The Stranger

The Stranger by Albert Camus, is a story fallowing Meursault, an indifferent young man who begins the story with his Mothers death. His mom lived in an assisted living home however Meursault felt nothing at his moms death, and showed no emotion which everyone who attended noticed. He later goes on a date the next day and through seeing his daily life you see that he is a normal guy except for the lack of emotion and care. Later on Meursault is at the beach and kills a man. Then he goes to jail to await a trial. At the trial, the case is handled much less like a court case should, but rather is about Meursault character. The court asked him question about his Mother and ended on the decision that he is a monster due to his lack of emotion and give him the death sentence. My big question is about fate or free will and which one existed in the novel. 

I believe that in the novel their is free will. I think the book as a whole would have been pointless if it was fate. As the book was about humans and their interactions with each other, if their was no free will and was instead fate their actions would be completely meaningless. Furthermore Meursault lives only through himself, never doing anything that is not in his character to do.     

The Portrait of an Artists as a Young Man

The portrait of an artist as a young man by James Joyce is the story of a young man, Stephan, as he grows up. Most of the book is internal and is told to the reader through stream of conscious. Due to the uniqueness my big question of sheathed the characters in the book have free will or if they are controlled by a greater force. The book being told solely through Stephan's thoughts adds a deeper level to this question. Unlike books that focus on external action and need a set of (convenient) events to progress, the reader was allowed to see each step Stephan took to grow. It is due to this personal and intimate connection between reader and Stephan that the book progresses purely through free will. I never felt as though the events were conveniently created for progressing the story.  Stephan progresses the story solely through his thought epiphanies which are seen by the reader due to Joyce's use of stream of consciousness.  Overall I believe that having the main character have free will instead of controlling the story with fate adds more to the story

The Invisible Man

The Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison fallows the story of a unseen narrator, who is "invisible" not from affliction as he says but because people refuse to see him. Through the story he goes through outrages events, gives speeches, and learns the power in being invisible. My big question is asking whether their was free will and action or if the narrator was forced through fate and destiny to travel the path he traveled. I went back and forth on this big question for this book. The path was to paved, it appeared to be set before him. As if the scenery never existed until he turned the corner and it suddenly jumped up so he wouldn't see the empty nothingness before him. This is why I believe it was fate at first, the things happened because they were destined to happen, the point I struggled with was his growth. The invisible narrator did not grow in the normal step stair pattern often used with fate based stories. Instead of learning one lesson and now gaining that trait never to be lost. It felt much more humane, that he like all of us forget valuable lessons from time to time or in the heat of the moment. Overall I have landed on the thought that it was destiny, the events were to fantastical and everything just happened to propel him to the next stage.