Introduction
In the work of Albert Camus, The Guest, considering the main character’s actions, behavior, and motivation, the idea of their self-determination and its problem stands out. The story follows Daru, a French teacher who lives and works in a small school in Algeria on a high plateau. He is ordered to bring a man to jail for murder and tasked with choosing the man’s fate. From the very meeting of the characters, the teacher is unpleasant to the young Arab, who did not have to cut the throat of the same as him with a knife, but the owner of the school feeds him, puts him to bed, and is still looking for an acceptable solution. Daru has to escort Arab to prison but is reluctant to do so, giving him a chance to escape. The Arab does not want to accept this gift. The bottom line is that the characters do not want to make decisions because they believe their fate is predetermined.
Disclosure of the Problem that Arose Between the Characters
In the short story, the idea of self-determination shines through most vividly when he leaves the Arab, along with the opportunity to leave the school at any time. When not hearing any sound, Daru feels “unmixed joy… from the mere thought that the Arab might have fled and that he would be alone with no decision to make” (Camus 1957, 6). When Daru learns that the Arab never left the school, the only feeling of dismay is the mere thought that the criminal did not take advantage of such a gift of fate. However, Daru does not give up on this, giving the criminal more opportunities to escape (Camus 1957, 10). The current situation clearly shows the self-determination of both characters in the opposite way. Daru is determined that the Arab must escape, but the Arab rejects all chances given to him to run, as he is determined that he is destined to become a prisoner.
Daru’s Desire within the Framework of Self-Determination
The next manifestation of Daru’s determination and apogee is when he takes the Arab into the desert, giving him money and supplies. Here Daru again shows his indirect desire for the criminal to escape, and he offers him a choice: he will go to prison or a safe place (Camus 1957, 10). This act is the high point, reflecting his determination that the Arab must escape. Nevertheless, the Arab’s self-determination again directly contrasts with Daru, thus highlighting the story’s main problem, the belief of two personalities to the contrary. Despite this, it is worth mentioning that Daru is determined by the fate of the Arab and not his own; that is, he reflects on the fate of another person who is disgusting to him (Camus 1957, 2). Several explanations can be found for this phenomenon, but the most appropriate again proves the idea of self-determination. According to Daru, his fate is already determined, but the fate of the Arab is not.
Contrasting Characters’ Self-Determination
For certainty in the idea of self-determination in the story, it is also worth considering the position of the Arab regarding his condemnation separately. On the one hand, his unwillingness for freedom, presented on a silver platter, can be interpreted as remorse and full awareness of his guilt for what he did. Given the above facts, such an idea seems too mundane for the work of the philosopher Albert Comus. Given this, one can conclude that the Arab considers his imprisonment his fate, inevitable. If we take this statement as accurate, it becomes the final one in the entire discussion about the mutually contradictory beliefs of the characters. After all, this is precisely what proves the self-determination of both oppositely. If it were not for this opposition, then the work from the side of the idea of self-determination would not make sense.
The Question of Daru’s True Motivation
Despite all of the above, there remains one point that cannot be given an exact explanation. This question lies in the motivation of Daru, namely the reason for his desire to influence the fate of the Arab. On the one hand, you can try to connect this with the kindness of Daru. On the other hand, he can be considered a hostage of a criminal because his motivation could be the prisoner’s fear, which turned into an attachment to him. Even though the text clearly expresses his dislike for the Arab, his goodwill remains a mystery to the reader. This is sad because by accurately determining the hero’s motivation, it would be possible to determine the motive of his self-determination, which is essential for this work.
Conclusion
Summarizing all the above facts and reasoning, one can conclude that the main idea of the work is the self-determination of the main characters. After all, the whole work is built on it, and all the main actions occur because of the difference in attitude to the fate of one person, his own and outside. It is fascinating to watch such fatalism because Daru’s actions and hopelessness cause compassion for the character. Moreover, all this is fueled by the incomprehensibility of Daru’s actions, and it is not completely clear what motivated this person.
Reference
Camus, Albert. 1957. The Guest. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Web.