Page 263 - the-trial

ions about this, some say the doorkeeper was only answering
a question or showing his devotion to duty or, just when the
man was in his last moments, the doorkeeper wanted to
cause him regret and sorrow. There are many who agree
that he wouldn’t be able to close the door. They even believe,
at the end at least, the doorkeeper is aware, deep down, that
he’s the man’s subordinate, as the man sees the light that
shines out of the entry to the law whereas the doorkeeper
would probably have his back to it and says nothing at all to
show there’s been any change.” “That is well substantiated,”
said K., who had been repeating some parts of the priest’s
explanation to himself in a whisper. “It is well substantiat-
ed, and now I too think the doorkeeper must have been
deceived. Although that does not mean I’ve abandoned
what I thought earlier as the two versions are, to some ex-
tent, not incompatible. It’s not clear whether the doorkeeper
sees clearly or is deceived. I said the man had been cheated.
If the doorkeeper understands clearly, then there could be
some doubt about it, but if the doorkeeper has been de-
ceived then the man is bound to believe the same thing.
That would mean the doorkeeper is not a cheat but so sim-
ple-minded that he ought to be dismissed from his job
immediately; if the doorkeeper is mistaken it will do him no
harm but the man will be harmed immensely.” “There
you’ve found another opinion,” said the priest, “as there are
many who say the story doesn’t give anyone the right to
judge the doorkeeper. However he might seem to us he is
still in the service of the law, so he belongs to the law, so he’s
beyond what man has a right to judge. In this case we can’t

The Trial