The question is simple, why did Meursault kill the Arab? The answer is complex. There were many triggers that could've possibly motivated him, as well as possibly a deeper answer hiding beneath all of them.
If we are 100% trusting to Meursault, then the reason he kills the Arab is simply that he has a gun, his enemy is in front of him, but not threatening him. The sun and hot weather is disorienting him, and when the Arab's blade is reflecting bright light from the sun directly into his eyes, it is too much. He shoots the Arab once, then four more times. Maybe this disorienting setting, as well as the fact he had a gun in his hands with someone to shoot, was the last straw. Something might've been building up in him ever since the book started, since we never see any brash behavior on his part whatsoever.
However, if we look closer, by looking at the bigger picture the answer is much more complex. The reason Meursault even has the gun is because he took it from his acquaintance, Raymond, so he wouldn't do something rash. As we obviously know, Meursault is the one who does something rash in the end. Could Meursault have been protecting his friend Raymond? Although Meursault never mentioned that they were very close, as they had just been acquainted earlier in the story because Raymond wanted help to threaten his mistress who had cheated on him, the two may have shared some kind of bond. By killing the Arab, Meursault effectively put an end to Raymond's troubles, saving Raymond from possibly killing the Arab himself, something he obviously wanted to do.
Another good question, why did Meursault shoot four more times? Just for fun? Initially, we might think that it was just to finish the job, to make sure the Arab really was dead. However, Meursault seems to put this reason to rest when he mentions that he has entered the door of unhappiness after shooting the Arab. He knows that his life will be turned upside-down because of this incident. It could've been this unhappiness that made him mad, mad enough to shoot the Arab four more times.
In Meursault's trial, the four extra shots are deeply looked at. In the end, they may have led to his execution. It is funny to think that one moment, Meursault is perhaps the most rational person I've ever met, observing and content. The next, he has killed a man for a reason that isn't clear.
And maybe an even more troubling implication, which the novel can be read as fully supporting, is that there is no "answer" to the question of "why." The act simply cannot be explained--it happened in such a way, the sun was shining in such a way, the guy was still at the pool even though M. didn't expect him to be, and "the trigger gave." One way to read the trial is to see the court as trying to grapple with a crime that simply cannot be explained. This "meaninglessness" is deeply unnerving, and so they have to force M. to fit into some kind of discernible model of human motivation. But what if no such model actually applies?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete