Why do men still love The Outsider?

We all have a radical resistance within us towards the bourgeois value system which Meursault despised in the novel The Outsider. We are conscious of the fact that the existing value system de-humanizes our existence. Meursault did not agree to play the game of obedience to the accepted bourgeois behavior and mannerism. Rather than the pro-Oedipus portrayal of mother-son relationship which men find easy to relate to, our inherent political resistance to the existing system plays a significant role in the popularity factor in the novel. Though isolated and detached from common political goals of the contemporary era, the individual struggle (though a Marxist cannot agree with) in Meursault by not giving in to the accepted standards makes men immensely love him even today. Hence, this novel must always be read as a political text than just an existential textbook. However, in providing an answer to the question ‘why men like this novel over the years’ (according to an article published in The Guardian by Marcel Berlin), it takes the novel to another political level. I think it is still men who are driven by the nostalgia of a ‘better world’, the ultimate goal of the modern project. At the same time, they are the ones who still hold onto the utopia of some possible radical change in the system in future. According to Zizek, it is true that we do not have an alternative to the present inhuman system, but the only radical action today is not to be obedient to the coordinates of the current global Capitalism. We must say no to the false ideological propositions such as ‘Capitalism with human face’ or fake trends in socialism itself (such as Chaves in Venezuela). Radical politics means today is to become utopian and hold onto that dream.

Women, on the other hand, have yielded themselves to the call of the devil, since there no essence in them (‘to precede existence’). They only have existence and can only beautify it (in other words, they can offer man an ‘aesthetic death’). This means not that there are still few women who believe in a systemic change, but the majority is either the victims of the system or allowed themselves to be victimized by the system (apart from the fact that woman is the focused exploited subject under this commodity fetishism). Women most willingly embrace the demands of the system and try to make their life meaningful through these commodities. Hence, they have no reason to love a character like Meursault who was truthful to his own existence and displayed his resistance in his own manner (which sublimated his existence). One can define his action as a very subjective approach, but the signifier that he generated through his ‘undefeated death’ (better be called a ‘heroic death’) is everlasting not only in literature but in radical politics too. It is true that his life has nothing to do with exploitation of labor, collective action to topple down the system or ideological defense towards Marxism; or at least a Marxist cannot be delighted to see his alienation, as depicted in the novel, does not directly relate to labor.

Think, for a moment, of women who come to the television and counsel us about our happiness, to build a good house, to buy a car or to be obedient to the system rather than worrying about politics. How many actresses day after day claim that they are a-political (while falling in love with them for personal benefits)? Don’t they represent the majority? A woman may not radicalize her existence through 'political acts' (such as that of Meursault's decision to die) that will finally generate a signifier for others to agree and rally as an ultimate human achievement (at least at a utopian level). One can argue here that even men seek fetish commodities as their final meaning. Yes. Majority of men has sold their soul not only to the market demands but to the Lolitizied women who stand before them as final savior. But still some handful of men carry on with the universal dialogue for a better world, believe in it and are ready to make a sacrifice for it whereas women, without any moral integrity, become subjects of seduction. In Sri Lanka, just observe how women spend money for weddings and to build houses that kiss the sky (all are demands of the bourgeois market). The beauticians (including few feminized men too) in various beauty salons come to the television everyday and tell us that we are not beautiful enough. Housing construction firms promote houses that are far beyond your imaginations. Don’t we blindly seek these fetish items for our ‘meaningful existence’? Can we get away from our alienation after obtaining them? We become more and more miserable after owning them and target some other commodities for satisfaction. The vicious circle continues and the companies gain more and more profit. That is all. Weddings and houses (including Montero Sports) in Sri Lanka are the symptoms of this unbearable alienation. In this context, can someone love Meursault?

The novel The Outsider has generated a signifier for radicalism, resistance, detachment (as the most radical approach towards freedom, if I borrow from Zizek’s point in preserving nature) and anti-bourgeois life style. His death sublimated him in our minds. He was not defeated by the demand. That itself is enough for us.

Men are at least utopian. So, they have all the reasons to love Meursault.