Reaction to "The Guest"

While reading through Albert Camus’ short story, the first thing that struck me was the title, “The Guest.” It seems a little confusing; the Arab man is clearly not really a welcome guest, despite his welcoming treatment of tea, food, and shelter from the cold for a night. At the same time, Daru seems akin to a classic character from bad television; he plays the surly host, the man who graciously bends over backwards to please the guests he prays will leave soon. All we need is a mother-in-law and a night gone wrong. The actions Daru takes toward the prisoner immediately give insight into Daru’s character. He admittedly despises the Arab, feeling a “sudden wrath against the man, against all men with their rotten spite, their tireless hates, their blood lusts” when he finds out his prisoner’s crime. However, he is still unable to treat him poorly, even as he contemplates whether to send him to death or let him free. The addition of the man sets the stage for what is probably the most important choice of Daru’s isolated life: Does he consider the Arab a guest, or is he a prisoner?

Right away, Daru boldly states that he will not lead the man to his death, even after he learns that the man killed his cousin over grain. Daru clearly does not want to go against his own morals, but still does not want to make the decision to set the man free. I thought that this emphasis on choice was one of the main themes of the novel, the unavoidability and consequences of choice on the individual. The story actually reminded me of something my Macroeconomics professor said, “You can choose whatever you want, but you have to make a choice.” While Professor Sawyer was talking about choosing the shape of the bottom of the recession (I still think it’s a “W”) and not the fate of another human, I think that the basic concept still applies. Daru has to make a decision about what to do with the Arab, and even though he lets the tension build for hours struggling to get out of taking a preference, he knows that in the morning he will basically choose life or death for his houseguest.

While reading through the portion where Daru hears the man leave the room and hopes that he escaped so Daru would not have to actively make the difficult choice, I started to feel some annoyance with Daru. Even though I think that I would probably have all of the same feelings as Daru, I immediately thought of him as a coward when he lets the Arab leave instead of making a decision. I feel like Camus purposely makes the reader feel removed from Daru’s emotions; I never really felt empathy toward Daru considering his situation. I think that I immediately took on the position of the reader. To the removed reader, the choice Daru’s makes is inevitable; he has to make a selection, one way or another. Allowing the prisoner to escape seems to completely avoid a climax. The story builds on the emotional states and tensions between the characters, and just bailing out before the obvious climax is downright frustrating. This is why the return of the prisoner aroused positive feelings in me, despite the fact that both major characters are worse off in this situation.

This dedication to the fate of choice finally arrives in the climax of the short story, where Daru leaves the Arab man with food and the choice of two paths. By letting the prisoner select his own path, Darus essentially avoids the actual decision. He somehow avoids his fate, albeit momentarily. Not making a decision did not end up saving him from anything; the message on his blackboard proves that his attempt to avoid a situation was futile. The Arab man is hiking toward his death, and Daru will be punished for “sending” him there, despite the fact that Daru chickened out of actively causing the actions to happen. I think this is why I actually hope that the murdering, yet somewhat righteous, Arab somehow avoids his fate, because he actively made a difficult decision.

I found that the entire story seemed odd to me when I went back and reflected upon it. While normally I side with the narrator, even though if I were presented with the same information in a different setting I would not, I disliked Daru. In reality, I probably would have done what he did, yet somehow I feel that he deserves what he gets for not facing the inevitable. I think it must be the view from the reader’s perspective; I know that he has to make a decision in the next few pages, with Daru himself has no idea what the future holds.