A take on Existentialism

     In class we took a little bit of time to discuss the Existentialist theory, which I found to be very interesting, however it seems like a bit of an extreme. The belief that life has no set meaning is understandable, but I believe that we as individuals create that meaning for ourselves whatever we may believe. I would be interested to view some of the other "denominations" of Existentialism to see how they commonly view life. This difference in views also makes me wonder if the society we were raised in affects our readiness to subscribe to Existentialist beliefs.
     In the play we are currently reading, Waiting for Godot, it is easy to see the sense of confusion in the characters. Although this sense of confusion is sometimes inward and not directed towards the world in general, it can represent the confusion that people feel when pondering existentialist issues. The scope of the questions raised is immense and cannot be answered by one man. In the play Oedipus the dominant theme of fate clearly contradicts Existentialist views. Life is a set path and cannot be changed as opposed to life having no meaning.
   This way of thought appealed to me so much because religion and how it relates to life is something that I often think about. I see religion as something that was created to give the direct meaning to life that is clearly denied in the broadest form of Existentialism. Hearing about these theories is very interesting because it shows me that many other people contemplate the same things.
     The Existentialist unit that we are doing right now is very interesting, but I feel at times that works of art representing this view are just like works puffed up by Ellsworth Toohey in The Fountainhead to appeal to the general public. It seems there is a fine line between supporting something with all you heart and following a movement because you know it will take you places.