Page 262 - the-trial

doorkeeper. If he takes the stool and sits down beside the
door and stays there all his life he does this of his own free
will, there’s nothing in the story to say he was forced to do
it. On the other hand, the doorkeeper is kept to his post by
his employment, he’s not allowed to go away from it and it
seems he’s not allowed to go inside either, not even if he
wanted to. Also, although he’s in the service of the law he’s
only there for this one entrance, therefore he’s there only in
the service of this one man who the door’s intended for.
This is another way in which he’s his subordinate. We can
take it that he’s been performing this somewhat empty ser-
vice for many years, through the whole of a man’s life, as it
says that a man will come, that means someone old enough
to be a man. That means the doorkeeper will have to wait a
long time before his function is fulfilled, he will have to wait
for as long as the man liked, who came to the door of his
own free will. Even the end of the doorkeeper’s service is
determined by when the man’s life ends, so the doorkeeper
remains his subordinate right to the end. And it’s pointed
out repeatedly that the doorkeeper seems to know nothing
of any of this, although this is not seen as anything remark-
able, as those who hold this view see the doorkeeper as
deluded in a way that’s far worse, a way that’s to do with his
service. At the end, speaking about the entrance he says,
‘Now I’ll go and close it’, although at the beginning of the
story it says the door to the law is open as it always is, but if
it’s always open always that means it’s open independently
of the lifespan of the man it’s intended for, and not even the
doorkeeper will be able to close it. There are various opin-

1