The Theme of Freedom in the Authors Sartre and Camus, Essay Example

The 20^th century was a period of theoretical turmoil because some academics drifted from the concord of logical beliefs, increasing ideological division between the continental and logical philosophical customs. The two philosophers who spearheaded the intellectual revolt during the 20^th century are Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus. They were famous for their commitment to distinct logical queries that pertain the human actuality. For that reason, the philosopher’s intellectual contribution resulted in the creation of two different schools of thought: existentialism and absurdism. Camus and Sartre explored identical topics within their theoretical novels and essays yet reached different conclusions about how humans should approach their existence. The only similarity is that the two scholars are categorised as members and contributors of the same school. The literature of the two philosophers offer differences in their beliefs. The essay compares Camus’s novel The Stranger and Sartre’s novel Nausea to present the literary representation of the two philosophers.

The novel The Stranger by Camus talks about the story of Meursault, a pathetic man who committed a mysterious murder and was facing the rage of the Algerian legal classification because of his complete insignificance of the resolutions of the cultured human humanities. On the other hand, the novel Nausea by Sartre offers a reflection of a historian by the name of Antoine Roquentin, who was aggrieved by a sneaky disease that seemed to derive from numerous disturbing disclosures about the nature of his being. In the novel The Stranger, Camus portrays freedom as the conclusion of a specific connection with life. Sartre, in his book Nausea, uses nausea to gratify that autonomy is intrinsic to humanity. Therefore, the difference between absurdist and existentialist freedom is gleaned from how Roquentin and Meursault’s existential journeys are portrayed.

In The Stranger, Camus hypotheses a literary depiction of metaphysical opinions advocated in The Myth of Sisyphus. In his essay, Camus nebulously and affectingly depicts the crime performed by Meursault as evidence of discounting hypothetical and espousal autonomy based on the illogicality of life. The author starts the narration of Meursault before the homicide is committed and regards Meursault as an individual who had been barred by society. As such, Meursault moved through life in an unreal state because he could not assemble the persuasion to participate with humanity in a way that surpasses artificial relations. This is evident when Meursault is unpretentious by the decease of his mother after sluggish implementation of his societally required responsibilities at the funeral of his mother. Besides, Meursault creates a relationship with Raymond, a person of uncertain profession and character, and Raymond invites him to spend time at the beach. While at the beach, Raymond argues with a group of Arab men, culminating in Meursault using his gun and killing one of the Arab men. Therefore, the relevance of the incidence to the concept of independence is deep-rooted in how it is depicted: the idea of individual autonomy in the value of external circumstance and free will is rendered ineffective by Meursault’s motivation. The author uses language indicative of scepticism about human independence as Meursault walks alongside the beach towards the Arabs. Meursault asserts that it transpired to him “that all (he) had to do turn around, …. [but] the whole beach, throbbing in the sun, was pressing on [his] back (58).” Further, Meursault goes ahead to expound on the strength of the sun’s scowl, as well as the intense effect that the glare had on his mind. Meursault documents that “[it] was” the adverse physical effects of the light “that made [him] move forward” (59). Based on the argument, Meursault does not show that a mindful verdict catalysed his act of shooting a bullet towards the Arabs. In fact, Meursault does not clearly state whether, as a cognizant agent, he fired the gun knowingly. In brief, the actions of Meursault were understandable based on the argument that is provided in the essay, The Myth of Sisyphus.

Meursault is not only depicted as a conscious writer based on the decision that he made to kill the Arab is but also painted as a deterministic force that transcends both the sequential and spatial constraints of the physical biosphere. The vagueness expedites a heightened taste of the author’s absurdist philosophy since bookworms of the novel are documented with no validation for the disastrous incidence. As such, Meursault is portrayed as a person who has been deferred within the society and is satisfied with the existential position. While Meursault is regarded as incompetent in handling emotions about his state, as well as the unadventurous performs of the society, Meursault avoids material deficiency by obediently ensuring that he maintains occupation in a state of apparent unevenness. Nonetheless, he does not propagate a public façade that is sustainable outside the least of communal tolerability. As such, Meursault cannot achieve a kind of freedom enclosed in absurdism because he has not been comprehended and antagonized with the inherent illogicality of the kind of life he is living.

Contrary to the teaching of absurdists, Sartre stressed that autonomy is on a priori state of human reality. Besides, he also emphasises that humans are accountable for the creation of individual denotation in their survival. This kind of existentialist depiction of independence is perceived in Sartre’s book Nausea where the narrator, Roquentin, is disbursed by psychological and corporal expressions of existential torment. The author designed the novel based on a series of journal entries revealed in the periodical of Antoine Roquentin. The novel documents the life of Roquentin while living in the fictional city of Bonville, France. Roquentin started experiencing the challenge of completing his novel after being plagued by an illness that affected his everyday life. Nonetheless, when he decided to stop documenting the history of Rollebon, Roquentin realised that his existence was affected by his perception. As such, Roquentin discovers that he is “the one who pulls [himself] from the nothingness to which [he aspires] (100).” For that reason, he stops perceiving physical objects through the interpretation of the human lens. The numerous realisation that Roquentin makes enable him to make a deduction that “all are free” after learning that nothing subsists out of need. As such, Roquentin articulates that “I am free: there is absolutely no more reason for living, all the ones I have tried have given way, and I can’t imagine any more of them…the past is dead. I am alone… and free. But this freedom is rather like death (156).”

Sartre’s idea of autonomy is that of an inborn feature that subsists within human beings. In Sartre’s novel Being and Nothingness, the author reconnoiters subjects identical to those discussed in Nausea. Particularly, his concept of mode of consciousness or anguish whereby human beings perceive their freedom, is identical to a person who has been separated from their past but still retains the ability to modify their behaviour. Nonetheless, a person needs to ensure that they have total control of their past to prevent themselves from taking part in such activities. In the novel, Roquentin finds himself having the desire to complete his documentation of Rollebon’s history. When people cannot abandon their past activities, they will burden their freedom with every part of the action crashing due to a measure of responsibility.

The essay compares Camus’s novel The Stranger and Sartre’s novel Nausea to present the literary representation of the two philosophers. Nausea and The Stranger are philosophical literary works that have been documented in the first-person perspective to talk about the existential state of the people. Nonetheless, there are different viewpoints that are presented in the books. In the book The Stranger, the author argues that freedom cannot be measured using a metaphysical truth. As such, a person can only achieve freedom through acceptance and recognition of the absurdity of existence. Besides, people can also attain freedom by rejecting predominant concepts of morality that restrain the behaviour of humans. Contrary, Sartre’s concept of existentialism is rooted in the belief that freedom is a constituent of humans acting for themselves. After Antoine Roquentin realized that the past influenced his exit, he discovered that he was the only person who could make a move to get out of the past. The conflicts portrayed in the two novels emphasize the significance of freedom in advising humans to approach the state of their being.

Works Cited

Camus, A. (2000). The Stranger. Trans. Joseph Laredo. New York: Penguin Books Classics.

Sartre, J. P. (2021). Nausea. Penguin UK.