The Absurdity of Life
People look for meaning in everything, but at the end of one’s life what is one left with? How does one cope with the concept of death when it is so imminent and near? These questions are handled differently in “The Death of Iván Ilyich” and The Stranger when the main characters both struggle with the ideas of death and the absurdity of life. DuBois, a professor at Saint Louis University, defines in simplicity what the absurdity is; it is the proposition that there is no meaning to life as in the end nothing humans do matters (1). In The Stranger, Meursault is facing death after he is persecuted for killing a man. On the other hand, in “The Death of Iván Ilyich,” Iván comes down with a terminal illness after taking a fall.…show more content… They both have what Botros coins as resignation or overall acceptance toward absurdity and death and neither of them openly desire it, in contrast to being in “submission or inertia” towards it (449). They also manage to “relinquish…concern with world possessions” (451), which is a critical step that Botros brings up in accepting the absurd. If one puts value on any possession, that has the capability of giving that life meaning, which is ultimately an illusion because life and all these possessions are meaningless, according to the absurd. This total acceptance or resignation toward death is where these two characters greatly parallel each other. Meursault, because of this resignation, is the epitome of what Botros calls, “rejection of old values” (451), with no real regard to laws, respectability, and uprightness. This behavior can be seen in Meursault’s reaction to his mother’s death, his non-remorseful attitude toward killing someone, and his blatant rejection of God before death. Iván, on the other hand, has lived throughout his whole life with these values, always trying to be not seen as an outsider by society. He is now realizing that all these values are meaningless. Thus, there is a difference between these resignations. Iván needed a stimulus, or death, for this resignation to arise. He never desires death to quickly finish the job, but he does accept that it is coming and his fear of it is eventually…show more content… Meursault’s acceptance of death has been carried with him throughout his whole life and has impacted most of his decisions, which impacts what he realizes while he is waiting for his death. Iván accepts death only while he is lying on his deathbed, and he realizes that his life has not been as great as he thought it was. William Mueller and Josephine Jacobsen build on the steps of confronting the absurd that were first introduced by Botros, which includes the realization and reflection on the life one has lived (226). Meursault has already confronted the absurd throughout his whole life, and at the end of the story realizes that his life has made him happy (Camus 123). This brings up a question about absurdity because Iván realizes his life did not bring him joy, while Meursault realizes that he was happy. Is it better to face the absurd before or after lying on your deathbed? This question is handled differently in both stories. Botros claims that the statement “God is dead” creates the “most terrifying absurdity of the century” (236). However, Camus through Meursault exhibits how absurdity does not have to lead to a life of unhappiness and realizing it can stop the pain of it at the end of life, such as Iván. According to Botros, Iván lived his whole life thinking in terms of how to impress people (450). However, if Iván were to have faced the absurd earlier, he would not have held such an illusion. He
