termed as the perfect moment. the moment she kept on urging till the end of the novel. meursault the stranger on the other hand totally ignores the look of the others and thus becomes a stranger or an outsider for the society. reaching towards the ending even meursault for a short while but first time in the novel gets affected by the other during the trial where he states it was then that i noticed a row of faces in front of me. they were all looking at me camus 1989: 83 and for the first time in years i had this stupid urge to cry because i could feel how much all these people hated me and for the first time i realised that i was guilty camus 1989: 90 sartre in nausea also gives an example of lucie a charwoman who symbolises being-in-itself and portrays the sufferings of individuals who attempts to find meaning and purpose in life by merging with others in the crowd. her husband has become the major reason for her suffering and because of him she stays in an anguish state. in an encounter with lucie where she was pleading to a man not to leave her in such a state but he walks away roquentin recognises her it is lucie the charwoman. but he says i dare not offer her my support but she must be able to call for it if need be: i pass before her slowly looking at her. her eyes stare at me but she seems not to see me; she looks as though she were lost in her suffering. sartre 2000: 44 the protagonist roquentin shows the being-for-itself which represents the nothingness of the pureconsciousness other people in cafe represents being-for-others whereas lucie represents the inauthentic struggle of being in the middle of both the realities. though the common grounds of suffering remain the same but the nothingness of roquentin goes in negative direction whereas the sufferings of lucie take her in the positive direction. roquentin represents sartres concept of look whereas lucie and charles represent sartres sadism-masochism opposition. lucie is largely represented as a masochistic and charles as sadistic. roquentin through his look objectifies lucie turning her into an object she stares at him back but her look is not able to counter roquentins look by her own look which makes her a mere object. on the other hand she becomes largely masochistic when she calls after charles as charles i beg you you know what i told you charles come back ive had enough im too miserable. 44 and charles becomes largely sadistic. here lucie is represented as the fusion of being-in-itself by being objectified by the look of roquentin and a sadism-masochism relation with charles and thus doubly entrapped in the sufferings and despair. on the other hand roquentin who was trying to understand and accept the reality of his life does not help lucie when he could because he wanted to give lucie the freedom to make a choice by herself whether she wants to get the help or wants to bear the suffering so that she does not completely become the object. through the above discussion it is clear that it is not an individuals condition that makes him realise the hell but the look of the others.the ideas of sartre and camus can be related to each other to some extent but camus refuses it by saying that all that links him to the sartrean group is just a mere coincidence and the result of being in same country at same time in same condition and nothing more. he claims it in an interview in local newspaper named diario. camus in his irritation states that it is a serious error to treat.a philosophical research as serious as existentialism.the similarities.come naturally from the chance or the misfortune that we have to live in the same era and in confrontation with common problems and concerns. lottman 470 despite of camus rejection of he is seen as an existentialist and also deals with the same problems as sartre does in a little different way through his philosophy of the absurd. in this connection germaine bee comments camus remained more consistently faithful to existentialism.than did sartre with his commitment to doctrinaire marxism.there was no theorists system he camus wanted to communicate to others. it was of the one-sidedness of doctrinaire ideologies that he was critical. charlesworth 40