The Stranger

The Stranger
by Albert Camus

This novel was a shocking look at the simplicity of the human mind, but I was not initially sure as to how it pertained to my big question. How, I mulled over, does a story about only being concerned with the present events in one's life while paying no attention to surroundings or the past or future fit in with the idea of original thoughts? Just as I was beginning to think that only original thoughts we have came from the inherent characteristics of our personalities, Muersault enters the picture with a philosophy on life that seems utterly unconcerned with any thoughts whatsoever.

But maybe that is actually an important image in this question. What can the thoughts of a man who doesn't have any concern for the rest of the world or the thoughts of others say about the natural, organic even, tendencies of the mind? Muersault only acts on the ideas flowing through his mind at any time. He refuses to lie, to acknowledge any other lives, but he also refuses to be crudely against anything he doesn't agree with (etc. the religious themes in the novel). Muersault is, effectively, an organic mind.

Maybe all that is needed to achieve this mental cleanliness is indifference to the ways of your surroundings. Maybe it is possible to be mentally innocent, to have the intellectual corruption of a fetus, simply by withdrawing yourself from the rest of the world.

Crime and Punishment

Crime and Punishment
by Fyodor Dostoevsky

The title of Crime and Punishment instantly brings the mind to fabricate images of concrete situations: a jail cell, a trial, a gun in the hand of a killer. I find that the beauty of the novel lies in the fact that while all of these images are encountered throughout the story, they are defined by abstract and incredibly intimate sensations. I have found through this novel what I believe to be the most significant discovery about original thoughts that I have encountered through this year's quest.

The novel follows Rodya Raskolnikov as he fights through his own guilt and fleeting, though passionate, regret for a highly contemplated murder. While this concept rose a thrilling question about whether our nation has our justice system confused when we see premeditated murder more severely than murder of passion, it also presented the perfect foil. The character Svidrigailov is a man in essentially the same position as Rodya in his life; he is a murderer, a man searching for love, and a man of great fear.

The two men, however, end up in completely different places in their lives.
Svidrigailov lies dead with a bullet hole in his temple. Raskolnikov finds spiritual redemption from within a jail cell.

Both men had the same fate awaiting them, both were guilty and sinful. But something clicked in Rodya's head that wasn't comprehensible for Svidrigailov. Here I am finally beginning to see that a personally original thought, such as an enlightenment that there could be such a thing as redemption and a joyful future for the evil if they follow the proper steps, can come from the soul of a person and not necessarily the mind. Both of these men are "the same man" in the wiring of their brains, but deeper into the soul they are defined by their choices. Sure, Rodya had guidence from Sonia in reaching his redemption, but he made himself open to God on his own. A choice that was never comprehended by Svidrigailov.

Maybe, as has been previously suggested to me,
a truly original thought is embedded in the soul, the heart.
We all have those original characteristics that make us boldfaced, and these are the personal qualities that enable us to be free thinkers in these subjects.