In the opening scene of the play, Jean and Berenger are seen at a café.

The subject of the conversation quickly turns to

Jean admonishing Berenger for Berenger’s seeming malaise. Berenger explains that he gets bored in the small town
and that working eight hours a day is taxing on him since he does not feel cut out for the work. For Jean, this is a sign of
Berenger lacking willpower, and Jean uses himself as a counterpoint: “My dear man, everybody has to work. I spend
eight hours a day in the office the same as everyone else. And I only get three weeks off a year, but even so you don’t
catch me . . . Will-power, my good man!” Following this pronouncement, Jean presents a paradox: the “superior man” is
one who “fulfills his duty . . . as an employee.” The paradox is that the “superior man” is the man who does the “same as
everyone else.” In that sense, if “everyone else” goes to work, as Jean says they do, everyone is “superior,” which, of
course, is an illogical statement, since superior assumes something above the ordinary. For Jean, conformity is
superior, which is illogical. On the other hand, Berenger seems unimpressed with willpower and duty being equated with
having duty to one’s employer. Berenger’s line, “Oh yes, his duty as an employee . . . ,” signals an brushing-off
affirmation, but the fact that he trails off shows hesitation and the lack of elaboration shows he is ready to move on to
another subject and is not moved by such an idea.
In fact, the audience is led to believe that Berenger does lack willpower. Berenger is portrayed as a drunk. In Jean’s
eyes, Berenger, “can no longer control [his] movements, [he has] no strength left in [his hands] . . . [he is] destroying
[himself].” Berenger’s answer is typical, however, it is typical from the eyes of a therapist. Berenger says, “I drink not to
be frightened any longer . . . It’s a sort of anguish difficult to describe. I feel out of place in life, among people, and so I
take to drink. That calms me down and relaxes me so I can forget.” Berenger—though he does not yet have an effective
means to deal with the world, which does not offer him what he wants—is self-reflective and acknowledges the world for
what it is and he understands his place in it. The first step, Camus argues, is to acknowledge the world for what it is.
Berenger sees the absurd situation, but he has not yet figured out his purpose; therefore, he drinks to forget the
absurdity of the world. However, though Jean claims that Berenger speaks in “stupid paradoxes,” Berenger merely
points out the true contradictions in life, the source of the feelings of absurdity. And it takes a man who acknowledges
that contradictions do exist to be able to find meaning in a contradictory world.
When confronted with rhinoceritis, Berenger finds a twofold purpose in life: confronting rhinoceritis and loving Daisy. It
is love, for Berenger, and for the play as a whole that represents the connective tissue of society. In the world of
business, in the mundane, the connective fabric of society is symbolized by the landing. The landing moves people from
one place to another, but nobody wants to reside on the landing. Therefore, the mode of connection is worthless in and
of itself. Whereas, for Berenger, at the end of the play when he and Daisy are left alone to confront the onslaught of
rhinoceritis, Berenger sees love as providing the means in which to preserve their humanity: “our love is the only thing
that’s real.” Daisy, too, seems to be on the same page as Berenger, as she views duty, not as a duty to one’s work, but
as the “duty to be happy in spite of everything.” The important point is that Daisy, like Berenger, acknowledges their
absurd situation, but they refuse to let others or the world interfere with their own happiness: “Nobody has the right to
stop us from being happy . . .” The two seem perfect for each other in their acknowledgement of the situation. Their love
is what kept the two from becoming rhinos for so long. However, Daisy succumbs to rhinoceritis and the question is
why?
The difference between Daisy and Berenger is that Berenger does not only acknowledge the sitatution, as Daisy
does, but he wants to do something about it. Berenger wants to revolt against their absurd situation: “Listen, Daisy,
there is something we can do. We’ll have children, and our children will have children—it’ll take time, but together we
can regenerate the human race.” Berenger’s revolt takes the ultimate form of being human: mentally, making a choice
and biologically, making more humans. For Berenger it will take courage, but Daisy does not see it the same way. Daisy
does not want to have children, but even more indicting is Daisy’s response to, “How can we save the world, if you don’t
[want to have children]?”: “Why bother to save it?” For Berenger, it seems to me, the world is worth saving precisely
because of the possibility of love and the possibility of human revolt.
In the end, Berenger displays willpower when it really matters: in revolting against an absurd world. Berenger says
something really telling in the last few lines of the play that appears, at first, to be contradictory to the point of the play:
“People who try to hang on to their individuality always come to a bad end!”40 With having Berenger, the outcast, left
alone at the end of the play taking on the world, the play appears to tout individuality. However, this statement furthers
the logic of the ethical syllogism of the play. One ought to, or one needs to, be human, as the syllogism goes, is very
different from the passive “hang on to their individuality.” Instead of fighting for his individuality, as he literally is the only
individual left in the play, as Berenger is prepared to do, others merely try to hang on. Even when love is not present, as
Frankl suggests, Berenger still finds something worth fighting and living for: his place in the world, despite what the
world is like. However, most importantly, he fights for the fact that he gets to decide his own fate: “I’m not capitulating!”
is the last line of the play.