In “The Guest”, the French must have been convinced that since Daru was French, he certainly was on their side. The French at the time were in conflict with the Algerian separatists. Camus presents Daru as an absurdist, a man who does not subscribe to any side of the conflict. He chooses to live in a mountainous region, preferring to concentrate on his work as a teacher. Barducci, who most likely is a police officer, is given orders to deliver an Arab prisoner to Daru, who is subsequently required to take him to the police headquarters at Tinguit. The treatment Daru gives the prisoner is unexpected. Barducci and Daru did not know whether the prisoner was on their side or not. Daru gives him food and gives him a comfortable place to sleep at night. The prisoner has a chance to overpower Daru and escape at night but does not.
The most absurd thing happens the following day when Daru leaves the prisoner at crossroads and tells him to decide whether he wanted to go to prison or escape. The prisoner chooses to present himself to the administration headquarters. When Daru returns to the classroom, he finds writings on the board threatening him for handing over a ‘brother’ to the French. Camus writes that Daru was ‘alone’. In this case, regardless of Daru’s actions, he was alone, an evident rejection of existentialism. Even though Daru did not want to be part of the conflict, every side would blame him. He would be criticized by the French for letting the Arab prisoner go to the headquarters unaccompanied and the Arabs would accuse him of handing over their brother to the authorities. Therefore, according to Camus, everyone needs to have free will to do what they like. There should be no thing as collective responsibility or adhering to set standards or values. The Arab prisoner would have simply escaped and joined his brothers, while Daru would have been strict and harsh to the prisoner, and escorted him to the administration headquarters.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
