Character analysis sounds like the easy assignment, and with Meursault it rarely is. Students arrive with strong opinions about him, often before they finish chapter two, and those opinions tend to harden into labels. The essay then becomes a defense of the label instead of an examination of the book.

The most common label is sociopath, followed closely by robot and psychopath. These words feel like conclusions, but they import a clinical vocabulary the novel never uses. A student can argue that Meursault seems cold, but the moment they diagnose him, they leave the text behind.

The better question is what Camus lets us see about him and how. Meursault narrates in a flat, observant way, notices physical details, and reports feelings sparingly. An essay that starts from those choices has something to analyze.

Feedback should push students to stay on the page. Ask for the moment that supports each claim, and ask what a different reader might see in the same moment. That pair of questions cures most diagnosis problems.

Separate What He Does From What He Says About Himself

Meursault is a narrator, which means students are always reading his account of events, not a neutral record. A strong essay notices the difference between his actions, his explanations, and the way others respond to him. Weak essays treat everything he says as fact and everything others say as bias.

• Does the essay distinguish action, narration, and other characters' interpretations?
• Does it explain Meursault's choices with evidence instead of assumptions about his mind?
• Does it avoid clinical labels unless the essay argues why they fit?
• Does it consider how other characters, such as Marie or Céleste, see him?
• Does it track change in Meursault, especially in the final chapters?

Watch for Sympathy and Judgment Getting Mixed Up

Students often feel they have to like or dislike Meursault before they can write about him. Remind them that analysis can happen without endorsement. A student can argue the book invites sympathy for him without arguing that his behavior is admirable.

When you see moralizing, write a comment that asks what the text shows instead of what the student feels. "How does Camus make the reader uneasy here?" is a better prompt than "Do you think he was wrong?" It steers the essay toward technique.

Look for Development Across the Whole Book

Many essays treat Meursault as static, a single tone from page one to the end. The final chapters show something different, especially in his confrontation with the chaplain. Essays that recognize that shift usually have deeper claims.

A rubric row about development across the novel helps students see what to look for. If you use a grading tool such as GraideMind, you can build that row into the criteria so every draft gets comments on it. It gives students one more reason to read past chapter two.

Keep Comments Short and Specific

Character essays tempt teachers into long marginal debates about who Meursault really is. Resist that pull. Two well-aimed comments about evidence and interpretation do more than a page of your own reading of the book.

Your own view of Meursault is not the standard. What you are grading is whether the student can build a case from the text. Say that out loud in the assignment sheet and in your comments.