The Stranger

A Little reminder of my big question: Does facing adversity/failure strengthen or hinder ones potential?

Camus' novel, "The Stranger," is another book where the answer to my Big Question does not follow the previous trends of the works of literature we read first semester. The protagonist of the novel holds similar traits to that of Raskolnikov from "Crime & Punishment." He is alienated from society like Raskolnikov, but unlike him Meursault holds a "gentle indifference" to the world, and is emotionally detached-- a passive observer who never passes judgement on others. Because of such characteristics, when Meursault is faced with the death of his mother and then is tried and convicted of murder, his potential is neither strengthened nor hindered-- it just is. He remarks upon the physical state of things and never denies he is guilty of murder, but it also has little emotional effect on him. Typically in the other works we read, such series of events would be the spark in starting a process that leads to either self- betterment or to self destruction. Meursault's gentle indifference, and his embodiment of Camus' Philosophy of the Absurd, are key components in making him one of the few protagonist that responds with a neutral answer to my big question.  

Crime & Punishment

Dotevsky's novel Crime & Punishment is another work of literature my big question can be applied to. Raskolnikov does not face failure so much as he faces adversity. Throughout the entire novel he is at war with himself and stuck between action and inaction. After killing an old pawnbroker and her sister, Raskolnikov's internal struggle magnifies and he grows paranoid. Once he is caught, the adversity is also magnified. Unlike the other protagonists I have written about before, Raskolnikov is hard to sympathize with. He feels justified in his crimes-- above the general public. His adversity, and his girlfriend's persistence lead him down the road to redemption. Raskolnikov is convicted of the murders finally and at first he is sentenced to death. That sentence is then reduced to eight years of hard labor in Siberia. What's interesting in Raskolnikov's case is that he is not the one who instigates the journey to redemption, rather his girlfriend Sonia is. She is the reason he chooses to better himself through such adversity; not the adversity itself. In relation to my big question, that leaves me to conclude that it was NOT the failure/adversity Raskolnikov encountered that strengthened his potential and made him a better person. In this case, a third party is what inspired such transformation.