Thoughts and analysis of some recurring themes of the first part of The Stranger (it’s mostly about Meursault’s character, his personnality and behavior) :

Socialization I saw some people argue that Meursault doesn’t understand social cues/codes but I think that’s – at least partially – untrue. He is, by nature, very observant and able to understand subtext or even body langage; he just chooses to not follow social norms* because he find them absurd and doesn’t grant them any importance. What he lacks is social hypocrisy; when he and Marie witness Raymond beating a woman, they both do nothing and protect him but Marie said it was "awful" while the narrator just tells us he doesn’t care and act accordingly. He says what he thinks, and lets life carry him along to relieve his boredom.

*this is only partially true, he kinda forces himself to do small talk with the hospice’s director, engages with his neighbors, etc. Even if he pretends he doesn’t care, he want people to like him.

Emotions It’s made very clear throughout that first part that Meursault is very detached from his emotions, selfish, and self-centered.

He (obviously) has emotions but is only capable of identifying the concrete effects they have on him (ex: he "wants" Marie, likes when she laughs, and misses her but is unable to understand that its because he loves her.) He doesn’t identify the emotion or its origin and only acknowledges the resulting "needs". (reaction VS emotion/sensation)

This attitude is also present during the moments of intimacy between him and Marie. He always explain what this or that act do to him and never think about/try to please his partner (ex: when he tells her they will eat dinner together, he never asks Marie what she wants.) The only moments when he tries to be pleasant with another person and helps them fulfill their "needs" is when he’s interracting with men (ex: Raymond), whereas he completely disregards women’s emotions or stories.

Morality and Neutrality Empathy and sympathy are different concepts; you don’t have to understand someone’s emotions to choose to care about what they’re going through and make the moral choice of standing with the oppressed. Meursault, under the cover of "neutrality", positions himself repeatedly on the side of immorality and violence (cf. his whole thing with Raymond). To me, the first time Meursault quit his "passive" stance is not the murder, it’s when he actively helps Raymond to lure a woman into a violent trap, and when he lies to the authorities to protect his neighbor.

The first cycle of Camus’ philosophy is the realization of the Absurd*: the world has no meaning and you have to be lucid about it. The thing is, that realization must be followed by the acceptance of the world’s absurdity but also by the refusal of passivity and a figh for human dignity. It’s the second cycle, the Revolt (book example: The Pest, Camus). The third cycle is Love; finding a middle ground, a way to reconciliate the tensions of the Absurd (quest for meaning) and the Revolt (quest for justice). But Meursault seems unable to move past the stage of his initial realization and locks himself into absurdism without really understanting it because he hasn’t accepted, embraced that realization – it probably will happen in the second part of the novel.

So, if there’s no meaning to anything then there’s no reason or need to question your behavior – or even just look inward and interrogate yourself – and thats where resides the only explanation/justification for his lack of morale; Meursault is privileged. He is a colon, a white man**, and the world doesn’t give him any reason to revolt because he is not personnally suffering.

*at some point, Meursault alludes to having this realization – which he mainly identifies as the loss of his ambition – after he had to abandon his studies. **let me translate: Meursault is a racist, misogynist, upper-middle class, sometimes fatphobic, piece of crap.

About the Asperger/low-support need autism theory I don’t think Meursault is autistic. I agree with the fact that he sometimes presents autistic traits (bluntness, difficulty to identify his emotions, ignore social cues, etc.) and that this is probably due to Camus being inspired by one of his friends’ behavior, and that there’s now a consensus about that man being on the spectrum. However, there was no diagnosis for autism in 1942 and Camus likely based Meursault on this friend of his because he was "odd". It was not Camus’ intention to portray an autistic man, Meursault is simply the embodiment of the first cycle of the philosophy of the absurd.

Also, Meursault mostly understand social cues/norms and body langage, the brief moment he mentions sensory issues it is very normal stuff (not liking the texture of the wet towel at work, being inconvenienced by the heat, etc.), he doesn’t stim (except if you count his obsessive smoking), has no specific or strong interest, presents a distinct lack of curiosity about anything, etc.

Some people have suggested that antisocial personnality disorder may be a more appropriate diagnosis for him, but honestly I think trying to justify his behavior medically, trying to find a meaning when the whole point of the book is demonstrating there is none, may be a bit counterproductive.

About the sun The sun is omnipresent and almost his own character; to me, its a physical and metaphorical metaphor of the oppressive nature of the world/life/society, absurdism, and fatality*. It is mentionned when Meursault experiences intense emotions but is unable to identify them (grief, love, anger, etc.), because of that, he attributes his unease to the sun/the heat, something physical and concrete.

*chap 1, Meursault and the nurse talk about the sun and the consequences it will have on their health during the funeral, and Meursault observes that "there is no way out.", he can’t escape this world’s system an will suffer just and unjust consequences for his actions.

Hope the English was okay. If you read all that, thank you.