Chronicle of a Death Foretold and the Stranger Essay Example for Free

Chronicle of a Death Foretold and the Stranger Essay Conflict Resulting From the Negative Effects of Rigid Societal Expectations in A Chronicle of A Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez and The Stranger by Albert Camus Everyone has felt the pressure of societal expectations during their lifetime. The negative effects society brings on one’s life can lead to a feeling of rejection towards the people who do not conform to meet those standards. Gabriel Garcia Marquez, author of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, and Albert Camus, author of The Stranger, both construct the external moral conflict of society versus the protagonist in order to critique the way society fails to accept the moral values of the people who differ from the norm. In Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez emphasizes the central conflict of society versus the protagonist, based on beliefs and values, through the controversy leading up to the murder of Santiago Nasar, which is based on family honor and pre-marital sex. When Pedro and Pablo Vicario ask their sister, Angela Vicario, who had stolen her virginity, her response is described as â€Å"She only took the time necessary to say the name †¦ and she nailed it to the wall with her well-aimed dart, like a butterfly with no will whose sentence has already been written. ‘Santiago Nasar,’ she said†(47). Describing Angela’s response as â€Å"only took the time necessary† indicates that she is trying to put the blame on Santiago, making him a scapegoat, in order to protect the true man who took her virginity before marriage. In the Latin American society, where the setting of the novella takes place, it is not acceptable for a woman to have pre-marital sex due to the beliefs and morals of Catholics. Santiago is represented as the butterfly â€Å"whose sentence had already been written†. Even though there is no evidence Santiago took Angela’s virginity, it is the twin’s duty to protect their sister. Therefore, Pedro and Pablo Vicario set out to kill the man who had stolen their sister’s virginity, Santiago Nasar, in order to protect their family. The twins tell everyone in town about their plan to murder Santiago, but the people in the community doubt their intentions: â€Å"twenty-two people declared they had heard everything said, and they all coincided in the impression that the only reason the brothers had said it was so that someone would come over to hear them†(51). The people in the town who â€Å"[coincide] in the impression that the only reason the brothers had said it was so that someone would come over to hear them† shows how oblivious the townspeople act owards a societal member’s life. Society looks past at the fact that a murder is about to occur, but focuses on the purpose; family honor, which is highly respected. Since it is unacceptable for a female to have sex before marriage, Santiago is viewed in a negative light by society because he is accused of taking the virginity of an unmarried woman. The debate surrounding Santiago’s death highlights the conflict between society and the protagonist, where Santiago is a man who is accused of committing an act that society does not accept. Albert Camus, in The Stranger, constructs the protagonist, Monsieur Meursault, as a man who has absurdist morals and values, which society does not accept. Meursault has an intimate relationship with Marie Cardona, a former typist, but the connection does not go beyond a physical attraction; â€Å"she wanted to know if I loved her. I answered the same way I had the last time, that it didn’t mean anything but that I probably didn’t love her† (41). By Meursault stating â€Å"it didn’t mean anything† and â€Å"I probably didn’t love her† highlights his absurdist views on life; he believes life contains no purpose, thus he cannot love Marie because loving Marie would give life a purpose, which Meursault does not believe. He simply associates with Marie, because he likes being around her. There is no need for an emotional connection because the physical appearance of her is satisfying enough. Absurdism is not accepted in society therefore it does not accept Meursault. He is an outsider in a world he did not choose. Meursault is a man who does not show his emotions very well, but instead focuses on his physical need; â€Å"I explained to him, however, that my nature was such that my physical needs often got in the way of my feelings† (65). Meursault saying â€Å"that my physical needs often got in the way of my feelings† emphasizes the simplistic life he live—a life without meaning. Showing emotions would signify a life with purpose, which Meursault does not believe. The Algerian society, in which the novella takes place, does not accept the type of lifestyle Meursault lives and believes every life should be lived with a purpose. Society’s expectations clash with Meursault’s values because his beliefs and outlooks on life are not accepted by society, which sets up the external conflict between the two. In the external conflict between society and the protagonist, Garcia Marquez emphasizes the negative effects society has on a person who goes against the social norm by showing the biased opinions towards the Pedro and Pablo Vicario regarding Santiago’s murder. After brutally stabbing Santiago to death, the Vicario twins sprint to the church to inform the priest of their barbaric act; â€Å"Both were exhausted from the barbarous work of death, and their clothes and arms were soaked and their faces smeared with sweat and still living blood but the priest recalled the surrender as an act of great dignity†(49). The priest calling the murder â€Å"an act of great dignity† shows how, in the Latin American society, family honor is highly valued, no matter how far it is taken. Even though the twins have committed the worst crime imaginable, it is acceptable because it was done in order to protect their family. Pedro and Pablo Vicario are viewed as meeting expectations, as opposed to Santiago, who fails to follow them. When the crime was brought to court, the twins had already won before it even started; â€Å"The lawyer stood by the thesis of the homicide in legitimate defense of honor, which was upheld by the court in good faith, and the twins declared at the end of the trial that they would have done it again a thousand times over for the same reason† (48). The lawyer stating the homicide as a â€Å"legitimate defense of honor† verifies that society values family honor over a man’s life. The court case represents the conflict of society against Santiago and since he goes against society’s values, Santiago ends up dying, indicating society’s victory. The twins do not receive any severe punishment, because of their intentions to protect their family. Through Santiago’s death, Garcia Marquez stresses the harmful effects society can have on someone whose beliefs differ from societal standards. Camus constructs Meursault’s trial to critique society’s lack of acceptance towards the people who do not meet expectations. Throughout the court case, Meursault is quickly judged by the prosecutor due to his actions concerning his mother’s death, â€Å"He said the truth was that I didn’t have a soul and that nothing human, not one of my moral principles that governs men’s hearts, was within my reach† (101). The prosecutor bluntly stating that Meursault â€Å"didn’t have a soul† and is incapable of having â€Å"moral principles that governs men’s hearts† highlights how society does not understand Meursault’s morals and values, thus critiques his character and neglects him. Meursault is looked down upon because of how he acted on the day of Maman’s funeral. He does not express feelings towards his mother’s death because he is an absurdist and believes death is inevitable. Society believes that there is purpose to every societal member’s life, and since Meursault shares absurdist views, he is not accepted by society. To close his final argument against Meursault, the prosecutor states, â€Å" ‘I ask you for this man’s head†¦never as strongly as today have I felt this painful duty made easier, light, clearer by the certain knowledge of a sacred imperative and by the horror I feel when I look into a man’s face and all I see is a monster. † (102). The whole trial is based around Meursault’s character, and him being called â€Å"a monster† stresses the fact that society is unwilling to accept anyone who does not follow the expectations. Meursault does not share the same views that society wants, and as a result, he is rejected because of his moral values. By asking â€Å"for this m an’s head† the prosecutor shows how society neglects the people who share different views and therefore want them out of society completely. Camus uses the trial and Meursault’s crime to emphasize the external conflict of society versus the protagonist, Meursault, to demonstrate how society does not accept people who share different moral values. The negative effects society has on the people who do not meet expectations are emphasized through the external conflict, based of moral values, between the protagonist and society in the Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez and The Stranger by Albert Camus. Both novellas show the harmful consequence faced by the protagonist, who do not conform to societal expectations, which evidently resulted in death.