I have mixed feelings about "The Meursault
Investigation" by Algerian journalist Kamel Daoud, a book that has received
considerable worldwide attention and which I have been eager to read in the year since
its publication.
Here is Amazon's capsule summary of the novel's premise:
"He was the brother of 'the Arab' killed by the
infamous Meursault, the antihero of Camus' classic novel ['L'etranger'].
Seventy years after that event, Harun, who has lived since childhood in the
shadow of his sibling's memory, refuses to let him remain anonymous: He gives
his brother a story and a name―Musa―and describes the events that led to Musa's
casual murder on a dazzlingly sunny beach."
Like almost
everyone, I was intrigued by that premise. I remember reading "L'etranger"
(translated then as "The Stranger," and more recently, and
contentiously, as "The Outsider") for a French class and wondering
why the victim of the Meursault's maddeningly pointless crime was referred to
merely as "l'arabe." Thus, a living breathing human being was cheated
of a name. Reading "The Stranger," I simply could not understand how
Meursault, the contemporary antihero, could care so absurdly little for the
life of the man he killed -- or, ultimately, for his own. Well, that turns out
to be the point.
Daoud's
book invents a first-person narrator, who tells the story of Meursault's crime
from the point of view of the victim's brother. In that way the novel rights
one of Meursault's wrongs: he gives the victim a name and therefore a personal identity and family. But for much of the novel's
first ninety pages or so, I had difficulty believing this correction of the record was
worth a whole book. Daoud's narrator, who does nothing but drink in a cafe and obsess
over his "pathetic" life (to use his own term), repeats accusation that the highly regarded classic
"L'etranger" denied the victim a name about a hundred times through the
first two-thirds of the book.
I take
this denial of a victim's identity to stand for a wider point. The European,
Western colonialism that dominated and oppressed most of Asia, Africa and the
Middle East for centuries deprived these societies of their own identity,
suppressed their culture, forbade their religions, and exploited their
resources, stealing their wealth to fill the coffers of rich and powerful
nations. It's hard to say what reckoning should be made for these crimes.
Perhaps we have not yet paid it.
After Daoud's
narrator cycles back and forth through the misery the murder of his brother
Musa brings to his mother and himself, he announces that he will begin the
whole tale over again. He acknowledges to his listener (a nameless 'researcher' with
a notebook) that "I should have told you this story in chronological
order." Indeed. The remainder of this book -- whether intended to be
truth, allegory, or realistic fiction; in fact it works on all these levels --
is a devastating and riveting psychological portrait of the central figures and
the society they now inhabit. And its reach goes well beyond an indictment of
Meursault, his crime, his 'outsider' status, and the praise heaped on Camus's book,
to the insights Daoud has to offer into the psychology of loss and the 'absurdity'
of life as experienced by a particular man in his own harrowing time and place,
leaving us with a blistering critique of the deadening independent Algeria that
has replaced the exploitive French colony.
"The Meursault Investigaton" may in fact be the literary tour de force critics have pronounced it, although I found much of this book not much fun to read. The good parts, however, are likely to stay with me (and any reader) for a very long time.
"The Meursault Investigaton" may in fact be the literary tour de force critics have pronounced it, although I found much of this book not much fun to read. The good parts, however, are likely to stay with me (and any reader) for a very long time.
No comments:
Post a Comment