The Immoralist

The subplot about Michel’s misadventures with Alcide reveals Michel’s desire to be free from the constraints of society, even when he is the one who holds the power. Although Michel is the owner of the farm, and though Alcide is stealing from him both by poaching and by collecting a reward for “discovering” the illicit traps that he himself sets up, Michel is amused by the boy’s actions, not angered. He is delighted by the carefree immorality that Alcide displays, just as he was pleased by Moktir’s theft of Marceline’s scissors. By helping Alcide carry out his misdeeds, Michel knowingly harms his own financial interests to amuse himself. When Charles criticizes Michel’s irresponsibility, and Michel decides to sell his property, Gide shows the resolution of Michel’s conversation with Ménalque in Part 2, Chapter 2, in which Ménalque pointed out Michel’s hypocrisy in not caring about material possessions while owning so much. The decision to sell his property marks a turning point for Michel: he finally liberates himself from society’s expectations.

However, there is still one constraint on Michel: his wife, Marceline. During these chapters, Gide reverse the roles of Michel and Marceline from the ones they held during Part 1 of the novel. Before, Marceline was Michel’s caretaker while he was ill; now, he is responsible for her as she succumbs to sickness. The scenes of her illness parallel those of his earlier struggle with tuberculosis. She coughs, and Michel is horrified to know whether she is coughing up blood. He tries to entertain her much the way that she tried to entertain him, but his efforts to cheer her up are not as successful. The changing weather on the farm and while they are traveling affects Marceline’s health, too, just as much as it affected Michel’s during his recovery.

Unlike Marceline, Michel is unable to selflessly assume the role of caregiver. He is torn between his love for his wife and his resentment of her for preventing him from pursuing unabated pleasure. Michel feels emasculated by his role as a loving husband, explaining, “my veneration of her grew in inverse proportions to my self-respect” (113). He derives his sense of self-worth from his adherence to his philosophy of pursuing pleasure above all else. Marceline points out that his “doctrine [...] leaves out the weak” (112), by which she means both sick people and women. Bringing his wife flowers irks Michel because he views any selfless action as weak and feminine, which contradicts his personal doctrine.

These chapters explore Michel’s developing sexual interest in men, which he acts on during his second trip to Italy and North Africa. Both on his farm and while travelling, Michel communes with working-class men whom he views as being in touch with their primitive selves. Although he does not explicitly state sexual interest in these men, he implies that he is attracted to them in a similar way to his attraction to boys earlier in the novel. While fraternizing with dock workers in Syracuse, he states, “I misread the brutality of their passion as a sign of health and vigor” (115). Just as he was attracted to the boys in North Africa because they possessed what he did not—health and youth—he is interested in laborers because he believes they live a more authentic life than his own.

Looking back, the narrator recognizes this is probably not the case. In the moment, however, Michel enjoys his voyeuristic encounters with these men. Interacting with the men on his farm, he states, “the mere sight of these poor people constantly fills me with wonder” (90). He is fascinated by their ability to give in to their vices without caring about their own responsibilities, such as when Pierre gets drunk without considering how it might affect his employment. Furthermore, when Michel is on his second trip, his socialization with working-class men allows him to pursue his sexual desires. In Naples, he does not just observe others engaged in debauchery; he participates in it himself, stating that “I wandered aimlessly, feeling no desire, no constraint […] I touched things with my hands; I went prowling.” (114). The narrator implies that he engaged in sexual acts with men he met in the streets, an insinuation that is reinforced when he kisses a coach driver and flirts with him in the next scene.

Michel’s sexual explorations culminate in the scene with Moktir and his mistress in a brothel. While Michel has sex with Moktir’s mistress, not with Moktir, Michel implies that Moktir was involved since he was in the room with them. This final transgression, outright adultery, coincides with Marceline’s death, suggesting that she dies because of his neglect and as a divine punishment for his actions.

The last few pages of the novel are written in a fragmented style. This change in style reflects Michel’s frantic state as he confesses the most damning part of his tale. For example, he interrupts his own narrative to tell a story out of chronological order, directly addressing the listeners: “I didn’t tell you that when we were at Naples I went to Paestum on my own one day […] Oh, I could have wept at the sight of those ruins! They stood in all their ancient beauty—simple, perfect, smiling […] and deserted” (120). Michel refers to his previous aversion to ruins, stating that he returned to them on this journey only to find them emotionally devastating. The ruins symbolize the peak of Roman civilization, which is often depicted as having collapsed due to its hedonism. Thus, the ruins mirror Michel’s own downfall, the destructive result of going too far in his pursuit of pleasure.

At the end of the novel, Michel expresses remorse for his sins and wants his friends to rescue him and bring him back to society. Nevertheless, he openly admits to sleeping with a prostitute and implies that he is sexually attracted to his male servant. He may be apologetic for his actions, but he has not reformed his ways. Gide leaves open-ended to what extent Michel should be denounced. Michel’s fall from grace has elements of a tragic hero’s narrative—the novel’s portrayal of the hypocrisy of society implies that Michel is justified in wishing to be liberated from its constraints. His immoral actions, however, only lead him to despair.

During the final scene, Gide dabbles in metafiction to imply that readers themselves are just as flawed as Michel. The frame narrator, Michel’s friend, states, “By not condemning his actions at any point during his long explanation, we were as good as being accomplices” (123). This commentary implicates the reader, too, because the reader has also presumably reached the end of the narrative without denouncing it. By entertaining the reader, this tale of immorality allows the reader to participate in their own form of voyeurism, finding pleasure in the narrative of Michel’s immoral actions. Thus, Gide implies that Michel’s friends, and even the novel’s readers, are not so different from Michel.