Search Menu

The Stranger

Albert Camus


Suggestion for Further Reading

Bachman, V. J. Camus’s Rebellious Thought. Cahoes, New York: Talus Titles, 1999.

Bloom, Harold, ed. Albert Camus’s The Stranger. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2001.

Bronner, Stephen Eric. Albert Camus: The Thinker, the Artist, the Man. Danbury, Connecticut: Franklin Watts, 1996.

Davison, Ray. Camus: The Challenge of Dostoevsky. Exeter: University Press of Exeter, 1997.

Ellison, David. Understanding Albert Camus. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press, 1990.

Lenzini, José. Albert Camus. Toulouse: Les Essentiels Milan, 1995.

McBride, Joseph. Albert Camus: Philosopher and Litterateur. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992.

Rizzuto, Anthony. Camus: Love and Sexuality. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998.

Winegarten, R. “Camus Today.” The New Criterion 11.7 (1993): 3542.

More Help

Previous Next
Meursault`s Morality

by I dont need a bluddy nick name, March 21, 2013

This Spark Note describes Meursault as being amoral. I completely disagree with this interpretation. It is not that Meursault does not understand right and wrong but rather that his ideas of right and wrong differ from those of society. This different moral code can be seen by the way he refuses to break his own morals. He may not value life but he does value honesty and his disbelief in a higher being. Throughout the book he never lies or pretends to have faith in God not even to save his life. His specific moral code is founded in Camus` ... Read more


333 out of 365 people found this helpful

Morality in 'The Stranger'

by dmborong, April 11, 2013

Albert Camus' idea of morality in 'The Stranger' is completely unconventional and this can be seen through the protagonist who is a total embarrassment to the society in which he finds himself. This disparity between what is expected of Meursault and what he displays forms the basis of Albert Camus' philosophy of morality. There is a big question mark on conventional morality which the author finds to be absurd. He seems to be questioning the fabric of societal morality on grounds of motivation; are some of those values upheld merely for con... Read more


68 out of 81 people found this helpful

Response to No-Bloody-Nickname

by OverseasTeacher, April 29, 2013

Morality is simply the way that an individual chooses between opposing values in a given situation.

So, lets say "Prolife" vs "Prochoice" as a moral issue. Regardless of your position, you are pushing values. The question isn't "is a fetus valuable?" or "is a woman's right to choose what happens to her body valuable?"

The vast majority of the world would answer yes to both. No, the question is... "which is more valuable if you can't have both?"

In this way, morality requires an active decision making.

This is wher


15 out of 15 people found this helpful

See all 10 readers' notes   →