The reputation of
Albert Camus has never been higher. He was the novelist
who captured the post-war sense of European civilisation in tatters.
In his 1957 Nobel speech he said: "For
more than twenty years of an insane history, hopelessly lost like all
the men of my generation in the convulsions of time, I have been
supported by one thing: by the hidden feeling that to write today was
an honour."
Zakia
reads about the trial
Camus'
thought evolved with his writings and experience. When this novel is
read with his later philosophical essay The Myth of Sisyphus,
we see a vision emerging of how Camus surmounted the nihilism
pervasive in much of European thought at the time – which gave rise to
various streams of existentialism. But Camus' stance is unique as man
of action, writer engagé,
and novelist.
Thommo
left early to test drive his Tata Nano
Is
Meursault a 'queer fellow' as his girl-friend Marie suggests, or is he
the normal male who enjoys the simple pleasures of life, and
seeks to avoid the kind of involvement with others that would abridge his
own freedom? The irony is he gets caught up in a fracas, though he had no
dog in the fight (as Texans say); and ends by losing his freedom totally!
Talitha,
Priya, and KumKum at the Camus reading
Be surprised by who else read this novel lately:
Here are the readers at the end:
Talitha,
Zakia, Priya, KumKum, Bobby, & Joe
Click below to read more ...
The
Stranger by Albert Camus
Reading on Apr
13, 2012
Present:
Priya,
Talitha, KumKum, Zakia, Thommo, Bobby, Joe
Absent:
Sunil and Mathew (to Kottayam to attend a meeting), Sivaram (last
minute meeting), Verghese (?)
The
next session is Poetry, on May
11, 2012.
The
next novel for reading is
A
Tale of Two Cities
by Charles Dickens on Jun
15, 2012.
The novel selection after that is up to Sunil and Mathew by end April,
please.
Everyone
wished Thommo God-speed on the first part of his solo drive in a Tata
Nano car from Mumbai to the North-east and then back via central and
South India to Kochi in June; the second leg is from Kochi to Ladakh.
Joe offered to be his cleaner, if he needed a companion; various
family members will be joining him in stages. Thommo will be
maintaining a blog and Tata Motors will be posting a log of his
journey on their Web site.
For
a scholarly and comprehensive link to the works of Camus, please see:
(Update: The novel was chosen by The Guardian reading group as their Nov 2013 selection; see
http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2013/nov/06/the-outsider-albert-camus-reading-group
Read the recollections of
his daughter, Catherine, on the 100th birth anniversary of Albert Camus on Nov 7, 2013:
Thommo
The first reading Thommo presented was Meursault's response to his employer when a posting to Paris was offered with a promotion. He is quite non-committal, and the employer, discerning his indifference, chides him for his lack of ambition. This brings out one side of his character. The second passage has a bit of humour in the light banter about marrying Marie who is keen for the relationship to be formalised. Meursault is not, and though he's not in love, merely wanting to have a good time, he finally obliges Marie: they will get married. She remarks he's a 'queer fellow'.
The first reading Thommo presented was Meursault's response to his employer when a posting to Paris was offered with a promotion. He is quite non-committal, and the employer, discerning his indifference, chides him for his lack of ambition. This brings out one side of his character. The second passage has a bit of humour in the light banter about marrying Marie who is keen for the relationship to be formalised. Meursault is not, and though he's not in love, merely wanting to have a good time, he finally obliges Marie: they will get married. She remarks he's a 'queer fellow'.
KumKum
thought he was quite a guy, with his ability to get his girl without
any any show of commitment. But it was common in the free-love days
after the war, and continues that way today in many countries.
Talitha thought Meursault was 'emotionally blunted.' She didn't see
the 'absurd' in the novel, venturing that Meursault in the end finds
some meaning. But is it not a meaning made-up by him to overcome the
finality of death? He does not 'discover' meaning in life, as
believers do, but invents one for himself. Regarding this, the
following thesis on the Web may throw further light:
Talitha
wondered if Meursault was capable of love. In response to which Bobby
quoted a para from Camus' Nobel banquet speech:
Truth is mysterious, elusive, always to be conquered. ... artists scorn nothing: they are obliged to understand rather than to judge.
Talitha
wanted to know why Meursault gets involved with Raymond. Joe thought
it was a casual sort of neighbourly involvement. Meursault was not
stand-offish or solitary. He was a normal guy, who doesn't want to be
tied down, and lose his liberty of action.
KumKum
The
author took great care to describe each physical situation as the
story unfolds. We see the world and feel it through the protagonist,
Meursault.
Meursault is
keenly observant of his surroundings, yet he floats through the
narration untethered. Or nearly so. He lived for himself. The author
implies that when a man bonds, if at all, with other human beings, it
is to satisfy his own needs, and he offers as little as needed to get
something which he wants.
Meursault
certainly did not care for his mother beyond her death at the
beginning of the story, as he no longer needed her. It was a mere
formality that he attended her funeral, and he did not try to conceal
his feelings.
His relationship
with Marie is basically need-driven, to satisfy his physical desire.
There was no love from his side in this relationship, either. On the
other hand, Marie talked about love and she sought permanence in
their relationship.
It was by chance
that Meursault met Raymond, and everything that followed from the
first meeting is series of accidents. Killing a man came easy to
Meursault. And he did not repent for his act. Here is his reaction
after the heinous act:
I knew I’d
shattered the balance of the day, the spacious calm of this beach on
which I had been happy. But I fired four shots more into the inert
body, on which they left no visible trace. And each successive shot
was another loud, fateful rap on the door of my undoing.
He
only thought about "the balance of the day" being shattered, and
something else, "the spacious calm of this beach on which I had
been happy." From this it appears that Meursault wanted only a
superficial connection with people around him. Life is a stroll from
birth to the death for him; why bother chasing permanence, when existence
is transient. Meursault did not believe in God or in useless
benevolence, for he did not hope for anything from life. Whether
Meursault's character represents the belief system of the author or
not, is difficult to tell. Authors invent characters to tell stories.
Camus
has taken great care to describe the scenes. One of the odd things about
Meursault is that he did not need his mother beyond death. There is a
series of accidents that lead to a senseless death. These phrases are
signals to Meursault's response to events:
'I
knew I shattered the balance of the day.'
'I
had been very happy.'
It's
a superficial world Meursault inhabits; he didn't hope for anything
from life.
Bobby
The passage Bobby
read is a striking one which describes the fateful murder. It's a an
apocalyptic scene:
a fiery gust came
from the sea, while the sky cracked in two, from end to end,”
This
reminded KumKum of the words in Matthew's gospel when Christ is
crucified:
At
that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to
bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split.
A
discussion ensued about the virtue of the two translations the
readers used, the older one by Stuart Gilbert (SG), and the more
recent one by the American, Matthew Ward (MW).
English
translation by Stuart Gilbert
I knew I’d shattered the balance of the day, the spacious calm of this beach on which I had been happy. But I fired four shots more into the inert body, on which they left no visible trace. And each successive shot was another loud, fateful rap on the door of my undoing.
The Original
French
J'ai compris que j'avais détruit l'équilibre du jour, le silence exceptionnel d'une plage où j'avais été heureux. Alors, j'ai tiré encore quatre fois sur un corps inerte où les balles s'enfonçaient sans qu'il y parût. Et c'était comme quatre coups brefs que je frappais sur la porte du malheur.
The
question was whether in the context of the passage
(a)
équilibre is better translated
as 'balance' (SG), or 'harmony' (MW), and
(b)
should porte du malheur be the
'door of my undoing' (SG),
or the 'door of my unhappiness' (MW)?
Regarding
(a) Joe thinks 'balance' is nearer to the original than
harmony, keeping in mind that 'equilibrium of the day' would sound
pedantic. And if harmony was what Camus intended he would have used
the exact same word in French: 'harmonie'.
In
(b) the noun 'malheur' in French means 'misfortune', although
the adjective 'heureux' does mean 'happy'. So 'door of unhappiness' would
be off the mark. The 'door of my undoing' is an unusual choice (some
alliteration afoot there), but apt, since it points to all that goes
wrong from that point on in Meursault's trial, and thereby in his
life.
Stuart
Gilbert has taken liberties. The last sentence of the passage faithfully translated
is "And it was like four brief knocks (or blows) on the door of
my misfortune." There is nothing about "each successive
shot was another loud, fateful ..." 'Successive' is not present,
nor is 'loud' or 'fateful'. They've been added but in totality SG's
translation is an improvement on the original – if that can be
said.
For a critical article on translating the simple opening sentence of the novel, see:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/05/camus-translation.html
For the translator's view on a new translation by Sandra Smith, see:
http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2013/nov/28/translating-camus-the-outsider-sandra-smith
One
way of accounting for the out-of-character murder is that Meursault
was transported to a trance state by the joint effect of the heat and
light and the build-up of excitement in the encounter with the Arab.
Bobby thought reason left him in those moments. Priya opined that
things like that happen and mentioned something about the Bhagvad
Gita. But the question is the responsibility of the agent through whom
evil happens. Talitha thought a moral void within Meursault allowed him to
commit such a senseless act.
Bobby
remarked that in the end Meursault does not want to be left alone in
death. Rather he wishes that a crowd of spectators should be there to
curse him at the execution. It is a macabre wish.
Remarking
on the poor defence mounted for Meursault at the trial, Joe considered the lawyer as
quite incompetent and Meursault thought as much. After all, the Arab did bring out a knife first; he
was armed and ready to use it. Justifying Meursault's action as
self-defence would have been quite credible. The prosecutor had a
field day citing all sorts of irrelevant facts to prove that it was
not merely culpable homicide, but premeditated murder.
Bobby
mentioned his shifting to a Philosophy MA from PolSci without any
preparation, and having a hard time of it, reading Dostoevsky, Kafka,
and the lot. KumKum mentioned that our guest from the last session, Tom
Duddy, wanted to come, as he had lived at a time
when Camus' reputation was on the ascendant, culminating in his Nobel
prize. It was a novel that made a deep impression on him. KumKum
recalled the days in Calcutta University when people would hold
readings in the Coffee House on College Street. Camus made no sense
to her then, and she misunderstood many things. She was surprised
later when she married Joe to find a collection of Camus' books on
his shelf. That still did not impel her to read Camus, so this novel was a
revelation for her and she rather took to the unique character of
Meursault.
Joe
The style is
detached, precise and without ornament. In English, portions seem to
suffer from a staccato harshness: short sentences beginning with the
initial announcement of the mother's death, but it sounds elegiac in
French:
(Reading
1)
The
spare style goes with the story of a man who is not inclined to weep
at his mother’s funeral, and feels overcome, rather, by the heat
and the tiresome people he has to deal with at the old-age home after
his long bus ride. He is glad to get back but the scenes of that
first chapter revisit him later at the trial when the Prosecutor sees
a way to assassinate his character as being heartless: a man who
would not shed tears even for his dead mother had to be sinister. This is to reinforce
the lack of remorse Meursault apparently shows for the killing of the
Arab, froim which its premeditated nature could be inferred by the Prosecutor.
Meursault
is a man who'd like to live in the uncomplicated present, and occupy
his life with the pleasures of taking a girl out to the movies or for
a swim at the beach, having a weekend in the countryside and so on.
He is an ordinary person, everyman. He is not a hero, not even a
tragic hero, he is simply us. His interaction with his neighbours is
limited, but it's not because he is reclusive or arrogant. He shows
no ambition at the office to get ahead. When he has to make decisions
he's alright with either option, and shows a pleasant reluctance to
act decisively, just like most of us. He is indifferent to the human
emotions of grief and not given to violence; he describes the abuse
of a dog by his neighbour clinically, but manages some sympathy for
the victimiser too. He's cool, he's low-key. He helps if pressed (for
instance, by writing a letter for the pimp, Raymond, which by a
series of twists of fate leads to the fatal shooting of the Arab).
Why
does he then whip out the revolver? It does not seem to be in
character with a man who lacks commitment, to act so decisively; he
had, you recall, dissuaded Raymond from doing the same murderous act
twice earlier. We must blame the sunlight:
(Reading
2)
The
sunlight is a disordering influence on his mind; Camus has been
careful to sketch scenes of heat and light on the brilliant beaches
in the run-up to the killing. Camus himself in essays on his homeland
of Algeria has described the lasting influence of that light on his
own life (The Minotaur of Oran).
The
absence of God and the after-life is the subject of the final debate with the
chaplain. Given his lack of belief, Meursault finds nothing
comforting in the chaplain's talk. Yet in his own predicament at the
end when he finds execution will soon close his life, he comes to
understand why his mother in her final years embraced companionship
with an old man. It was a clinging to life, the only good there is,
and re-asserting the ability to claim a second wind when the first is
about to expire. His own second wind is seeing the stars in the night
sky from his barred cell.
(Reading
3)
This
is a far different thing from recovering the honour of a person beset
by Sisyphean existence in the world, forever condemned to the
futility of raising the rock from the bottom of the slope to the
pinnacle, only to see it roll down again by a fiat of the vindictive
gods. Reading this novel enables one to appreciate where Camus
stands in the struggle to recover something from 'le condition
humaine.' His view evolved from mere nihilism to the conquest of
nihilism by adopting a permanent attitude of rebellion against life's
circumstances and achieving creative activity against the odds. That
philosophy was explicated a few years later in his most influential work: the
Myth of Sisyphus.
Albert
Camus - abjuring abstraction and extremism, he found a way to write
about politics that was sober, lofty, and a little sad (photo -
Cartier-Bresson)
Zakia
The scene of the trial which Zakia read makes Meursault seem a stranger to himself. Talitha noted that he relishes the simple state of joy, and this could be a 'religious' experience for him, even though he disavows religion. Priya made the point that all of us at times feel the pointlessness of life keenly, though we might come to terms with it and recover some meaning, and balance the pointlessness against some purpose that we discover; yet the dark feeling still hovers in the background.
The scene of the trial which Zakia read makes Meursault seem a stranger to himself. Talitha noted that he relishes the simple state of joy, and this could be a 'religious' experience for him, even though he disavows religion. Priya made the point that all of us at times feel the pointlessness of life keenly, though we might come to terms with it and recover some meaning, and balance the pointlessness against some purpose that we discover; yet the dark feeling still hovers in the background.
Bobby
noticed the expression 'absurd hurry' about people in the street
where Meursault lived, and a bit later that a cat crossed the street
unhurrying.
Zakia
found it strange that Meursault should go back to his cell to sleep
and derive joy from that. Joe noted that the French title L’ÉTRANGER,
could also have the meaning 'The Outsider,' which in a way Meursault
is. He seems like a disembodied being floating through life's simple
pleasures, and then absurdly trapped by a single inadvertent act.
Priya
thought of the protagonist as detached in the sense of the Gita. But
Joe demurred, for he saw the Gita as advocating adherence to the
dharma each person must discharge, and detachment should only be in
the matter of the success or otherwise that results from performing
the obligations of your state of life. Was he wrong in his understanding, Joe
asked?
About
the alleged callousness of Meursault towards his mother’s storage
in an elder care home, KumKum remarked that though the mother cried when taken away from her own home, later she liked the place and made
friends there and found companionship.
Talitha
brought up the opening sentence: Aujourd'hui,
maman est morte. (see reference to the New Yorker article above in Bobby's piece). It is translated as 'Mother died today.' by SG and 'Maman
died today'
by MW. Why 'Maman' was the question raised by Talitha. In French it's
quite natural according to Joe, since people would refer to their
mothers by a familiar expression, and not the formal word 'mère'. However, he didn't think 'Maman' was the word to use in English and that would be straining for an effect half-way between English and French. But the
use of upper case letters for the telegram in SG's translation
of the opening paragraph produces a jarring effect that is not present in the original.
Priya
referred to a personal experience when her father-in-law passed away
and her husband referred to the the corpse as the 'body' repeatedly,
whereas for her it was still 'Papa.'
Bobby
found a genuineness in Meursault in that he does not pretend to
feelings he does not have, affecting sorrow or some other feeling
from human respect. Talitha is convinced he ceased to be a stranger
and his alienation left him when he had a religious experience,
seeing signs at the end ('gazing
up at the dark sky spangled with its signs and stars').
But that may be attributing to Meursault a sentiment he'd deny – witness his stout rebuff of the religious exhortations by
the chaplain.
Priya
Priya read the passage in which Meursault tells the chaplain 'not to waste his rotten prayers' on him. All are privileged, not merely those who have religious faith, and all are marching toward the same fate, death. Meursault feels that 'none of his [the chaplain's] certainties was worth one strand of a woman’s hair.'
Meursault wonders why the chaplain, as a man also condemned to death ultimately, cannot sense the dark wind from the future that 'had been blowing toward me, all my life long, from the years that were to come.'
Priya read the passage in which Meursault tells the chaplain 'not to waste his rotten prayers' on him. All are privileged, not merely those who have religious faith, and all are marching toward the same fate, death. Meursault feels that 'none of his [the chaplain's] certainties was worth one strand of a woman’s hair.'
Meursault wonders why the chaplain, as a man also condemned to death ultimately, cannot sense the dark wind from the future that 'had been blowing toward me, all my life long, from the years that were to come.'
About
his character, Priya said Meursault does not seem to analyse himself.
But is that true? He is quite self-aware and knows what's important
for him and all the things to which he should be indifferent. In most of the
final chapters he is speaking his mind as he observes the trial, and
the proceedings that propel him toward his certain execution.
Priya
liked the well-observed description of the aged mourners at the vigil
over his mother's body:
I was very tired and my legs were aching badly. And now I realized that the silence of these people was telling on my nerves. The only sound was a rather queer one; it came only now and then, and at first I was puzzled by it. However, after listening attentively, I guessed what it was; the old men were sucking at the insides of their cheeks, and this caused the odd, wheezing noises that had mystified me. They were so much absorbed in their thoughts that they didn’t know what they were up to. I even had an impression that the dead body in their midst meant nothing at all to them. But now I suspect that I was mistaken about this.
Talitha
In the passage Salamano, the geezer whose dog was abused and loved by him at the same time, is having a chat with Meursault. Talitha mentioned that the phrase Il était avec son chien in the original is differently translated by SG and MW:
In the passage Salamano, the geezer whose dog was abused and loved by him at the same time, is having a chat with Meursault. Talitha mentioned that the phrase Il était avec son chien in the original is differently translated by SG and MW:
SG
translates it as
As
usual, he had his dog with him.
MW as
He
was with his dog.
Ward
felt his version better reflected Meursault's character. Indeed,
later in the novel Meursault notes Salamano's dog is worth no more or
less than his wife. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Ward_(writer)
Talitha
said that Camus adopted an American style in writing his novel;
Hemingway comes to mind. Here is a quote from Albert Camus, The
Stranger by Patrick McCarthy, p. 98:
The
Stranger has no obvious
ancestors in French fiction, which led Sartre and many others to
wonder whether Camus had not been influenced by the American novel.
Sartre
writes that the short, parallel sentences of The Stranger
are islands like Hemingway's sentences. From there to detecting
Hemingway's influence was a short step and Camus seemed to take it
himself. In a 1945 interview he declared that 'I used it [the
technique of the American novel] in the Stranger,
it's true. It suited my purpose which was to depict a man who seemed
to have no awareness'. When we remember that American novelists were
widely read in France and Italy at the time, the case seems proved:
The Stranger was
influenced by The Sun Also Rises.
But
Kafka's is the philosophical influence:
"Hope
and the Absurd in the Work of Franz Kafka," the appendix to
Camus' influential essay, The Myth of Sisyphus, serves
to link Kafka's ideas with Camus' own. Both authors treat
'existentialist' themes of estrangement, death, absurdity, and
anxiety.
The
trial in the novel clearly derives from The Trial
by Franz Kafka.
Talitha
saw a version of gallows (guillotine?) humour in the section where Meursault
ruminates on his impending death and her recitation brought out a
ripple of laughter among the readers:
For after taking much thought, calmly, I came to the conclusion that what was wrong about the guillotine was that the condemned man had no chance at all, absolutely none. In fact, the patient’s death had been ordained irrevocably. It was a foregone conclusion. If by some fluke the knife didn’t do its job, they started again. So it came to this, that—against the grain, no doubt—the condemned man had to hope the apparatus was in good working order! This, I thought, was a flaw in the system; and, on the face of it, my view was sound enough. On the other hand, I had to admit it proved the efficiency of the system. It came to this; the man under sentence was obliged to collaborate mentally, it was in his interest that all should go off without a hitch.
Bobby
quoted the phrase
'this business of dying had to be got through, inevitably.'
as
another example of putting on a humorous face as he contemplates the
end. Talitha, whose sense of wit is always alert when reading,
referred to the second paragraph of the novel in which Meursault has
to petition for leave to attend his mother's funeral. He detects his
employer is irked:
I said, without thinking: “Sorry, sir, but it’s not my fault, you know.”
KumKum's
was the final remark, directed to all women, while glancing toward
Priya in particular:
Doesn't matter we married men of this kind. We won't let our daughters marry the same kind.
Meursault-ian
men everywhere be advised!
An exercise for the reader:
Define
the Meursaultian man according to his philosophical, psychological, moral, and
morphological essence.
1. Priya's answer:
The
Mersaultian man is hard to fathom. As much as one respects the
individuality of another fellow being, Mersaultians (and such kinds
do exist, hopefully rare) are personalities incompatible with a
healthy society.
Mersault
wants utopian freedom that allows no questioning. Does not the
freedom of one man begin where the freedom of another ends? Much as
he understands that, he seems to fall victim to senseless action.
The blinding light, the rising heat, the piercing glare, the beating
sun, the burning sands, the flies, the whirring fans etc all seem to
irk him to a point where the physical world gets the better of his
mental faculties (not balance) and he ends up murdering a man who was
following his friend.
Even
a very smart and astute advocate would find it difficult to get
justice for Meursault.
His
philosophy is one of measured detachment, desiring to enjoy or relish anything on his terms. The minute it changes and does no longer suit his philosophic, psychological and physical parameters a
Meursaultian cannot handle it. How much do non-Meursaultians accept
each other and physical irritants to carry on with a life which
is harsher than what Mersault was living before he committed the
crime? Meursault comes across as a cold, though not calculating, but selfish man. His love life is more or less one sided, need
based and even Marie finds him “queer.”
Psychologically
he is an interesting case. Freud would clearly see an element of
mental sexual dysfunction that caused such irrational behavior.
Existentialism was the flavor of the day which arose more out of the
bloody wars that raged in those times, causing people to question the
very nature of existence. Society was in turmoil and entire
generations were moving through unprecedented times of death and
disaster. Mersault is a perfect creation of the time and his
philosophy found many takers and appreciators then. In fact, many
would justify his motiveless killing and his reasoning, his atheism
and absurdity. It must have almost been fashionable then to talk
absurdism and Mersault in the corridors of colleges and at tea shop
corners in the world where ideologies are discussed and dissected.
Mersault would even be a character discussed by soldiers ordered to
kill the enemy, who as a fellow human being has not caused him any
harm. Mersault’s crime would be a justifier in cases of motiveless
killing.
In
today’s terror ridden world Mersault is way down the ladder in
terms of a heinous crime. He is a paradox and more of a neurotic. Nobody kills these days without a motive, except Italian marines in
our waters:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Italian_shooting_in_the_Arabian_Sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Italian_shooting_in_the_Arabian_Sea
That
Mersault does not weep at his mother’s funeral is not a basis on
which one should judge him morally. He enjoys nature, the breeze,
sand, surf, stars and even finally understands why his mother chose a
fiancé at the age when she did. He seems to understand Thomas
Perez’s desperate walk to reach the burial of his mother on time.
But he does not understand that a reclining Arab with a knife need
not be shot dead. Of course, he does not look at the act morally.
There is no good or evil in his scheme of things. His world is
amoral, there is no right or wrong, though he realizes he is a
criminal and should be treated like one. He is ready for his
execution and in fact seems to romance the whole act with a kind of
excitement where crowds will chant cries of hate when he is
guillotined.
Morphologically
Mersault has no trait of even an anti-hero. He comes out as a man for
whom life on this earth is just a passage with no highs or lows. He
has no great love or great hate. The one act which is the high and
low point of his life, the game changer is taken in stride. He is
aware that his peace will be shattered but that too is part of his
existence. It is as if this is something that was to happen to him
and an unavoidable part of his existence. He does not rebel or react or even
grieve his act. He accepts and moves on, never trying to justify it.
Mersault
is a self-centered being of measured detachment, of low threshold of
discomfort, amoral and an intelligent, aware man. He is not
villainous or heroic; he is commonplace and an idiot to throw away a
regular life.
2. KumKum's
answer:
I
do not quite believe that Meursault killed the Arab on the beach
without provocation. Actually, the act of killing was far from his
mind. It was he, who stopped Raymond from taking a similar drastic
step earlier. And concerned Mersault took away the gun from
Raymond for safe keeping. The gun now remained in M's
jacket pocket.
It
was a mere accident that Raymond's gun was still in M's
pocket when he went out for his second stroll on the hot, blazing
beach in the afternoon. This stroll was not a premeditated action. It
was spontaneous; he just went out, wishing to be away from whatever
activities were taking place inside Mr. & Mame Masson's beach
side chalet. He did not even care that no one else followed him. He
was alone, walking on the hot sand, under the blazing sun and was
"thinking of the cold,clear stream behind" the small black
hump of rock that was in his view.
And
he was longing, not to kill any one, but "to hear again the
tinkle of running water. Anything to be rid of the glare, the sight
of women in tears, the strain and effort---- and to retrieve the pool
of shadow by the rock and its cool silence!"
Look at Mersault's thoughts, there was no trace of violence; even in that extreme condition, his mind could imagine and transport him to a cool private recess.
Look at Mersault's thoughts, there was no trace of violence; even in that extreme condition, his mind could imagine and transport him to a cool private recess.
Then
suddenly, as he came nearer he noticed "Raymond's Arab had
returned." Mersault was "taken aback; my impression had
been that the incident was closed, and I hadn't given a thought to it
on my way here."
That's
right, M had not expected that he would encounter again any of those
Arabs on this stroll. What happened next:
"On
seeing me, the Arab raised himself a little, and his hand went to his
pocket. Naturally, I gripped Raymond's revolver in the pocket of my
coat." Merely a cautious action for self-defence. No aggression.
The Arab displayed aggression and he waited for his chance to pounce on Merausalt. M could have tried to run away from the situation. And the thought did cross his mind: " It struck me that all I had to do was to turn, walk away, and think no more about it".
Mersaultian
men are not cowards, surely. Nor could they think ahead, they are
uncomplicated "simpletons." And live in the NOW. It was the
oppressive heat, the blinding light reflecting off the knife of the Arab, and
the dazzling sunlight, that was bathing the beach, that overwhelmed M.
"I
couldn't stand it any longer, and took another step forward. I knew
it was a foolish thing to do; I wouldn't get out of the sun by moving
on a yard or so. But I took that step, just one step, forward. And
then the Arab drew his knife and held it up toward me, athwart the
sunlight."
This
was not the confession of a killer. How beautifully he described
what actually happened; it has a detached, yet sublime with
poetic feeling; no criminal mind could think so truthfully.
Mersaultian
men are not killers. So if they are faced with a situation when they
do kill, it is never premeditated, but always for self-defence as a violent
reaction.
Had Raymond's revolver not been in M's pocket, he would have faced the
Arab bare-handed and got himself killed, instead. That's why, in a
nonchalant manner M could make light of this heinous act and
introspect thus:
"I
knew I'd shattered the balance of the day, the spacious calm of this
beach on which I had been happy. But I fired four shots more into the
inert body, on which they left no visible trace. And each successive
shot was another loud, fateful rap on the door of my undoing."
Meursaultian
men cannot be tethered. They live in the NOW, not beyond. And the past
has ceased to be of any consequence to them. That's why the mother's
death failed to evoke any emotion in him. He enjoys Marie and her
allures NOW, not bothering to think beyond that.
M
men are drifters, too. It is a mistake to domesticate them. Mother
could not tame him, nor will Marie be able to change him. They do not
wish much out of life, just enough to get by, and be happy with. They
do not believe in God, benevolence or anything that stands for
permanence or the unattainable. They will not desire to harm their fellow men,
but their actions often cause pain to those who care for them. They are in
constant communication with their inner-self, but not much with other
human beings.
Lastly,
the Meursaultian man is a poet, and philosopher.
3. Bobby's answer:
3. Bobby's answer:
Meursault
calls a spade a spade. His reluctance to judge and be judged has a
Christian echo.
Camus
is able to portray the man as a man living for the day ... give us
this day our daily bread.
It
is a book that requires re-reading ... to enjoy the nuances. The prose
is minimalistic and yet searing , full of sarcasm at the bourgeois
practices of society.
Meursault
is able to console Salamano for the loss of his dog.
Meursault
is able to give in to Marie's needs for reassurance.
He
has no idea of the "afterlife" and is not interested. He is
interested in today.
His
crime was making that one step forward , his undoing.
4. Talitha's
answer:
The
Meursaultian man appears sub-human. Since he is seems incapable of
entering into the joys and sorrows of others and is hardly aware of
his own, one wonders why he cannot be classed as autistic.
However,
there are stray glimpses of some latent humanity - his perception of
the strange link between his neighbour and his pathetic dog; his
realisation that by his almost robotic shooting of the Arab, he had
opened the door of his own misery; his musings during the court scene
and after his outburst against the chaplain, that the scents, sounds
and simple joys of the world had in some way meant something to him.
That if anything could have made him happy, he had been happy.
I
see two religious motifs in the book, unintended by Camus, I am sure.
One is the description of the shooting. The motiveless act, scarcely
volitional, seems to mirror the Fall of man, which was just as lacking in
a positive motive. The eating of the apple was such an insignificant
act of disobedience, and yet it opened the door to Man's undoing,
condemnation and death, as Meursault's act does for him.
The
other is the experience of the universe "speaking" to
Meursault through the "signs and stars" that he saw from
his prison cell. Meursault was condemned for his callousness and
amorality by the judicial world. But this mystical experience that Meursault had, offsets in a perverse way the madness that the sun had earlier
infused in him.
Despite
these flashes of human feeling, the only sign that he is reacting to
the world of men is his macabre desire that cries of execration
should accompany his last moments on earth.
Though
he was a poor lover, loving his mother, his neighbour and Marie with
so a faint and feeble love, he proves quite animated in his hate, if
only in his last hours on earth.
5. Joe's answer:
5. Joe's answer:
Philosophical:
M thinks being
alive is the only good in life. For it gives access to the simple
pleasures of being with a woman, going swimming, walking on the
beach, etc.
M lives and lets
live. He respects his neighbours' space, and if necessary stops to
sympathise with them in their loss.
M lays no store by
getting ahead in life. He's okay where he is.
M does not believe
in the after-life.
Psychological:
M is laid-back,
and indecisive.
M is not capable
of long-term commitment to others.
M 's potentiality
for grief, and the stronger emotions like hate, is strictly limited.
M is erratic,
waylaid by his repressed prejudices, resulting in unintended
consequences.
Moral:
M is self-centred
and evaluates situations in terms of whether it will circumscribe his
own freedom or not.
M is not affected
by injurious acts of his that violate other people's rights.
M subscribes to no
societal code of ethics above himself, that will govern his actions.
Morphological:
The Meursaultian
human has no particular morphological characteristics. Either sex,
could be Meursaultian, every ethnic type can have its Meursaultians;
they could be fat or lean, athletic or sedentary; ordinary-looking or
handsome.
Albert
Camus is buried in Lourmarin, the Luberon village he loved in
Provence
Sivaram
In Sivaram's absence here is the reference to the Nobel Banquet speech of Albert Camus:
In Sivaram's absence here is the reference to the Nobel Banquet speech of Albert Camus:
Here
is the excerpt,
which he intended to read:
For myself, I cannot live without my art. But I have never placed it above everything. If, on the other hand, I need it, it is because it cannot be separated from my fellow men, and it allows me to live, such as I am, on one level with them. It is a means of stirring the greatest number of people by offering them a privileged picture of common joys and sufferings. It obliges the artist not to keep himself apart; it subjects him to the most humble and the most universal truth. And often he who has chosen the fate of the artist because he felt himself to be different soon realizes that he can maintain neither his art nor his difference unless he admits that he is like the others. The artist forges himself to the others, midway between the beauty he cannot do without and the community he cannot tear himself away from. That is why true artists scorn nothing: they are obliged to understand rather than to judge. And if they have to take sides in this world, they can perhaps side only with that society in which, according to Nietzsche's great words, not the judge but the creator will rule, whether he be a worker or an intellectual.By the same token, the writer's role is not free from difficult duties. By definition he cannot put himself today in the service of those who make history; he is at the service of those who suffer it. Otherwise, he will be alone and deprived of his art. Not all the armies of tyranny with their millions of men will free him from his isolation, even and particularly if he falls into step with them. But the silence of an unknown prisoner, abandoned to humiliations at the other end of the world, is enough to draw the writer out of his exile, at least whenever, in the midst of the privileges of freedom, he manages not to forget that silence, and to transmit it in order to make it resound by means of his art.
Readings
Thommo
1. Part I, Section V, p. 28
1. Part I, Section V, p. 28
Just
then my employer sent for me. For a moment I felt uneasy, as I
expected he was going to tell me to stick to my work and not waste
time chattering with friends over the phone. However, it was nothing
of the kind. He wanted to discuss a project he had in view, though so
far he’d come to no decision. It was to open a branch at Paris, so
as to be able to deal with the big companies on the spot, without
postal delays, and he wanted to know if I’d like a post there.
“You’re
a young man,” he said, “and I’m pretty sure you’d enjoy
living in Paris. And, of course, you could travel about France for
some months in the year.”
I
told him I was quite prepared to go; but really I didn’t care much
one way or the other.
He
then asked if a “change of life,” as he called it, didn’t
appeal to me, and I answered that one never changed his way of life;
one life was as good as another, and my present one suited me quite
well.
At
this he looked rather hurt, and told me that I always
shilly-shallied, and that I lacked ambition—a grave defect, to his
mind, when one was in business.
I
returned to my work. I’d have preferred not to vex him, but I saw
no reason for “changing my life.” By and large it wasn’t an
unpleasant one. As a student I’d had plenty of ambition of the kind
he meant. But, when I had to drop my studies, I very soon realized
all that was pretty futile.
2.
Part I, Section
V p.28
Marie came that
evening and asked me if I’d marry her. I said I didn’t mind; if
she was keen on it, we’d get married.
Then she asked me
again if I loved her. I replied, much as before, that her question
meant nothing or next to nothing—but I supposed I didn’t.
“If
that’s how you feel,” she said, “why marry me?”
I explained that
it had no importance really, but, if it would give her pleasure, we
could get married right away. I pointed out that, anyhow, the
suggestion came from her; as for me, I’d merely said, “Yes.”
Then she remarked
that marriage was a serious matter.
To which I
answered: “No.”
She kept silent
after that, staring at me in a curious way. Then she asked:
“Suppose another
girl had asked you to marry her—I mean, a girl you liked in the
same way as you like me—would you have said ‘Yes’ to her, too?”
“Naturally.”
Then she said she
wondered if she really loved me or not. I, of course, couldn’t
enlighten her as to that. And, after another silence, she murmured
something about my being “a queer fellow.” “And I daresay
that’s why I love you,” she added. “But maybe that’s why one
day I’ll come to hate you.”
To which I had
nothing to say, so I said nothing.
She thought for a
bit, then started smiling and, taking my arm, repeated that she was
in earnest; she really wanted to marry me.
“All
right,” I answered. “We’ll get married whenever you like.” I
then mentioned the proposal made by my employer, and Marie said she’d
love to go to Paris.
KumKum
Part I, Section VI Page 37-39 – The encounter on the beach with the Arab
Part I, Section VI Page 37-39 – The encounter on the beach with the Arab
The small black
hump of rock came into view far down the beach. It was rimmed by a
dazzling sheen of light and feathery spray, but I was thinking of the
cold, clear stream behind it, and longing to hear again the tinkle of
running water. Anything to be rid of the glare, the sight of women in
tears, the strain and effort—and to retrieve the pool of shadow by
the rock and its cool silence!
But when I came
nearer I saw that Raymond’s Arab had returned. He was by himself
this time, lying on his back, his hands behind his head, his face
shaded by the rock while the sun beat on the rest of his body. One
could see his dungarees steaming in the heat. I was rather taken
aback; my impression had been that the incident was closed, and I
hadn’t given a thought to it on my way here.
On seeing me, the
Arab raised himself a little, and his hand went to his pocket.
Naturally, I gripped Raymond’s revolver in the pocket of my coat.
Then the Arab let himself sink back again, but without taking his
hand from his pocket. I was some distance off, at least ten yards,
and most of the time I saw him as a blurred dark form wobbling in the
heat haze. Sometimes, however, I had glimpses of his eyes glowing
between the half-closed lids. The sound of the waves was even lazier,
feebler, than at noon. But the light hadn’t changed; it was
pounding as fiercely as ever on the long stretch of sand that ended
at the rock. For two hours the sun seemed to have made no progress;
becalmed in a sea of molten steel. Far out on the horizon a steamer
was passing; I could just make out from the corner of an eye the
small black moving patch, while I kept my gaze fixed on the Arab.
It struck me that
all I had to do was to turn, walk away, and think no more about it.
But the whole beach, pulsing with heat, was pressing on my back. I
took some steps toward the stream. The Arab didn’t move. After all,
there was still some distance between us. Perhaps because of the
shadow on his face, he seemed to be grinning at me.
I waited. The heat
was beginning to scorch my cheeks; beads of sweat were gathering in
my eyebrows. It was just the same sort of heat as at my mother’s
funeral, and I had the same disagreeable sensations—especially in
my forehead, where all the veins seemed to be bursting through the
skin. I couldn’t stand it any longer, and took another step
forward. I knew it was a fool thing to do; I wouldn’t get out of
the sun by moving on a yard or so. But I took that step, just one
step, forward. And then the Arab drew his knife and held it up toward
me, athwart the sunlight.
A
shaft of light shot upward from the steel, and I felt as if a long,
thin blade transfixed my forehead. At the same moment all the sweat
that had accumulated in my eyebrows splashed down on my eyelids,
covering them with a warm film of moisture. Beneath a veil of brine
and tears my eyes were blinded; I was conscious only of the cymbals
of the sun clashing on my skull, and, less distinctly, of the keen
blade of light flashing up from the knife, scarring my eyelashes, and
gouging into my eyeballs.
Bobby
Part I, Section
VI end, p.38
Then everything
began to reel before my eyes, a fiery gust came from the sea, while
the sky cracked in two, from end to end, and a great sheet of flame
poured down through the rift. Every nerve in my body was a steel
spring, and my grip closed on the revolver. The trigger gave, and the
smooth underbelly of the butt jogged my palm. And so, with that
crisp, whipcrack sound, it all began. I shook off my sweat and the
clinging veil of light. I knew I’d shattered the balance of the
day, the spacious calm of this beach on which I had been happy. But I
fired four shots more into the inert body, on which they left no
visible trace. And each successive shot was another loud, fateful rap
on the door of my undoing.
Joe
1.
The opening.
Aujourd'hui,
maman est morte. Ou peut-être hier, je ne sais pas. J'ai reçu un
télégramme de l'asile : « Mère décédée. Enterrement demain.
Sentiments distingués. » Cela ne veut rien dire. C'était peut-être
hier.
2.
The Murder
A
shaft of light shot upward from the steel, and I felt as if a long,
thin blade transfixed my forehead. … Then everything began to reel
before my eyes, a fiery gust came from the sea, while the sky cracked
in two, from end to end, and a great sheet of flame poured down
through the rift. Every nerve in my body was a steel spring, and my
grip closed on the revolver. The trigger gave, and the smooth
underbelly of the butt jogged my palm. And so, with that crisp,
whipcrack sound, it all began. I shook off my sweat and the clinging
veil of light. I knew I’d shattered the balance of the day, the
spacious calm of this beach on which I had been happy.
3.
The ending
Once
he’d gone, I felt calm again. But all this excitement had exhausted
me and I dropped heavily on to my sleeping plank. I must have had a
longish sleep, for, when I woke, the stars were shining down on my
face. Sounds of the countryside came faintly in, and the cool night
air, veined with smells’ of earth and salt, fanned my cheeks. The
marvelous peace of the sleepbound summer night flooded through me
like a tide. Then, just on the edge of daybreak, I heard a steamer’s
siren. People were starting on a voyage to a world which had ceased
to concern me forever. Almost for the first time in many months I
thought of my mother. And now, it seemed to me, I understood why at
her life’s end she had taken on a “fiancé”; why she’d played
at making a fresh start. There, too, in that Home where lives were
flickering out, the dusk came as a mournful solace. With death so
near, Mother must have felt like someone on the brink of freedom,
ready to start life all over again. No one, no one in the world had
any right to weep for her. And I, too, felt ready to start life all
over again. It was as if that great rush of anger had washed me
clean, emptied me of hope, and,
gazing up at the dark sky spangled with its signs and stars, for the
first time, the first, I laid my heart open to the benign
indifference of the universe. To feel it so like myself, indeed, so
brotherly, made me realize that I’d been happy, and that I was
happy still. For all to be accomplished, for me to feel less lonely,
all that remained to hope was that on the day of my execution there
should be a huge crowd of spectators and that they should greet me
with howls of execration.
Zakia
Part II, Section IV, p.65 (the Trial)
Part II, Section IV, p.65 (the Trial)
When
I was brought back next day, the electric fans were still churning up
the heavy air and the jurymen plying their gaudy little fans in a
sort of steady rhythm. The speech for the defense seemed to me
interminable. At one moment, however, I pricked up my ears; it was
when I heard him saying: “It is true I killed a man.” He went on
in the same strain, saying “I” when he referred to me. It seemed
so queer that I bent toward the policeman on my right and asked him
to explain. He told me to shut up; then, after a moment, whispered:
“They all do that.” It seemed to me that the idea behind it was
still further to exclude me from the case, to put me off the map. so
to speak, by substituting the lawyer for myself. Anyway, it hardly
mattered; I already felt worlds away from this courtroom and its
tedious “proceedings.”
My
lawyer, in any case, struck me as feeble to the point of being
ridiculous. He hurried through his plea of provocation, and then he,
too, started in about my soul. But I had an impression that he had
much less talent than the Prosecutor.
“I,
too,” he said, “have closely studied this man’s soul; but,
unlike my learned friend for the prosecution, I have found something
there. Indeed, I may say that I have read the prisoner’s mind like
an open book.” What he had read there was that I was an excellent
young fellow, a steady, conscientious worker who did his best by his
employer; that I was popular with everyone and sympathetic in others’
troubles. According to him I was a dutiful son, who had supported his
mother as long as he was able. After anxious consideration I had
reached the conclusion that, by entering a home, the old lady would
have comforts that my means didn’t permit me to provide for her. “I
am astounded, gentlemen,” he added, “by the attitude taken up by
my learned friend in referring to this Home. Surely if proof be
needed of the excellence of such institutions, we need only remember
that they are promoted and financed by a government department.” I
noticed that he made no reference to the funeral, and this seemed to
me a serious omission. But, what with his long-windedness, the
endless days and hours they had been discussing my “soul,” and
the rest of it, I found that my mind had gone blurred; everything was
dissolving into a grayish, watery haze.
Only
one incident stands out; toward the end, while my counsel rambled on,
I heard the tin trumpet of an ice-cream vendor in the street, a
small, shrill sound cutting across the flow of words. And then a rush
of memories went through my mind—memories of a life which was mine
no longer and had once provided me with the surest, humblest
pleasures: warm smells of summer, my favorite streets, the sky at
evening, Marie’s dresses and her laugh. The futility of what was
happening here seemed to take me by the throat, I felt like vomiting,
and I had only one idea: to get it over, to go back to my cell, and
sleep ... and sleep.
Priya
The
final encounter with the chaplain, at the end.
Then,
I don’t know how it was, but something seemed to break inside me,
and I started yelling at the top of my voice. I hurled insults at
him, I told him not to waste his rotten prayers on me; it was better
to burn than to disappear. I’d taken him by the neckband of his
cassock, and, in a sort of ecstasy of joy and rage, I poured out on
him all the thoughts that had been simmering in my brain. He seemed
so cocksure, you see. And yet none of his certainties was worth one
strand of a woman’s hair. Living as he did, like a corpse, he
couldn’t even be sure of being alive. It might look as if my hands
were empty. Actually, I was sure of myself, sure about everything,
far surer than he; sure of my present life and of the death that was
coming. That, no doubt, was all I had; but at least that certainty
was something I could get my teeth into—just as it had got its
teeth into me. I’d been right, I was still right, I was always
right. I’d passed my life in a certain way, and I might have passed
it in a different way, if I’d felt like it. I’d acted thus, and I
hadn’t acted otherwise; I hadn’t done x,
whereas I had done y
or
z.
And what did that mean? That, all the time, I’d been waiting for
this present moment, for that dawn, tomorrow’s or another day’s,
which was to justify me. Nothing, nothing had the least importance
and I knew quite well why. He, too, knew why. From the dark horizon
of my future a sort of slow, persistent breeze had been blowing
toward me, all my life long, from the years that were to come. And on
its way that breeze had leveled out all the ideas that people tried
to foist on me in the equally unreal years I then was living through.
What difference could they make to me, the deaths of others, or a
mother’s love, or his God; or the way a man decides to live, the
fate he thinks he chooses, since one and the same fate was bound to
“choose” not only me but thousands of millions of privileged
people who, like him, called themselves my brothers. Surely, surely
he must see that? Every man alive was privileged; there was only one
class of men, the privileged class. All alike would be condemned to
die one day; his turn, too, would come like the others’. And what
difference could it make if, after being charged with murder, he were
executed because he didn’t weep at his mother’s funeral, since it
all came to the same thing in the end? The same thing for Salamano’s
wife and for Salamano’s dog. That little robot woman was as
“guilty” as the girl from Paris who had married Masson, or as
Marie, who wanted me to marry her. What did it matter if Raymond was
as much my pal as Céleste, who was a far worthier man? What did it
matter if at this very moment Marie was kissing a new boy friend? As
a condemned man himself, couldn’t he grasp what I meant by that
dark wind blowing from my future? ...
I
had been shouting so much that I’d lost my breath, and just then
the jailers rushed in and started trying to release the chaplain from
my grip. One of them made as if to strike me. The chaplain quietened
them down, then gazed at me for a moment without speaking. I could
see tears in his eyes. Then he turned and left the cell.
Talitha
Part I, end of Section V, p.31 (Salamano's dog is lost)
Part I, end of Section V, p.31 (Salamano's dog is lost)
Just
then I yawned, and the old man said he’d better make a move. I told
him he could stay, and that I was sorry about what had happened to
his dog. He thanked me, and mentioned that my mother had been very
fond of his dog. He referred to her as “your poor mother,” and
was afraid I must be feeling her death terribly. When I said nothing
he added hastily and with a rather embarrassed air that some of the
people in the street said nasty things about me because I’d sent my
mother to the Home. But he, of course, knew better; he knew how
devoted to my mother I had always been.
I answered—why,
I still don’t know—that it surprised me to learn I’d produced
such a bad impression. As I couldn’t afford to keep her here, it
seemed the obvious thing to do, to send her to a home. “In any
case,” I added, “for years she’d never had a word to say to me,
and I could see she was moping, with no one to talk to.”
“Yes,” he
said, “and at a home one makes friends, anyhow.”
He got up, saying
it was high time for him to be in bed, and added that life was going
to be a bit of a problem for him, under the new conditions. For the
first time since I’d known him he held out his hand to me—rather
shyly, I thought—and I could feel the scales on his skin. Just as
he was going out of the door, he turned and, smiling a little, said:
“Let’s
hope the dogs won’t bark again tonight. I always think it’s mine
I hear. ...”
Meursaultian man appears sub-human. Since he is seems incapable of entering into the joys and sorrows of others and is hardly aware of his own, one wonders why he cannot be classed as autistic.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are stray glimpses of some latent humanity - his perception of the strange link between his neighbour and his pathetic dog; his realisation that by his almost robotic shooting of the Arab, he had opened the door of his own misery; his musings during the courtscene and after his outburst against the chaplain, that the scents, sounds and simple joys of the world had in some way meant something to him. That if anything could have made him happy, he had been happy.
I see two religious motifs in the book, I am sure unintended by Camus. One is the description of the shooting. The motiveless act, scarcely volitional, seems to mirror the Fall of man, which was as shorn of positive motive. The eating of the apple was such an insignificant act of disobedience, and yet it opened the door to man's undoing, condemnation and death, as his act does for Meursault.
The other is the experience of the universe "speaking" to Meursault, whom the world of men condemned for his callousness and amorality, through the "signs and stars" that he saw from his prison cell. It was a mystical experience that Meursault had, and offsets in a perverse way the madness that the sun had earlier infused in him.
Despite these flashes of human feeling, the only sign that he is reacting to the world of men is his macabre desire that cries of execration should accompany his last moments on earth.
Though he was a poor lover, loving his mother, his neighbour and Marie with so faint and feeble a love, he proves quite animated in his hate, if only in his last hours on earth.
Oh my goodness. I love what I am reading here. I am a high school teacher in New York City. My class is reading "The Stranger" now. I look forward to sharing with them your meditations on this novel. Two years ago I visited your beautiful city. I was there for almost two weeks. I hope to visit again someday. Thank you for sharing your thoughts on-line. How generous!
ReplyDeleteDear teacher from NYC,
ReplyDeleteI am glad you came to the blog I maintain for the Kochi Reading Group (KRG). May I encourage your students to also comment, if they wish.
Please do come again to Kochi and get in touch with me, kjcleetus“at”gmail.com
Perhaps you can attend one of our monthly sessions as a guest, if our session date, posted at top right, happens to coincide with the visit. We welcome visitors and they can participate too - Tom Duddy from Brooklyn did at one of our poetry sessions:
http://kochiread.blogspot.in/2012/03/poetry-session-on-mar-16-2012.html
My wife and I celebrated her birthday in August this year by spending a great weekend in NYC with our children.
- joe