Camus and Mulisch demonstrate that past and present are related. The authors do this through the two characters, Meursault and Anton. Through Meursault, we see that his past actions influence the outcome of the trial. Through Anton, we see that his present situation constantly brings him back to his past despite trying to escape it. The authors thus stylistically connect the past and present to demonstrate that they are inevitably related, where certain events are inevitable or the past is undeniable. In "The Outsider", society continually brings up memories of Meursault's past actions against his will, such as his behavior at his mother's funeral. Under the rule of the French colonialists, the French Algerian court is a microcosm of the society with the Roman Catholic faith, in value as in determination. For this reason, Meursault, who distances himself from Roman Catholic expectations in society, was convicted of the Arab's murder. It was announced that he had "no place in the society of which he was ignorant of the most fundamental rules", which was based primarily on his emotions and behavior during the funeral rather than the actual murder. Contrary to this, Camus uses Meursault as a construct to demonstrate his philosophy of the absurd. Absurdity is the belief that one cannot give rational meaning or purpose to life, a belief based on the inevitability of death. Because people have difficulty accepting this notion, they constantly try to create rational structure and meaning in their lives. The term "nonsense" describes humanity's vain attempt to find a rational order where none exists. Only at Meursalt's epiphanic revelation before his death does he realize this as he becomes acquainted with the world of the absurd. 'The Assault' traces the consequences...... middle of paper ......ppy”, feeling a sense of satisfaction at living completely as he did and finding peace with himself and with the society that persecutes him , finally abandoning his fantasies of escaping execution. In conclusion, both authors demonstrate that the past and present are intertwined, but in different ways. Camus shows how each person determines their present with their past actions and how, in an absurd world, society forces connections between the two that could disadvantage us. Mulisch demonstrates in a different way that we can never escape or deny our past. It is the past that defines us and will always catch up with us, no matter how much we run from it. In my opinion, Camus's stylistic representation of this idea is more convincing than Mulisch's because we ourselves will have this experience, where society accuses us based on our past actions.