Charlie Sheen

I think the blogger's view of the situation is very existential. Charlie Sheen's "rock star" life style could be seen as him living and acting and doing whatever her wants whenever he wants. But I personally don't consider that living. I think that is just irresponsibility.  The only reason he is able to get away with doing what he has in his past is because he is a celebrity. And society puts celebrities on a silver platter. We worship them. And the fact that every seems to just find humor in the fact that Sheen is going around talking crazy and admitting to the many things that he does (illegal or not) is sad because it means as a society we only put these people on silver platters so we can watch them fall right off them.

I personally don't think it is a valid argument because I don't see Sheen's actions as living, they are more destruction. I understand that he is doing "whatever he wants", but the fact that he only seems to be doing it is because he can get away with it. We excuse his behavior because he is a celebrity. He lost his job, but from all the money has has already made, that doesn't mean anything. We have allowed him to go on all these talk shows so he can make a fool of himself and trash talk his bosses, and the only reason we do that is because we want to see him make a fool of himself, we want to see him fail. I think part of that is why so many stars do end up failing and falling into actions such as Sheen's. We push them over the edge because watching that is more entertaining than the shows they make, or the games they play for us to watch on TV.

Why is Meursault Existentialist??

In the first part of "The Stranger" I noticed focus on the existentialist pillars: Death and The Rejection of Meaning Giving Narratives, and Passion/Engagement.


"Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don't know"

This quote is so nonchalant and comes off almost uncaring. Meursault seems to have no sympathy or sadness towards the news of his mother's death. This is because any existentialist knows that death is inveitable and final. He shows no grief or sadness because he can not do anything about it. It doesn't do any good to cry or worry about it because it is going to happen to all of us at some point and he can't take back her death, so he sees no point in putting meaning to it.


"The trigger gave; I felt  the smooth underside of the butt; and there, in that noise, sharp and deafening at the smae time, is where it all started. I shook off the sweat and sun. I knew that I had shattered  the harmony of the day, the execeptional silence of a beach where I'd been happy. Then I fired four more tmes at the motionless body where the bullets lodged without leaving a trace. And it was like knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness"

Meursault rejects the meaning of murder. This is because his actions seem to have no preconceptions, therefore can not be considered murder. He also shoots the Arab's body four more times after he is dead, just because he can. To him death is final and inevitable, so ending it at one point compared to another means nothing, because death is unavoidable anyway. The other aspect of death being final leads Meursault not to see the cruelty in shooting the Arab after he was already dead. To him it is no different than shooting a deer again. It does't matter if he gets shot again because he is already dead.


"He wanted to write her a letter. 'one with a punch and also some things in it to make her sorry for what she's done.' Then, when she came running back, he'd go to bed with her and 'right at the last minute' he'd spit in her face and throw her out. Yes, that would punish her, I thought. But Raymond told me he didn't think he could write the kind of letter it would take and that he'd thought of asking me to write it for him. Since I didn't say anthing. he asked if I'd mind doing it right then and I said no."

This is another example of the Rejection of Meaning Giving Narrative pillar of existentialim. The morals that society knows would lead any of us to deny writing that letter for Raymond. Knowing that writing her this letter would lead to everything Raymond told you he would do is just something that people morally could not agree to. But becasue this has no gain or loss for Meursault, he does it. Plus, his pal Raymond asks him to. He sees no problem in this so he does it. He rejects society's morals and the meaning of them to write the letter for him


"Then she wanted to know if I loved her. I answered the same way I had last time, that it didn't mean anything but that I probably didn't love her. 'So why marry me, then?' she said. I explained to her that it didn't really matter and that if she wanted to, we could get married"

Meursault's engagement with Marie is odd, he doesn't seem to care about the things others care about such as marriage and love. Marie is just a woment that Meursault sees movies, eats dinner, and sleeps with. He doesn't seem to care about marriage and if they get married or not. He just kind of writes it off as no big deal. Marriage, a usually very important commitment to society, Meursault seems to not care either way.

My Reaction Original Reaction to Meursault

When reading "The Stranger" my original reaction to him was very confusing. His nonchalant attitude towards everything that he does is frustrating to me because I personally feel that everything we do has some meaning to our lives.

This "no-care" attitude starts right in the first paragraph of the book. He doesn't seem to care that his mom has died. And almost brushes it off. He doesn't even cry or show any emotion towards it. I hadn't realy understood why until the existentialism aspect of it comes into play with the pillars of absurdity, death, and rejection of meaning giving narratives.

He is definitely a clear example of straight line existentialism.

This is shown more clearly with his interaction with others like Marie and Raymond. He doesn't seem to care about love or marriage or anything society seems to care about. He also shows his existentialism when he shoots the Arab 4 times after he dies. That part in the story confused me as well because he again seems to have no guilt or anything towards killing him. He also seems to only do things, like write the letter for Raymond,  because it has no gain or loss from doing so because the morals set by society mean nothing to the existentialist.

I think overall Meursault frustrates me because I don't believe with how he lives his life. Maybe because I don't see it really as living. He doesn't seem to care about anything because he rejects meaning society has set. And he does stuff like write the letter for Raymond, which most people would see as morally wrong because it doesn't gain or lose anything from it. I just don't agree with the way he lives (or doesn't live) his life.

Existentialism Vid MEANING!!

Okay well, my video on Existentialism is about the curvy way of living an existential life. This way of living stresses making your own choices. Like should you do that homework tonight? Or even things like should you even go to school? While choices like these seem to have only one reasonable answer, there is ALWAYS a choice. But the other part of that is there are always consequences that come with those choices that we do make. As existentialists we have to accept any consequences (good or bad) that follow as a result of our decisions. We are the ones who control that though! We know what things can result after we make certain decisions, we just don't always want to accept these outcomes.

My picutres are mostly of me, my friends and family. I chose these because my friends and family having meaning to me personally, and some decisions I make affect them too and the engagement and passion and love that I have for them can influence the decisions I make. This goes along with the passion/engagement existential pillar because the people I have in my life mean a lot to me and I am a very "engaging" person.

I put the words about decisions and the result of them because, ultimately, it is up to me to be responsible for what I do with my life and how I live it. Whether it is choosing to enjoy time with family and friends, working, or doing homework. Anything in my life that happens is under my control. And although I don't entirely believe that statement because of my religious background, existentialists do. And part of me does like some aspects of the idea of existentialism, but there are others that I just do not agree with.

If i am an existenitalist, I am definitely NOT a Point A straight to Point B kind of girl, I follow mostly the pilliar of enagement/passion because I love to involve myself with others. I am a cruvy existentialist chick becasue I don't want to just exist, I want to LIVE!!

[Exist]entialism Vid!!

How I Feel About Existentialism

I personally like the idea of existentialism, the fact that ultimately every decision you make is up to you. That is something I have always followed, especially when taking responsibility for your own actions and other things like that. Because no one else made you do anything, you may have felt pressured to do something, but it is still your decision.

I also like that idea in context of how society controls us, like we mentioned in class, we technically don't have to follow the rules and truths society sets for us, but it is because of the consequences that we do.

The part I don't like about it is the concept of being alone. I have always put lots of importance on the  relationships I make with others. So the concept of kind of shutting yourself out from everyone in society is one I don't agree with.

Existentialism still confuses me because I fell like there is a lot of things that are controversial and contradicting. Like the fact that two pillars of existentialism are alienation and engagement. To me when I hear alienation, I think of isolating yourself from the rest of the world, the aloneness that I was talking about. But when I hear engagement, I think of relationships and engaging in conversation with others!

I do like the fact that everything existentialist is up to interpretation, like the poem "Two Bodies", where each stanza could have 2 different meanings. That part also kind of frustrates me though because there is never a right answer: you make your own. I do like that you can interpret meaning one way and another person a different way, because I think it gives me insight to different ways of looking at things.

Regardless of the Situation, there is Always a Choice Involved as to how to Handle it

It is not the experiences that define who we are, it is how we percieve them. we can either use each situation as a learning experience or we can fall onto the path of negativity.

Every situation we are in, good or bad, there are always multiple ways to handle it. The way we handle it helps define what path we take in this life.

This also leads me to another statement "ultimately, everything I do is my own decision and nobody else's" : People may try to influence your decisions, but in the end it is up to you to make them. Parents, friends, teachers, etc. may try and gicve you guidance, but it is your life and you have to make the decisions. No one can make them for you because you are your own person. No one can control your thoughts and your life except for you.

I have always felt that I have responsibility for my own actions and the decisions I make are my own and no one else's. And sometimes I screw up, but the mistakes I make, make me a stronger person. I grow thorugh my accomplishment and my failures. I take advice from my friends, family, and others, but I know that ultimately it is all up to me!