Is Antoinette Her Own Person???????

Hey guys!
I thought the book, The Wide Sargasso Sea, was really interesting. It made me think about how my environment has affected my life, just as it did to Antoinette. Antoinette was characterized as mad because of her mother. Additionally, she was an outlier who was stuck between two cultures; the "black" culture and the "white" culture. Because she was stuck in this sort of limbo state, she found it harder to relate to anyone. This could potentially be the reason why she loses herself and succumbs to the Bertha Mason persona.
The question I asked myself while reading this story was, "Was going mad Antoinette's destiny, or was it simply a product of logical responses to events that occurred throughout her life?" I would argue that it was a product of logical responses that led her to become mad. I also believe Rochester played a huge role in this transformation.
Throughout her whole life, Antoinette has struggled to find her identity. Her friendship with Tia really confused her, as she sympathized her Tia's culture more than her own. Once her relationship with Tia was broken as a result of their fight, she was even more lost. Throughout all of this, everyone compared Antoinette to her mother. Since Antoinette could not really "find herself", she gradually turned into a version of her mother.
 This process was accentuated when Rochester started calling her Bertha Mason, and locks her in his house. This stripped Antoinette of any attempt at creating her own persona. I think that since she had no other image to follow in, she HAD to immerse herself into her mother's persona. Everyone said that Antoinette would go mad just like her mother (because it was genetic). When Rochester locked her up, she probably succumbed to societies expectations for her, and became her mother!
Do you guys agree with this? Do you think Antoinette was a product of societal pressures or destiny? let me know!

The Stranger - Should we be sympathetic to Meursault?

While reading the book, The Stranger, I instantly felt distrust towards the Narrator. His lack of sympathy and objective narration made it seem as if he was holding back his emotions from the readers. I thought that his lack of emotion and apathy towards his scenario was a product of Albert Camus's writing style. This assumption was proved to be false when he shot the Arab sympathize with Meursault? Are his actions the result of built up stress brought onto him by his Mother's The Death Penalty is an extremely harsh punishment; did Meursault deserve it?

            Personally, I think he did. This is because I believe that justice should be served based on merit. If you do something legally wrong, you should be punished accordingly for that crime. Despite this, I think that discovering the motive behind offense is important. In The Stranger, there was no obvious motive for the shooting. Meursault simply did it because he wanted to. This would be drastically different if the Arab charged at him with a knife or something. Instead, the crime is completely unmerited. I think this is the reason the Court was so interested in Meursault’s reaction to his mother’s death. I don’t think they judged Meursault was purely judged for this crime by how he reacted to his mother’s death, but rather I believe that the investigation used that reaction to create a reasonable motive for his crime.

By proving that he was unsympathetic during his mother’s death, the court proves that Meursault is a “monster” that doesn’t account for the effects of his actions. The motive here could simply be, “He’s a Monster who doesn’t care if he hurts (Or kills) other people”. I believe this is the reason why the punishment was so harsh. From their perspective, he could very well shoot another person for no reason. This, in my opinion, justifies such an extreme punishment. Do you guys think that Meursault deserved the Death Penalty? Do you think that Meursault was prosecuted because of him reaction to his mother’s death, or by merit? Leave a comment down below!!