Sunday, February 28, 2010
In reading Chronicles of a Death Foretold, I noticed that the details and the circumstances of the murder were similar to the murder in The Stranger. Aside from the fact that both victims were Arabs, both murders seemed a bit inexplicable although there were possible motives behind each. In Garcia Marquez’s novella, the twins’ motives for killing Santiago Nasar were reasons of honor. In Camus’, one could say that Meursault’s underlying motive was to defend Raymond. In both instances, however, the victims did not really understand what was occurring. Neither the Arab nor Santiago Nasar did anything to warrant death. Although they both felt threatened, there was no clear reason for them to expect to be killed. Each death was a result of many “fatal coincidences.” Although there was a collective knowledge of Santiago Nasar’s imminent death but absolutely none of the Arab’s, both situations are comparable. The twins had announced their intent to the whole town, but as the narrator mentions numerous times, they were waiting for someone to intervene. They had no real intention of actually killing Santiago Nasar just as Meursault had no intentions of killing anyone when he went for that walk. Both acts of murders were messy and confusing. Meursaults began with a single gunshot followed by a few inexplicable gunshots; the twins’ attempts to kill Santiago Nasar included various slashes and stabs. Just as the subsequent gunshots were questioned in the Stranger, the messy butchering of Santiago Nasar seems ridiculously excessive. After committing the murders, though, neither the twins nor Meursault saw fault in their actions. In both cases, we see society piecing together an opinion of each of the convicted men. In the twins’ case, society declared them to be good people because they were acting on behalf of honor and whatnot. Meursault was viewed as despicable for his nonconforming / unacceptable behavior. Both murders were grotesque and horrid, but what differentiated them were society’s reactions and perspectives. Both instances represent the absurd nature of life and how man lacks any control. Both stories suggest that there is no fate or destiny or any higher power controlling mankind’s actions. There is only a series of fatal coincidences that shape the circumstances of our lives and actions.
No comments:
Post a Comment