A reader sometimes searches for a piece of literature that can give him or her insight; whether it is into a specific topic, such as human nature, or into life in general. Complex works of interpretive literature can often shed light on matters such as the aforementioned. However, effort and investigation on the behalf of the reader are necessary in order for him or her to become more aware of the real world. The short story, “The Guest” by Albert Camus is the epitome of such interpretative literature. Even though Erikson’s psychosocial theory is disparate when compared with “The Guest” as a whole, it is only logical that it be used to critically analyze particular aspects of the development of the characters through the decisions they make
…show more content…
At the outset of the story, Camus introduces Daru, a schoolmaster residing in a cold, empty schoolhouse away from any real signs of other human life. Interestingly, Daru felt most comfortable in this place of desolate isolation. “This is the way the region was, cruel to live in, even without men- who didn’t help matters either. But Daru had been born here. Everywhere else, he felt exiled." (Camus 325) Daru proves to be someone who really dislikes the presence of other people, whilst first dealing with the Arab, “Daru felt a sudden wrath against the man, against all men with their rotten spite, their tireless hates, their blood lust.” (Camus 325)Probably one of the most significant aspects of his characterization, however, is the existentialism in his viewpoint:
This was the way it was: bare rock covered three quarters of the region. Towns sprang up, flourished, and then disappeared; men came by, loved one another or fought bitterly, then died. No one in this desert, neither he nor his guest, mattered. And yet, outside this desert, neither of them, Daru knew, could have really lived. (Camus …show more content…
His role in the story was far more minor than Daru’s. Nonetheless, the choices he makes that put him where he is, both when he first encounters Daru and tells his story, and at the end, when he makes his decision about which direction he is going to go, make him just as noteworthy. His interactions with Daru are simple, with small interchanges and monosyllabic conversations, but they show both Daru’s state of mind, and to some degree, his. (Camus 327) This, in combination with the fact that the Arab killed someone related to him proves that he was undeveloped by Erikson’s standards as well. Killing someone is considered wrong in almost any society, and would most certainly not be characteristic of a well-rounded and sophisticated individual, what Erikson’s theory says a person will become, if and only if, they conduct themselves with the right virtues in difficult situations of life. He never really learns to respect those closest to him, and when he is caught for what he does wrong, he doesn’t try to fight it, which shows that he has some sense of guilt. He is never given a name, only called by his nationality throughout the whole story. A large amount of the information the reader obtains from the story is based on his physical appearance: “an Arab who was walking behind him with hands bound and head lowered… dressed in a faded blue jellaba, his feet in
At the outset of the story, Camus introduces Daru, a schoolmaster residing in a cold, empty schoolhouse away from any real signs of other human life. Interestingly, Daru felt most comfortable in this place of desolate isolation. “This is the way the region was, cruel to live in, even without men- who didn’t help matters either. But Daru had been born here. Everywhere else, he felt exiled." (Camus 325) Daru proves to be someone who really dislikes the presence of other people, whilst first dealing with the Arab, “Daru felt a sudden wrath against the man, against all men with their rotten spite, their tireless hates, their blood lust.” (Camus 325)Probably one of the most significant aspects of his characterization, however, is the existentialism in his viewpoint:
This was the way it was: bare rock covered three quarters of the region. Towns sprang up, flourished, and then disappeared; men came by, loved one another or fought bitterly, then died. No one in this desert, neither he nor his guest, mattered. And yet, outside this desert, neither of them, Daru knew, could have really lived. (Camus …show more content…
His role in the story was far more minor than Daru’s. Nonetheless, the choices he makes that put him where he is, both when he first encounters Daru and tells his story, and at the end, when he makes his decision about which direction he is going to go, make him just as noteworthy. His interactions with Daru are simple, with small interchanges and monosyllabic conversations, but they show both Daru’s state of mind, and to some degree, his. (Camus 327) This, in combination with the fact that the Arab killed someone related to him proves that he was undeveloped by Erikson’s standards as well. Killing someone is considered wrong in almost any society, and would most certainly not be characteristic of a well-rounded and sophisticated individual, what Erikson’s theory says a person will become, if and only if, they conduct themselves with the right virtues in difficult situations of life. He never really learns to respect those closest to him, and when he is caught for what he does wrong, he doesn’t try to fight it, which shows that he has some sense of guilt. He is never given a name, only called by his nationality throughout the whole story. A large amount of the information the reader obtains from the story is based on his physical appearance: “an Arab who was walking behind him with hands bound and head lowered… dressed in a faded blue jellaba, his feet in