and feet and suddenly the door opens.  There stands Dixon in all of his 6 foot 8 glory.  Even I am a little wary of him.  “What?” he barks.  Then he catches sight of the silent man in the wheelchair.  “Who’s he?” “One of the lucky ones,” I reply, and his face goes white.  For a split second, Dixon looks alarmed.  That is a sight I never imagined I’d see.  It’s unsettling.

Dixon points to the guards.  “Prep him for release.  Phone the warden and let him know what happened.  He’ll take care of the paperwork.”  The guards give terse nods before marching away, wheeling the man in front of them.  The man gives a stiff glance back with a look I’ve never before seen in the eyes of a patient.  I think it may be gratitude.

As soon as the guards are out of sight, Dixon yanks me deeper into his office and slams the door behind us.  “What the hell happened Jude?  That isn’t how it’s supposed to work!  No one ever gets lucky. No one!” he shouts, barely containing all the frustration visible in his eyes.  “I don’t know.  It was all going according to plan, the procedure was almost done.  I don’t know.”  My uninformative answer just serves to anger him even more.  “What’s going to happen when the word gets out?  That a murderer just walked out of prison because the injection didn’t work?  What will we tell people?”  “Tell them he got lucky.  Tell them it’s never happened before and won’t happen again.  We’ll up the dosages.  No, don’t tell them that part.  We don’t need society suddenly gaining morals again.”  Dixon smirks a little.  “No, we don’t,” he says slyly.

Dixon puts me in charge of the man.  For the next few months, I monitor him, check his physical and mental health, and keep his meds regular.  He’ll never have full use of his body again, even with physical therapy, and his frontal lobe will have lasting damage.  His speech drags, his thoughts moving faster that his lips.  He gets frustrated easily.  On a good day, when his speech is relatively understandable, he complains about the unfairness of it all.  “I didn’t choose this.  How am I supposed to reform and repent,  when I can barely move my hand?or make my life mean something when I can barely lift my arms?”  I listen patiently.  I’ve got nothing else to do.

The man believes that God gave him the chance to reform.  To try and undo the awful things he did before.  I agree with him.  It seems logical enough.  He has begun to throw himself into charity work, organizing banquets and food drives and marathons from a computer and phone by his bed.  He wants to be remembered for all the generous, good things he does now than for what he did in the past.  It makes sense.  He’s been working hard with a therapist, working on gaining function use of his legs.  “I want to do a marathon,” he said once, “wouldn’t that be fun?” “I suppose so,” I smiled.

Then one day, I come to check on him and he isn’t there.  The house is empty, and it doesn’t make sense because he can’t walk.  No one’s come in the last few hours to take him anywhere.  He’s simply gone.  I run outside, searching the street, because a man in a wheelchair can’t have gone very far on his own.  That’s when I see the hill.  It’s a gradual slope, one that appears almost flat if you’re not really looking.  I run down the sidewalk, doing calculations in my head.  If he didn’t notice the hill, if he got going too fast, there’s no way he could have the stopped.  The brakes on the chair can’t handle much speed.  I run faster.  There’s a small landing before the hill gets really steep and just as I crest it, I see the irregular lights below.  No sound reaches my ears, and only the sporadic blues and reds and whites flash in my eyes.

The man is dead.  Hit by a bus, says the policeman.  Gone before the ambulance was even called.  Nothing we could do.  I watch the mangled, broken body as it is picked up and shoved into a body bag.  Nothing they could do, I remind myself.  Nothing they could do.  It’s overwhelming.  He was the 1 in 5000, the lucky one.  He had a do-over.  .  It wasn’t supposed to go like this.  Why give him a second chance if it was just going to be taken away?

I feel sick.  I’ve witnessed so many deaths and the only one that makes me nauseous is one I had no part in.  The lights on the cop car are still flaasshing.  Over and over, stabbing my retinas, sheetscurtains of red and blue cloaking my overing my eyes.  Yet I continue to stare at the lights.  They just repeat themselves, the same pattern again and again.  They don’t do anything.  There’s no meaning behind their red-blue-blue-white lights, which are lying when they try to tell us that they can save us, they can rescue us .us.

One of the paramedics tries to comfort me.  He thinks I’m family, that I’m devastated by the loss of a brother or a son.  He’s wrong – .  I am overwhelmeddevastated, but not because the man is dead, but not by the loss of a life.  Death doesn’t scare me anymore.  I have long since accepted that nothing can prevent it; it is unavoidable.  No, I mourn for myself have lost  everything.  I have nothing.  I am no oneam alone.

  The paramedic, oblivious to my internal strife, is still next to me, trying to comfort me.  He doesn’t understand, and I consider the irony of this well-meaning man, trained in compassion – by love he was once given too or by his DNA? – try to comfort me, a remorseless killer of thousands.I break into a cold sweat and my heart races.  I am being consumed by anxiety, eaten alive by the sense that there really is no point, no purpose for anything.  No point, no point, no point; the words echo through my skull.  No one understands.  There is no destiny, no fate.  Nothing means anything.  My head aches, a throbbing pulse funneling anguish through my body.  My existence matters to no one.  I am on my own.

 

 

 

 

Alex, Alex, and Chris (Movie)

 

Losing Your Voice

Alex, Alex, and Chris give a new viewpoint on existentialism. In the short film, Alex, a gifted singer loses his voice in a horrific car accident where he kills an acquaintance. After losing his singing voice, he struggles to find his identity. He will try to find his new meaning in life as he suffers in jail. Will he find his new personality or will he life forever in forlornness? Join us to find out!

Moriah Calfin

Psychology Profile: Confidential

Profile

Name: Claude Benoît Meursault

Age: 32

Birthdate: 08 January 1914

Address: 66543 Rue Laribi Mohamed Tiaret, Algeria 14000

Marital Status: Unmarried- Relationship with Marie Cardona

Occupation: Clerk at Mediterranean Shipping Co.

Interests: Collecting stamps and cigarettes

 

 

 

 

Confession

Raymond’s friend invited Marie and I to their beach house. Raymond was worried because a group of Arabs, a brother of a past mistress, had been following him around. I agreed to go to the beach house. On Sunday, Marie had to wake me up. I think we were in a rush and I didn’t have time to eat. I had a headache and a cigarette. Raymond’s Arabs were watching us as we waited for the bus, but they never talked to us. Then, Raymond, Marie, and I got on the bus. The bus ride was nice and once we got to the next stop, we went to Masson’s bungalow. We swam, ate lunch, and went for a walk. The heat from the sun was making me sleepy. Raymond and Masson pointed out two Arabs. The Arabs were walked towards us. Raymond said he’d take one guy and Masson could have the other. The sand was scorching. Raymond and Masson beat up the Arabs, but one of the Arab’s had a knife and gave Raymond a nasty cut; one on his arm and the other on his mouth. The sun was blinding as we went home. Masson took Raymond to the doctor, they came back, and we went back to the beach. We saw the Arabs again. Raymond wanted a fight and I took his gun so if Raymond and Masson did fight the Arabs, it would be fair. But, before Raymond had a chance to fight, the Arabs walked away.

Raymond and I walked back to the bungalow. He went inside and I walked back to the beach. The water was reflecting the sun and my feet were burning. I saw a blue overall wearing Arab. He was resting in a cool spring that was surrounded by some rocks. It was so hot that I had chills as I held onto Raymond’s gun, which was in my jacket. The Arab leaned forward and drew out a knife. The reflected light sliced my eyes and a large headache formed. Sweat was pouring off my face as I drew out Raymond’s gun. I didn’t mean to kill him. I hadn’t planned to kill him, but I shot him once and then four times more. He was dead.

The police must have heard the gun shots, because a couple of them arrive at the beach to arrest me. I gave them the gun and then asked if I might sit down in the shade because I felt dehydrated. I asked for a glass of water, but no one gave me any. After, the police took me to the station.

Interview

Officer: *muffled noise* All right. It’s on. This is Officer Anton Pinet. August third. 1946. The time is… 4:26 p.m. What is your name?

Arrestee: Meursault is fine.

Anton: Alright, Meursault. Where do you live?

Meursault: I live at 66543 Rue Laribi Mohamed Tiaret, Algeria 14000. It’s an apartment on the corner of Rue Laribi Mohamed.

Anton: And where do you work?

Meursault: I work at the Mediterranean Shipping Company.

Anton: Could you be more specific? What is your job at the Shipping Company?

Meursault: I’m a clerk. I work pretty hard.

Anton: I see. And lastly, what is the date of your birth and where were you born?

Meursault: January 8^th 1914. And I was born in Tiaret.

Anton: Have you hired an attorney?

Meursault: I haven’t hired one. Is it necessary?

Anton: “Why do you ask (pg 63)?”

Meursault: My case is fairly simple.

Anton: “That’s your opinion. But the law is the law. If you don’t hire an attorney yourself, the court will appoint one (pg 63).”

Meursault: It’s convenient that “the court should take care of those details (pg 63).”

Anton: I agree. It is a good law.

…..

Anton: Officer Anton Pinet. Time is currently 7:34 p.m. and the date the third of August. I am here to finish conducting the interview with Claude Meursault. Meursault, I am going to ask you some questions and I would like you to respond with the best of your ability.

Meursault: I will try.

Anton: First question, where were you on July twenty-second?

Meursault: At the beach.

Anton: What beach?

Meursault: The one in Algiers. Raymond and Marie went too.

Anton: So when you went to the beach, did you have a good time?

Meursault: Yes, I did. But, the sun was so bright and I didn’t have a hat. There was also a pair of Arab’s that Raymond was afraid of. Raymond, Masson, and I saw the Arabs on the beach. I held onto Raymond’s gun and then he and Masson fought with the Arabs. Raymond took one and Masson took the other. They were winning, but Raymond got a sliced by a knife that the Arab had; we didn’t know he had a knife.

Anton: Do you feel responsible for Raymond’s cut?

Meursault: No. It was Raymond’s mistake because he wasn’t paying attention and then got the cut.

Anton: Tell me more about how you were feeling when you walked back Masson’s house.

Meursault: It was hot. And bright out. The sun was so bright and I wish I had a hat that day.

Anton: So you reach the house and watch Raymond walk into the house. And then you decide to wa- … Meursault, what was going through your head when you turned back to go to the beach.

Meursault: I don’t remember. There was this noise in my head, like a buzzing or ringing. And I didn’t want to climb the stairs, but standing at the doorstep was just as bad.

Anton: *papers shuffling* So, you went back to the beach and saw one of the Arabs…

Meursault: I took Raymond’s gun and shot him. He died instantly.

Anton: The medical reports say the victim had five gunshot wounds.

Meursault: Yes, I shot him four times after the first.

Silence for twenty seconds.

Anton: Do you have anything else you want to say or add?

Meursault: Might I get a cigarette?

Anton: I don’t know. I can ask but I think the answer is no.

Scraping noise as chair is pushed back. Steady footsteps as Meursault starts to walk away. Slight pause and then jingling noise as curtain is pulled back. Footsteps fade.

Anton: The time is now 8:02. Recorder is turned off.

Psychoanalyst Report

Claude Benoît Meursault is a man that shows signs of psychopathic behaviors and I fear that Mr. Meursault is stuck in the sixth stage of Erikson’s physiological stages. I have read Mr. Meursault’s confession, the police reports, and have sat one room over during the police interrogations. To say that I have not become fascinated with Mr. Meursault would be a lie. This man shows no signs of emotion whatsoever. His Maman died recently and reports are that there was no empathy, no desire to see his mother one last time, and at the funeral itself, his gaze was uninterested. Mr. Meursault was not able to provide for his mother, although he has a steady job at the Mediterranean Shipping Company. He stated, “I work pretty hard” and I have seen his income; it is a decent amount. The caretaker, whom I have talked with, said he told Mr. Meursault that there was no shame. Maman needed someone to take care of her and Mr. Meursault could not give his support. Mr. Meursault had not seen his mother in years and when he did- she was dead. This makes me question Claude’s childhood. Was his relationship with his Maman unstable? I do not believe I will ever get an answer because Mrs. Meursault is dead and Claude does not give emotional answers. This branches off to his interview with Officer Anton Pinet.

I specifically had Anton ask Claude about how Meursault was feeling when he was at the beach. I will describe the setting. Claude, who calls himself Meursault, was sitting in a chair. His body posture, I must point out, was quite impressive. He sat up straight, his shoulders were relaxed, and he did not tap his foot. Meursault’s manners were perfect. I bring up the Maman again- Was she the one to teach him such polite manners? Anton told me when he questioned about killing the Arab, Meursault squinted as if it were bright out. Pointedly, Meursault described both the funeral and the beach as being hot days with “bright” glares. I have deducted that Mr. Meursault killed the Arab because of the sun. Do not take this as child’s play- the sun has caused a man to murder. Since Meursault was not able to take care of his mother, and he felt the pressure- I am positive he did when he did not look at his mother’s dead body- he showed his strength by killing the Arab man. This was not an act of revenge for his friend Raymond. I believe Meursault does not have emotional feelings for his Raymond or Marie. “The sun was bright. My feet hurt. I was so hot.”- Meursault. Meursault, Meursault, Meursault. Where is the conscious thought for others? There is no fight for others. No love. No emotion. Only isolation. Thus, Erikson’s sixth stage.

Erik Erikson, genius of developmental psychology, stated in the sixth stage, that the main idea is intimacy versus isolation. The age group for this stage is 19-40 (Meursault is 32) and focuses on love. As I have stated before, I do not think Meursault is able to love- he has not shown signs of true love, only physical relationships. Erikson states that a person is not fully developed until they can form a romantic relationship. The goal is to relate to another person intimately and by doing so, the given person will put aside their needs and put thought into another person. The fear of love is isolation. Meursault has shown signs of isolation by being present, but not mentally and emotionally present. He is also not able to fulfill the commitments that have been given- Taking care of Maman. The sixth stage is about forming relationships. Has he maintained a relationship? To Marie? Maman? No and no. This man is deeply lacking in developmental progress, shows signs of failure, and most importantly, no effort to improve.

To conclude this psychological report on Claude Meursault, I leave this question. Who did he kill for? I know the answer. Clause Benoît Meursault killed for himself. There was no intent to protect Raymond. His fear of love has pushed his actions to murder. Meursault will not accept his responsibility to commit effort in forming relationships. I recommend he starts treatment right away. His time for completing the goal of intimate relationship in the sixth stage is almost past. I fear though that Meursault will not be able to show any signs of emotions and if this is the case, there is no point to why he might not be put in jail or even sentenced to death. I do not take this lightly, but there is no evidence pointing toward innocence. When one dies, they feel nothing. Is not Meursault already there?

Sources Used:

–                   My imaginative brain

–                   The Stranger

–                   Into to Psychology. Teacher: Frank Gallow.