A Comparative Analysis of Existentialism in The Stranger and The Trial

Existentialism is a philosophical approach that lays stress on the existence of an individual, freedom, and challenges related to the absurd nature of life. It challenges the meaning search in a world where there is no meaning, and how the individual is responsible for creating meaning, along with the suffering and certain death. In The Stranger, Albert Camus studies those concepts through Meursault, a cold man who is indifferent to the rules of society, which then causes him to conclude that life is absurd. Conversely, The Trial by Franz Kafka seems to have no explicit hero, but the protagonist is a man named Josef K., who gets stuck in the confusing legal framework that is a manifestation of alienation, bureaucracy, and despair. Although in both novels the struggle of existentialism is demonstrated, Camus ratifies the concept of encountering the absurdity, and Kafka ratifies the demolition of meaningful systems that pervade people of free will.

Facing Absurdity

Camus exploits the character of Meursault to reveal him as a person who is unemotional and cold towards societal conventions and expectations. This is made obvious because of his coldness towards the death of his mother, his refusal to articulate his sadness, and his dismissal of relationships. This is evident in the opening of the narrative, “Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don’t know. I got a telegram from the home: ‘Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours.’ That doesn’t mean anything. Maybe it was yesterday” (Camus, 1989, p. 3). Meursault is an indifferent man who does not experience a necessity to give some meaning to what he is experiencing. Nevertheless, this disengagement is not nothingness; it becomes existential integrity within the perspective of the absurdity. This is what he later realizes before dying, when he confesses that there is no escaping death and is content with the lack of emotion by the universe. In this struggle, Camus highlights the thought that no meaning exists but is inspired by itself through acceptance.

In The Trial, Kafka portrays how Josef K. is trapped in an inexplicable legal system, which represents another form of confronting the absurd. In contrast to Meursault, who later comes to appreciate the meaninglessness of life, Josef K. is absurdly in search of purpose and reason. His relentless questioning of the authority of the court reflects his unwillingness to live with absurdity, which causes growing anxiety and frustration. His struggle is made more futile by the lack of explicit charges or rational processes. He is surprised at his arrest: “‘How can I have been arrested? Especially in this manner?’ ‘There you go again,’ the guard said, dipping a slice of bread and butter in the honey pot. ‘We don’t answer questions like that’” (Kafka, 2009, p. 8). This persistent confusion is employed by Kafka in an attempt to demonstrate a world where people have been disempowered. Unlike Camus, who embraces the absurdity in a freeing manner, Kafka depicts absurdity as an overwhelming power that overcomes human free will.

Alienation and Isolation

Meursault alienates himself because he cannot adhere to social norms. The absence of emotional expression during the funeral of his mother and no interest in conventional morality are shocking to the people surrounding him, and society calls him inhuman. The prosecutor and the jurors centre on his apathy in his trial, but not on the murder he has perpetrated, labelling him morally flawed. Camus describes such alienation as an implication of the authenticity of Meursault, that is, his unwillingness to pretend to feel what he does not. He wonders, “What would it matter if he were accused of murder and then executed because he didn’t cry at his mother’s funeral?” (Camus, 1989, p. 121). Such an existential alienation proves the point that sometimes leading a truthful life is bound to clash with a society founded on common delusion.

Kafka presents alienation as external, and increasing pressure on Josef K. He finds that the people whom he could rely on (friends, colleagues, even relatives) become more distant as he continues to sink further into the red tape of the court. He loses his social contacts and increasingly gets isolated. Unlike Meursault, whose alienation is caused directly by his internal stand on conformity, the alienation of Josef K. is caused by the constructions of his world (rigid and depersonalized) which surround him. The author narrates, “And he was told nothing about the reason for his arrest, nor about whoever had given them their orders. He became somewhat agitated and walked up and down” (Kafka, 2009, p. 13). The endless judicial wars strip him of support and respect source and make him appear weak. As Kafka emphasizes, existential anxiety becomes worse when they experience alienation, which is imposed on them by the establishments that they do not understand or have no control over.

Freedom, Responsibility, and Sense

According to Camus, being truly dependent on one’s inner self leads to true existential freedom; one should not struggle against the absurd. Meursault's journey ultimately ends with his last few moments before his execution, when he accepts death as an unavoidable and freeing experience. Camus reflects this in Meursault’s epiphany, “And I felt ready to live it all again too. As if that blind rage had washed me clean, rid me of hope; for the first time, in that night alive with signs and stars, I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world” (Camus, 1989, p. 122). He shuns any illusion of religious redemption or social acceptance, thereby accepting his presence on his own scale. This realization enables him to feel an intense sense of clarity and calmness when he knows that the absence of meaning in life does not decrease its worth. Instead, what matters is building up personal meaning through accepting fate and standing against false consolations, which is the key to freedom.

The Trial, however, shows a person who never experiences such liberation. An unspecified sense of guilt rides Joseph K., and he has problems in vindicating himself against accusations that are not specified. His inability to create meaning of his suffering because he cannot take personal responsibility places him in the helplessness to go forward to take responsibility for his system. As Kafka narrates K’s interaction with the priest, “And they even pass their prejudice on to those who are not involved. My position is getting more and more difficult.’ ‘You misunderstand the situation,’ said the priest, ‘the verdict does not come all of a sudden, the proceedings gradually turn into the verdict’” (Kafka, 2009, p. 152). At the end, his execution, without struggle or argument, is a symbol of renouncing freedom. Kafka emphasizes the existential pathos of being trapped in the cage of delaying structures that hide the truth and dominate. The fate of Josef K. demonstrates that one cannot live an independent life when the freedom of individuals is suffocated by the power of incomprehensible nature.

Conclusion

The Stranger and The Trial address the main points of being an existentialist, doubting about the meaninglessness of the world, alienation, and free choice. Even though Camus’ Meursault ultimately comes to some clarity in acknowledging the absurd and establishing meaning in it through acceptance of fate, Kafka's Joseph K. concludes feeling desolate and depressed by the unexplainable bureaucracy. Those contradicting results demonstrate two different faces of existentialism, one offering liberation and facing the absurd, and the other illustrating incarceration within systems depriving individuals of free will. Together, the novels represent the variety of existential ideation, on the one hand, the freedom of latitude that might be present in defiance of indefensible social pressure, and, on the other, the possible impossibility of meaning in the context of oppressive and suppressing social pressure.