|
|
|
|
On K's Guilt and Kafka's Message
|
|
| | 2 | 11/10/2009 9:00 PM | Kafka invented the Construction Worker's Helmet His day job was an insurance adjuster. After a number of workplace incidents, he began requiring workers to wear a helmet when on site to protect them and thus not need constant medical attention. Thus the commonplace usage of the construction helmet can be traced to Kafka. That's what I learned on NPR today. I know that this has nothing to do with the trial, but I'm guessing there's no one on this board any way, so as long as Mr. Chiz sees this and enjoys it my goal will have been accomplished. | | | 9 | 10/15/2009 10:30 PM | Help! (about the ending) I'm very confused at the end of it all, maybe it is just me, but why was K. sentenced to death? was he even sentenced? did he even die? As I read the other form about the end I got more confused, But I came to the conclusion that maybe K really didn't die, and he just went insane. If you think I am wrong, please point out to me where in the book is mentions K was going to be sentenced to death, because I assume I looked over it | | | 9 | 10/14/2009 6:54 PM | THE END- Start Posts Here! Was anyone else shocked at the end? I was floored...and i feel that my comment made in class today, that Block is what K is to become..was hit right on the head. It does not suprise me that Fraulien Burstner/one of his many women, is there for his down fall. It shocks me the fact that we aren't sure if he is dead, or is he just damaged. | | | 7 | 10/13/2009 7:04 PM | K's relationship with Frau Grubach The more I think about the conversations that K has with Frau Grubach, the more I think there is much more than is said.
The entire time they are talking, Frau Grubach seems desperate not to upset K. K attributes this to her basically being in awe of him, but you can also look at it as a fear.
I think that Frau Grubach is simply frightened by K. She can tell that he isn't exactly the most put-together person, and is frightened by that. When they argue, she tries to make amends, possibly out of fear of him holding a grudge.
When K is talking to Burstner in her room, he says that Grubach "practically worships" him. I think this is, again, K deceiving himself. Grubach doesn't worship him, she instead is just doing her best to keep K satisfied with her boarding house. | | | 2 | 10/11/2009 2:15 PM | Is K. Schizophrenic? I argue that, yes, he is. My proof is:
patients suffering from paranoid-type symptoms – roughly one-third of people with schizophrenia – often have delusions of persecution, or false and irrational beliefs that they are being cheated, harassed, poisoned, or conspired against. These patients may believe that they, or a member of the family or someone close to them, are the focus of this persecution. In addition, delusions of grandeur, in which a person may believe he or she is a famous or important figure, may occur in schizophrenia.
Symptoms of Schizophrenia
We all know that K. believes he is being placed into some sort of trial where he is being tried for something that no one will tell him what he is being tried for. And so I ask you all, do you have any evidence supporting the counter argument for this argument? I know someone else in this class has a similar argument that I am making. | | | 1 | 10/11/2009 10:15 AM | The Students, The Flogger- Comments Friends, Romans, Countrymen, Classmates, and Mr. Chiz;
How things have changed!! Punishments, Craziness, and a few wise words fill the pages, and our discusions these days, but now....it's more answers and less of a mystery. who else was shocked that the court magistrate is the head of the bank K works at? Was his crime done during office hours, was it in the beginning of the book, when he had to refuse diner at the Managers home, that his crime became serious? How can all this absudity come from such a small and orderly place such as the bank?
I feel that the bank is the source of all his parnoia. Late nights alone in any place that is not a comfortable one, can cause you to worry about who or what is there, and what is going on. Seeing K in his work environment shows he actually has some strength, like the strength he showed during the initial inquiry. | | | 7 | 10/11/2009 8:56 AM | Leny I was highly confused when it came to Leny. At first I thought she was a little girl because she was described kind of child like and then she was with K and I was like "Oh, she's not a little girl"(I sincerely hope). But it was weird that she was the lawyers mistress which i kind of figuered out before the uncle said it but still kind of confused me. I also thought it was weird that she seemed so insecure and she was like "you don't like me" over and over. And then the weird space between her fingers. I just thought that she was toying with him the whole time. | | | 12 | 10/11/2009 8:46 AM | Who Is K.? Thinking about the book and everything that has happened in it.
K. not knowing why he was arrested and has to go to court for it. How he hasn't been told yet(from what I've read) from anyone why he was and the name of the book.. The Trial. I was just wondering what your thoughts on this would be.
Do you think that possibly K. being arrested and not knowing alot could be a test from the judges for him to really look and find out who he really is? And him not knowing what is going on with the court case is driving him to look deeper and see who he really is.
The trial to find out who K. really is.
Just a thought. I might be way off though. | | | 3 | 10/11/2009 7:40 AM | K. and Control The last few pages of The End brought me back to the whole en soi/pour soi idea. K is at one point directing his escorts on the walk to his end. At the quarry he considers seizing the knife and killing himself. I had a few thoughts about these moments, one being "is this K's attempt to take control? Or is he simply trying to convince himself that he is in fact in control, despite the obvious and not-so-obvious actions of the court." I could take this either way, but I wanted a second opinion. | | | 11 | 10/9/2009 11:08 PM | Why does K suffer? Please bear with me on this. I thiink K suffers simply because he an exestentialist. he has this idea that the world is absurd and thinks that he is rational. He suffers because he wants the world to make sense. So (bear with my logic) if K himself is rational, couldn't he take control of some or all aspects of his life and therefore make it rational? wouldn't he also have something he is connected to? I think because K is driven to want something in this world besides himself to make sense and to connect to the world, he has an obsession with control or seeming to be in control and an obsession to be with women...
I need your thoughts on this. I was so excited when this hit me i went and put this in pictograph..... | | | 0 | 10/6/2009 6:54 PM | Language- The Power Over Logic So ever sense we talked about language and its power over us, I've been thinking... "Why did we discuss this?" Now, as the paper starts to come to a close, I'm starting to get the sense that the reason Mr. Chiz decided to talk to us about this language subject is because Kafka's language is jumbled, in a sense. Afterall, it says in the translator's preface, "Malcolm Pasley has noted that as Kafka became more engrossed in the writing process his punctuation tended to loosen, periods turning into semicolons or commas, and commas themselves disappearing..."
I wish to better understand the question of, "What was the point of getting to know language so closely while reading a book in which language was so neglected?" But perhaps, the language wasn't neglected, and Kafka meant K. to experience the same awkwardness we acociate with that awkwardness while reading the book. Maybe he got awkward while writing the book? I'm not too sure on stating that last one... but I thought I'd try! | | | 0 | 10/6/2009 6:36 PM | In The Cathedral- The Priest and God Is it possible that the priest in In the Cathedral was not, as he says, "the prison chaplain," but instead, just a priest, or some other type of servant of God? I argue that K. was in a real chathedral, but when the priest was calling out to him, he really wasn't, and that K. came up to him and the priest thought he was a man in need and asked if K. needed help, specifically by saying,
"You stand accused," said the priest in a very low voice. "Yes," said K. "I've been notified about it." "Then you're the one I'm seeking," said the priest. "I'm the prison chaplain." "I see," said K. "I had you brought here," said the priest, "so I could speak with you."
This first statement, "'You stand accused,'" was, I argue, what the priest did say, and when K. says, "'I've been notified about it,'" the priest says, "'Then you're the one I'm seeking.'" Why would he be seeking K.? Sure, he could merely have been wishing to get power over K., but he's a priest in an early 1900/1910 setting in what we can only assume is somewhere in Europ. He'd have enough power from the Church. Why'd he need to get a hold over K.? He shows up in only one chapter, and then he never shows up for K.'s "trial/execution" which causes one to question if he really is affiliated with the court K. is involved with. This statement, "'Then you're the one I'm seeking,'" is a confusing one at best. In itself, it makes perfect sense, "'I have been looking for you, and now I've found you,'" but if he's with the court, which obviously has his job information as the inspector in Arrest tells K., "'No doubt you wish to go to the bank now?'" when he's telling K. to go to work like a good little beetle.
I argue that the priest was merely trying to help K., and K.'s subconscious picked up on this kindness and priestness his brain told him that the priest was telling K. advice about what was going on.
I also argue that when the priest said, "'I had you brought here,'" he could merely be explaining that he believed God sent K. to that chathedral specifically for that priest's help, and that the priest believed he was the entire reason why K. was at the chapel then, besides, of course, God's Will. Obviously I'm not saying that the entire experience was either true or delusion, but both in certain amounts.
| | | 2 | 10/5/2009 7:30 PM | K's Mother So the other day in class someone mentioned they thought maybe K's trial had something to do with his parents because they were never mentioned and his uncle had been his guardian, so we assumed his parnts were dead. Well, in one of the fragments at the back of the book, K leaves to visit his mother. He talks about how he sends money to his cousin for her and how she is going blind, and he seems to allude that she had or has some disease such as alztiemers(sp?). I think that maybe K never mentioned his mother because characters enter the book and then they are never mentioned again, and if they are mentioned, it is usually in passing. So this would have been the only place K would have mentioned his mother but he didn't because it was never completed. | | | 2 | 10/4/2009 6:47 PM | The Court and K.'s trial. Please note before you read this, I am not done with the book yet. So I don't know everything that is happening in the book.
From what I have read so far, I would have to say my reason for K's suffering is this, K was put on a trial and he is being tested through all of the women(who are with the court) that are supposedly all just attracted to him. K is suffering because he is not passing those tests. He falls for the women. and is distracted. therefore losing his trial.
One quote I think I might use is on page 109 when Uncle Karl and K meet after K had spent some time with Leni and Uncle Karl says, "My boy, how could you do it! You've damaged your case terribly, when it was starting out so well. You crawl of to hide with a dirty little creature who happens to be the lawyer's mistress, and stay away for hours."
Is this part good so far? Like I said I am not done reading the while book yet. Any comments or concerns with this idea? | | | 6 | 10/4/2009 6:14 PM | Back to why K. suffers So back to why K. suffers i feel like someone had a good point that K. doesnt really suffer. At first it seems his oblivian to the situation was killing him inside but as the story goes on his experience seems to almost become a little usual. Like as in his strange situation goes on so much its more of he needs to figure things out instead of shock and anger. Not to say at all he isnt completely flustered inside with all this madness. | | | 0 | 10/4/2009 9:45 AM | The Three Options When the painter laid out the three options for K, it seemed as if there was no hope for K. His options are Aquitall, which never happens, Apparent aquitall, which leaves the defendent worried for the rest of his life, and a protraction, which just freezes the trial so the defendant is never free. Then to adsd to that hopelessness, his only hope at attaining any of these is the painter. What would have happened to K if he hadn't met the painter? Why wasn't his lawyer trying to procure one of these options for K? It just seems like K meets people out of chance and they all just happen to be able to help him. I think this shows that it really is something moral that k thinks he did rather than an actual crime. | | | 2 | 10/4/2009 9:43 AM | K and Women- Discussions, Comments, and Questions I am very sketchy with K and women..he seems a gentleman at times, but behind his eyes are the animalistic ideas and thoughts he has. I think that it's turning from a tasteful book, into a gritty novel about the 1930's underground. It's not jazzy and glitzy, but it is very raw, shocking, and absurd. It defiles the ideas that most people probably have about the government.
It intrests me his quick obsession with women. K is like a child, not knowing what to do and not knowing how to solve his wants. It's almost comical, if it wasn't so twisted ad odd. All his relations are very carnal, and obsessive. | | | 9 | 10/4/2009 9:09 AM | K and His Attractions I want to know, what is K attracted to. He is interacting with all types of women and I can't help but wonder why. Most me like the same type of girl, that is why they date the same type all the time. With K he has variety, women falling at his feet....but Leni has me wondering (especially in the movie) are they faking? Are they just there to drive him wild--mentally, not sexually.
Sleeping Thinker | | | 12 | 10/4/2009 9:06 AM | Initial Inquiry This book just gets weirder and weirder. After re-reading the description of the building's location I still don't quit understand it. But one part does make me question K.'s innocence; "he had an aversion to even the slightest outside help in this affair of his; he didn't want to enlist anyone's aid..." Personally if I were in a situation weird and confusing as this one I would want all the help I could get. Unless I was guilty. Perhaps this aversion to help is his subconscious telling him he is guilty. But back to the building, maybe it is just proper of those times or in Germany, but why would an inquiry be held in such a shady building? Why is there a crowds of people "cheering" him on? This book just gets more and more confusing. | | | 1 | 10/4/2009 8:56 AM | Losing the Trial During "Lawyer, Manufacturer, Painter", three possible outcomes of the trial are outlined. All three of these are positive outcomes though, some are much more positive than others, but they basically boil down to being a successful outcome
These three are actually only half of the possibilities. K. could also lose the trial.
The more I think about it, the more inevitable I think this outcome is. The way K. tries hard to work on his trial, but doesn't really accomplish anything leads me to think he's just going to lose.
I have no idea what would happen then, maybe the book just ends. I just think that it seems to go with the flow of the story for all of K.'s work to go to nothing.
| | | 0 | 10/3/2009 10:08 PM | Why K. Suffers? I think k. suffers simply because he is trying to be something that he is not. Before this entire trial business he was your typical banker, who went to work and bars, and slept with his assumed girlfriend. But now he is trying to make everyone else see him as some powerful man with a higher position in society than he actually has, and who all the ladies can't get enough of. | | | 7 | 10/3/2009 6:15 PM | Does K. Suffer?... At all? We're gonna have to answer this at some point, so I feel we might as well talk about it.
Anyway, what are your opinions on it? I've been thinking a lot about what to write initially and quite frankly I can't figure anything out.
From my point of view especially, I feel like K. DOESN'T suffer. I feel like there isn't anything in the book that points to significant suffering. Rationally, one could say that he suffers because he is human, because the world is cruel, etc. But I feel like from the events in the book there is very little suffering, and--more than anything--chapters upon chapters of K.'s struggle against the court system, himself, and the ridiculous characters that come across him.
Do any of you know how to answer this question? Please feel free to contradict me, I'd love to hear a second opinion on the matter. | | | 11 | 10/3/2009 4:04 PM | Kafka. To go back to the previous discussion of Friday's class of "Why does K. suffer?". I think that why K. suffers is because Kafka suffered. It is sort of obvious that since Kafka has had paranoia, why shouldn't any of his characters that he created have it too? Shouldn't he be able to have all control over these imaginations of his?
Please enlighten me on what you think... | | | 0 | 10/3/2009 2:05 PM | The Merchant, a look into K.'s future? When i was reading about Block the merchant i really felt his story was very similar to K.'s. He's been trapped in the court system for 5 years now and he's just stuck in protraction. He says, "I tried it at first, but soon gave it up." and "Just sitting there and waiting is a major stain." I think Block is a look into K.'s future, he represents what will happen to K. if he stays stuck in the court system. | | | 2 | 10/2/2009 8:04 PM | The Trial: It's Meaning <Sleeping Thinkier Slight Epiphany> Could Kafka...Mr Franz Kafka have meant that not only is K being judged, but that he is really in a waiting period. Mr. Chiz brought up purgatory in class earlier this week...I THINK THAT THIS IS WHAT HE WAS SHOWING US!!! that K is waiting, waiting while the world as he knows it is crashing around him, and there is nothing that he can do to stop it..unless something..finally, K's only reactionary idea occurs.... | | | 2 | 10/2/2009 6:05 PM | Why Does k. suffer?
"Before the Law"
A man from the country seeks the law and wishes to gain entry to the law through a doorway. The doorkeeper tells the man that he cannot go through at the present time. The man asks if he can ever go through, and the doorkeeper says that is possible. The man waits by the door for years, bribing the doorkeeper with everything he has. The doorkeeper accepts the bribes, but tells the man that he accepts them "so you won't think you've neglected something." The man waits at the door until he is about to die. Right before his death, he asks the doorkeeper why even though everyone seeks the law, no one else has come in all the years. The doorkeeper answers "No one else could gain admittance here, because this entrance was meant solely for you. I am now going to shut it."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_the_Law
Now I know that i found that like on wikipediea, but i was reading the book, with increasing difficulty, so i decided to do some research. I thought that this was interesting because Mr.Chiz was tlaking to us about the law, and the Law. I read this and couldnt quite understand, so please, thoughts? | | | 7 | 10/1/2009 9:02 PM | Initial Inquiry I thought it was really wierd that the inquiry people didn't tell K. exactly where and when his inquiry was. Then I was kind of confused as to why his inquiry was in an over crowded room with everyone watching. And why was K. trying to get random people to cheer for his "speech"? That entire scene was kind of strange and I think K. might have some self-worth problems because he was trying to impress everyone including the little kids sitting on the stairs. | | | 3 | 10/1/2009 8:47 PM | K.: Pour Soi or En Soi? I just finished The Empty Courtroom and i was wondering if K. would be considered pour soi or en soi. There's a line in there that K. says to the woman working there, "Assuming the trial ever come to an actual conclusion, which i greatly doubt." Now at first glace that sounds like a very pour soi statement, he's acting like he doesn't really care, like this trial isn't really affecting his day-to-day life.
But we know very well that this trial means so much to K. He's ashamed, embarrassed and above all totally confused. I think he's trying very hard to come off as pour soi. And i think that need to seam like he's better than he really is is exactly what makes him en soi.
I believe K.'s whole nonchalant attitude is just a flimsy of a lie as his story about looking for a carpenter. | | | 3 | 9/30/2009 6:58 AM | a possible struggle for k.? I have already posted this theory as a reply but I feel like I should post it again. I believe that K. has control issues. One idea I have is that K. suffered a tragedy at a young age- perhaps losing his parents. I think this for a few reasons: the first is that the book mentioned that K.s' uncle was his guardian. Also, the book hasn't mentioned K.'s parents once, or at least in a significant way if I missed it. Obviously this theory could just be tossed off because not everyone keeps in touch with their parents after they leave home. But anyway I believe this event left K. feeling like he had no control over his life, so he threw himself into his work to feel some sense of control. This could explain why he lives by himself and is single: he doesn't have to deal with someone else and not being able to control it. This also could explain why K. is ignoring the lawyer's advice and deciding to try to fight the courts. This could also explain K.'s strange behavior towards women: he is fascinated with them being fascinated in him. I think in K.s mind he is respected high at the bank, but this is merely an illusion as K. isn't very close with his colleagues, they don't respect him as a person. On page 126 it mentions how the vice president wanted to share a joke with him and he just rudely bent over and took the pencil out of his hand. It's not like they're close enough to be friends where that would be okay, so it must mean K. isn't as respected as he thinks. I think K. sees this trial as just another thing he wants to control.
Now I have a lot left of the book to read so forgive me if I am missing things or if things are explained later on in the chapter. If there are other ways to add to or disprove this theory I would really appreciate it! I don't want to keep thinking this is a good theory if well..it isn't. | | | 7 | 9/27/2009 1:59 PM | K. and Mercy I found the Flogger to be an extremely detached chapter. Prior to reading it my impression of the book itself was somewhat confusing, and I'd already reached the conclusion that it was going to be labyrinth of a read. But this chapter stands out (atleast to me) because of the introduction of mercy.
In the first chapter, K. shows his blatant disgust of the guards actions and thier apparent blindness to logic and reason. I never could have predicted K.'s reaction to the flogger and his victims, considering his past attitude towards the guards.
I can't quite see a connection there, but maybe my understanding of this chapter is misguided, but who knows? | | | 3 | 9/26/2009 10:13 PM | Kafka's Influences I don't know how many of you have seen the movie The Truman Show, but as i read the book, i keep coming back to it. In the movie, Jim Carrey's character is born into a TV show. He spends his life unknowingly living a lie that the directors of the show have created. Everyone he knows is an actor assigned a role. Quite absurd. As the movie progresses, he becomes more and more suspicious of his everyday life.
The reality show "Joe Schmo" is another example if you've heard of it.
I can't help but relate this to The Trial. It seems as if K. is part of a gigantic scheme and is the only one oblivious to the whole thing. Kafka must've felt this way in some aspect. Like the whole world is enacting one big joke at your expense. An excellent cause of severe paranoia. | | | 0 | 9/26/2009 9:00 AM | The Trial Metaphorically *Potential spoilers?* I believe at this point we've come to recognize that the Trial is first and foremost a metaphor and not truly meant to be taken as literal plot, based on the pure absurdity of the court system and the events that follow K. At this point I'd like the take the time to look at some symbols to see how they relate to the overall metaphor. I'm basing this post on the assumption that the chief metaphor is that the trial is really an emotional and mental experience, and K struggling with his own morality.
The Lawyer: Lawyers are meant to be very logical and rational people, as is necessitated by their work. Yet in The Trial, it would appear that all the Lawyer's are really rather silly people and the rationality of their careers is really stripped away. This could be an extension of the overall metaphor in that logic and rationality are not necessarily the focus of a moral dilemma. By this I mean mostly that moral issues are generally speaking not completely rational. K may subconsciously realize this as he contemplates dismissing the lawyer, and I don't think I'm giving anything away by saying that he eventually does (based on the chapter "Dismissal of the Lawyer).
The Painter: Painters are really a foil to Lawyers. Where Lawyers rely on rationality, painters and artists rely on creativity. In our society, morality is really just a fabrication of our minds which we put in place to protect ourselves from each other. So in order to engage in morality, it makes more sense to have a greater sense of creativity. K again may subconsciously have realized this need, in that he accepts the painter's help almost immediately, while still being skeptical of the actual help his Lawyer (and rationality) can provide. | | | 2 | 9/20/2009 11:19 AM | Questions & Comments- Initial Inquiry Clasmates, Romans, Atlantians, and Herr Chisnell;
Why is K's case being handled with such haste? Who else is involved that has the power and the means to quicken his "trial"?
Why does K not just ask where is inquiry room is? Why are children all around in the place so strange to him? I wonder what the children represent? Possibly a comparison of the innocence reflecting on K's guilt?
This, I can actually slightly understand, because I would not want everyone to know that I was headed to court.
I think his affair has somthing to do with his lady of the evening friend and how he took his three work associates to see her..fir what..am not to sure, but I think this one goes without saying...
In the Inquiry, K has been wronged, been getting washed by the system of then, for a crime he may only be an accesory to, but, I will definetly re-read the section with fresher eyes tomorrow, and add along..
Sleeping Thinker | | | 5 | 9/19/2009 10:33 PM | Questions and Speculations- Conversations and B's Friend Classmates, Romans, Atlantians and Mr. Chisnell,
Why did Frau Grubach not accomdate her nephew faster? Yes, I know that the book stated that there weren't any avaliable rooms, but if he is family, he could have easily and comfortably stayed in the Frau's suite, as it is larger than the rest of her boarders rooms. Instead, he had to rest in the living room, a room adjacent to K's room, and with the thin walls, easily able to spy on him. May be I am not up to date with 1930's ettiqute, or maybe I am now starting to understand K's parinoia.
Next, Do K and the Frau have more than a boarder/owner relationship? Is the Frau a lonley older woman, and K is her friend? Are they intimate is a sense (not sexually)?
Last, What all does Fraulien Burstner know of K's crime, and is she involved? | | | 0 | 9/19/2009 9:26 PM | Kafka So I was just searching on the internet and I found a website that might interest some people. If you want to know a little more about Franz Kafka and where he came from, this website has a biography of Kafka. On the side of the page there is also a link to find more of the writings that he wrote.
Go ahead and check it out if you want.
| | | 4 | 9/18/2009 4:19 PM | Surreal Now that I've re-read the initial inquiry the setting makes a little more sense. There are so many descriptions and situations that make me wonder: If I was in K.'s situation I would be questioning everything. K. just continues on in this strange situation and doesn't find any of this a bit off? and If he did in fact, Kafka doesn't do a very good job of expressing it in the book. Maybe it's just the time or the way Germany does it, but the inquiry seems so shady and less than legitamit. This leads me to believe even more that none of this is real. The part where K. finds the guards from the arrest hiding in a storage closet seems very dream like. | | | 4 | 9/17/2009 7:40 PM | Strange Relationships Was anybody else thrown back by the second chapter of the book?
The thing that struck me the oddest was the ludicrous scene between K. and Burstner, which although amusing, left me uneasy. The scene confused me not only in the relationship between the two, but also had me wondering what the lesson, theme, or point of the chapter was for. I kept thinking; what is Kafka trying to tell us? What is this REALLY about?
First of all, why was K. so intent on visiting his neighbor? He had never had much of an interest in her before, yet suddenly after some time he decides that he MUST see the woman, and waits until ungodly hours of the night to meet her. Which makes some sense, but only in the matters of love, passion, friendship... I don't know too many people that would wait for their stranger-neighbor until early in the morning to apologize. This sounds like the behavior of a love-struck idiot, or a Scary Movie killer. So is Kafka trying to tell us that he loves her, or that he's the creepy guy that waits for his victims outside their doors?
Already weird, the scene turns crazy when she finally comes home and he spends a half hour telling her the story, for whatever reason despite the fact that she's already accepted his apology and, quite really, simply dismissed it without much care. Is he trying to show off? Is he trying to buy more time so that he can continue playing the part of the crazed killer? Or is he simply trying to unbottle his emotions about the whole situation?
Then came the 'love' scene. When he seizes Burtsner and kisses her like a 'wild animal'. Was this to show the humanity behind K., that despite his belief of laws and authority and businesslike transactions (This is simply how I feel he thinks, due to the pervious chapter in which he kept speaking of the law and 'proper' behavior) he was unable to resist the lusts within him? Or once again... Is this some kind of insight on the situation at hand? Did he viciously molest another one of his patrons? Is his inability to control his actions what initially got him in this mess? After all, at the end of the chapter he stated that he was 'pleased' with his actions, and did not find the least bit of wrong in them.
Maybe I'm thinking too much into it. =.=
ANYWAY.
What do you guys think?
(congratulations to anyone who read all that)
| | | 1 | 9/16/2009 8:27 PM | The Women of K. I know it's probably one of the last things I should be worrying about, but for some reason I can't get myself to stop twisting my mind around these women.
First off, I believe the whole book is a giant metaphor, I've said this around a million times on this forum, but I feel like everything that happens in this book was specifically chosen by Kafka to help explain, or depict Existentialism.
So, with that being said, the question now becomes; What about existentialism relates to the way K. treats women? Or even more so, why are there so many 'sexually-charged' scenes in a book that's supposedly about a Trial and the arrest of a man?
At first I thought Burstner was just some crazy coincidence, a one time deal and I figured their relationship would continue as such throughout the book. But now, in the "Empty Courtroom" chapter, there are more scenes between K. and a woman that make even less sense.
There's a discussion of her cheating on her husband with a younger man, the constant holding of their hands, her need to make him stay despite first asking him to leave, his ability to convince her to let him stay and help him despite any disadvantages that might be put upon her, and then, let's not forget, the weird picture he finds inside the 'law' books.
Once again; What is Kafka trying to say through all of this? How does this relate to anything? |
|
|
|
|
|
|