'Literature in Question\r'

'The protrudesider, written by Albert Camus and Perfumer by Patrick Suskind ar two books that brook addressed critic in wholey the nonion of lucidity and absurdity. The protagonist in the outsider is a controversial matchless, since he app bently does not fool feelings regular to his induce mother. He goes undeterred even with her mother’s death. He does not precaution about Marie- his girl friend- and even matinee idol. He wonders wherefore the priest worries himself by visiting him. In a route he has created a domain that he himself evoke understand.  It is absurd that Meursault’s inability to double-dealing and his insensitivity make the authority to perceive him as a threat.\r\nThe plan of background for any meet he does is irrelevant. It is in this breath that the author of The foreigner perhaps wants the lectors to believe that it is not ever much that we construct feelings that we ought to control had. And sometimes we play up an em otion that was expected to exist yet in existing experience the emotion did not exist inwardly us. It is to this resultant role that Mersault’s merely acknowledgement of whole step is tangible, physical things rather than corruptible emotion. He is, in this effect, a model in which the author installs the rule of existentialism where individuals have full responsibility for creating the essence of their throw lives. He does not read to rationally appreciate with the rest of the inn.\r\nCamus becomes an existentialist in this object lesson by screening that conscious human initiations infract always find in themselves a human of their aver. Existentialists believe that the ultimate and unquestionable is not reality, is not thinking consciousness nevertheless creationness in the terra firma. Mersault is just in the world. In feature no one- even the cab art- can give a moderateness for Meursault to be in the world.  He does not claim a justific ation to exist in the world.\r\nCamus wants to show us that a person cannot go against the company and the majority, be it good or bad, will always win; this is shown by the change of attitude by Mersault at the end of the novel. At this point the purchase order has won by converting Meursault to its side but keep mum there is no justification in the way the society perceives what transpires in Mersault’s animateness. He has got the regenerate to think the way he thinks and do whatsoever he does.\r\nThe book focuses on absurdity of animation and death, as well as the society. It is in this sense impression that Camus expounds on the theme of existentialism and rationalism. He addresses the concept of subjectivity, individual independence and plectrum, where life becomes a choice. Mersault’s behaviours might be attributed to his choice in life rather than subjecting it to social conventional reasoning. For him, app arntly, rationalism is comparative and depe nds on individual.\r\nHe does not even go for to the mercies offered by the priest while he awaits his execution. It is the choice of an individual to choose to believe in God or not; he has chosen not to believe and even death does not give him a reason to believe in God. Meursault does not seem to care whether he lives or dies- he is not remorseful even at a time he could be seeking contriteness; all seems to be absurd and vanity to him.\r\nMersault emotions are at most of the time switched off, which makes him possible to be an observer of his own life †watching it as an outsider. Camus writes the book in the first person so that the main character describes ein truththing that happens to him in a very elaborate way but does not chew out about his sentiments. The writer creates a cathartic effect by making the reader put himself in the position of the main character, all the same at the akin time creates a disturbing effect increase by the recurring deaths. (Three death s in the book allows that of the mother, sexual climax produces the Arab man’s death, then Meursault execution.)\r\nThe character starts showing emotions at the end- by recognizing his love for his girlfriend Marie. This gives a new lease in Mersault’s life. He, at least, though late, revives his emotions, changes his attitude and has a reason to live. The societal absurdity wins over Mersault; he has conformed to the societal norms- which include showing emotion. At this point, Camus shows that regardless of someone’s stand, life is paramount beyond reason and rationalism.\r\nBy referring to his away regarding how he gave up aft(prenominal) having tending(p) up ambitions when he was a student. This reflection of the past shows that at a point Mersault did everything as per societal expectation but later realized the need for organism who he was regardless of what the society would think of him-he could not figure out why he ought to do things to the societ al satisfaction and not for his own satisfaction.\r\nPatrick Suskind, on the other hand brings out the extend of absurdity in his novel Perfume by showing how Jean Baptiste Grenoulle engages in his great dearest-in his sense of smell leading him to become a murderer. Jean-Baptiste Grenoulle innate(p) with one uplifting enable of smell; and this being a gift that nothing can be done to stop-we as readers are left unbelieving if we have to blame him for the iniquities that come along with the gift.  The fact that he survives his birth by default complements this.\r\nThe reader asks himself if and so fate has destiny.  His identification of his gift to confiscate every kind of smell is also an central aspect that comes in his infancy. It is anomalous for the society to discriminate an innocent person because of an inherent, unique gift. For Grenoulle, he needful not to persuade the society to like him because all he got was an inborn gift. It is absurd how people in the society tend to give reasons as to why the society has to like them instead of living their own lives.\r\nHe is rejected by the society, grows up in an orphanage, unloved and malnourished.  If indeed rationalism was to be utilise in this case, no substantial reason can be given for the tribulations that Grenoulle undergoes. It is every bit monstrous for the society to treat him the way it does instead of sympathising with him and according him a chance to exploit his gift. Isolation from the society is the reason for him developing annoyance for fellow humans and so distinguishing himself by the uncanny sense of smell. It is amazing how he even uses his gift to find the beautiful girl.\r\nHe could not believe his nose and was threatened that the tenuous smell was from human race, which he had come to despise. It is rather paradoxical that he hates human race which he is part of. It is due to the absurd speckle he finds himself in and with the intention of preserving his s ense of essence he kills the beautiful girl. This shows his effort to find marrow to the universe and of course a place since, humans to him, are a threat. Though tortured by the roll he continues to search the scent and this keeps his survival going- a weird way and reason to survive. This scenario creates an absurd and irrational situation whereby Grenoulle is sandwiched between the nice smell and the antipathy of human beings.\r\nHe develops an even greater disgust for human as he goes through the travel in the forest to the extent of being repulsed by the scent of human of human existence. It is quite irrational and absurd how the greed to find this perfect scent drives Grenoulle into the forest. He lives for seven years in a dark cave where he was intoxicated by smells he preserves in his internal  ‘ rook of smells’ His high aptitude for mixing strange and strange winds would be an asset in the rational world but instead, in his apparently irrational way, he takes responsibility for creating the meaning of his own life.\r\nThe skill and gift leads him to his desire to cover his own lack of smell and quest to create the most unique olfactory property the world has ever known.  This in essence explains the passion the protagonist lives for- creating most unique perfume- but unfortunately, a human being has to be killed for the perfume to be made. It is absurd that this passion supersedes even the life of humans.\r\nTo the society, Grenoulle’s acts are unacceptable but then when he is supposed to be executed the same society becomes remorseful and throws his deeds to the dogs in the expense of the perfume. It is equally illogical or irrational for Grenoulle to be engulfed with the might of dissatisfaction because the society does not love him but his perfume; he instead ought to be celebrating!\r\nPatrick Suskind has succeeded to show that it is not right to judge individuals in the society and yet the society itself is irr ational in its thinking.  Grenoulle’s situation is inexplicable to the society but he has all the justification as to do what he does. He tries to find meaning in the universe but fails. It is absurd that he becomes a murderer from being a scent smeller.\r\nHe does not grind why he should not act in the case where his reason, his power of reflection tells him. He is being save himself by doing all he does; after all it is the same society that made him who he is by isolating him. In deed he uses his power of following his favorite scent only to find out that it is for human beings who he loathes and kills them one by one, eventually turning out to be a dangerous murderer.  This complements the fact that life is more than the rational thinking. This in essence is a case where man has chosen to embrace his absurd define instead of following the rational thinking of the society.\r\nThe protagonists in the two novels evidently show that man’s freedom and the oppor tunity to give life meaning lies in the acknowledgement and acceptance of absurdity. The freedom of man is therefore established in man’s natural ability and opportunity to create his own meaning and purpose. Mersault and Grenoulle, both create a world of their own and a purpose to live in it. The individual becomes the most precious unit of existence, as he represents unique ideals that can be characterized as an entire universe by itself.\r\nThe two writers have succeeded in bringing out the principles of absurdism, rationalism and existentialism. They have managed to create characters that have stood out of the society by defying the societal norms. These characters enable the readers elicit some significant questions on about their existence.  The writers manage to bring out the irrational way the society thinks of individuals who are only but living their lives. The rejection of reason as a source of meaning dominates the two works by focusing on the feelings of fear and dread -by the protagonists- that are felt in their own radical freedom and their awareness of death.\r\nThe writers succeed in showing that indeed human counter their fear of being in the world by believing that they are rational and everyone else is; they do not have the anything to fear and no reason to feel anxious about being free. They make the reader to view human beings as subjects in an indifferent, objective, often ambiguous and absurd world, in which meaning is not provided by the natural order, but rather created by human being actions and interpretations.\r\n reference\r\nCamus, A. (1983) The Outsider. Berkshire: Penguin Books\r\nColeburt, R (1968) An Introduction to Western Philosophy. New York: Sheed & adenine; Ward\r\nJean, P (1946) Existentialism is Humanism. London: Routledge\r\nSoren, K (1849) The Point of View of my Work as an Author. diary [27, 1849]\r\nSuskind, P. (1985) Perfume. Berkshire: Penguin Books\r\n \r\n'