Category: Kafka

The concept of ‘identity’ is defined as who a person is, or the qualities of a person or group that make them different from others . Throughout his 1915 novella The Metamorphosis , relationship between the identity and the motivations of Kafka’s characters plays a major role in the narrative. The Samsa family’s attitudes towards work are arguably linked to Marxist ideology, as previous breadwinner Gregor is first characterised by his slavish devotion to his work, and then lack of humanity in his insect form when he loses the ability to do said work. The family are structured similarly, with the parents and younger sister Grete acting as a single unit in their exploitation of Gregor until he becomes no longer useful, akin to how a capitalist employer would exploit their worker for labour. Gender identity also plays an important role, as it dictates the approval characters are given for their behaviour and interests. Gregor’s confinement and switch from the masculine role of salesmen to traditionally feminine interests such as his sister’s music and the décor of the room parallel his downfall in power to his previously weakened father who regains his role as patriarch.

Fundamentally, Gregor is positioned as the working-class man exploited by a capitalist system. He is, as commented by critic Ossewaarde, an organization man (Ossewaarde 4) who expresses discontent when describing his job as ‘strenuous’ and ‘stresses’ almost constantly when he is first unable to make it on time to his job (Kafka 460). However, he still has ‘nothing but his work’ (Kafka 466) and is inherently too powerless in the social hierarchy to express these complaints outside his inner monologues in fear of being fired. The employers themselves are characterised by Kafka as upper-class exploiters described by Gregor continually ‘talk down’ to their employees (Kafka 460). They engage in an almost parasitic relationship preventing him from living a fulfilling creative existence, whilst simultaneously increasing their wealth through his labour. He expresses wishing to confront them ‘from the bottom of his heart’ but is unconsciously trapped by the debt of his parents for ‘five or six years’ at least (Kafka 460). Ironically though, he does seem to be somewhat aware of this restrictive cycle he is stuck in, describing his co-worker as the ‘bosses’ creature; spineless and stupid’ (Kafka 461). In reality though, it is he who lacks the capability to escape the ‘exhaustive obligations to his superiors’ (1004 Ossewaarde) both mentally prior to the transformation and physical afterwards when he becomes without intelligence and literally without a spine as an invertebrate creature.

The titular metamorphosis itself could in fact be seen as a liberating point for Gregor. His power to produce that dictates his humanity are so diminished that he is removed from the pressure to keep up in the ‘rat race of a capitalist society’ as described by Duttlinger (36), this arguably allowing him to pursue the culturally meaningful existence he previously desired free from the exploitations of the outside world (Ossewaarde 1008). His freedom comes at a price for the rest of the Samsa family however, as they must now enter the same cycle of class subjugation to make up for the loss of Gregor; the need for a sustainable income is never-ending. A new hierarchy of the household must be established, with Gregor’s father taking the role of bank messenger so passionately that he sleeps in his uniform – even in his private sphere he is ‘waiting for his boss’s voice (Kafka 495). This association between uniform and power is a reoccurring theme throughout the novella, with Gregor’s uniformed photograph described as ‘commanded respect’ (Kafka 471). Kafka’ inclusion of this photograph serves as both a tragically ironic reminder of Gregor’s previous strength and confidence as well as highlighting his father’s own rapid transformation into a man possessing these qualities. The female characters of Metamorphosis are likewise forced to fill the space left by Gregor, although in more domestic forms. Despite the inherently gendered and limited nature of the working sphere towards women, the uptake of these roles allows them to gain greater authority in the narrative, especially towards the treatment of Gregor. Grete arguably emulates the previous role of Gregor the most as she ‘takes on the role shop assistant’ (Kafka 494) but rather than becoming ‘dictated by bureaucratic procedures and timetables’ (Ossewaarde 1008) as her brother, she ‘[blossoms]’ when given new responsibility (Kafka 511). Together the remaining family are a unit against the threat of bankruptcy and social ruin caused by Gregor’s transformation.

Leading on from this, it could be said that Kafka identifies the Samsa family as a working Marxist system in themselves. The influence on Gregor from his parents appears as inherently manipulative and parasitic as his employers even before his transformation where he ironically becomes a literal parasite. They had ‘simply gotten used’ (Kafka 482) to the income he provided, leading to a one side relationship where Gregor felt his ‘sole concern’ (Kafka 481) was to devote himself to his family– and similarly to his relationship with work he, ‘provided gladly’ both his income and the time he would use for developing a life in the outside world. Gregor’s personal sphere is heavily impacted by this, as he ‘holds back for his parent’s sake’ (Kafka 460), has romance as only ‘a fleeting memory’ (Kafka 497) and in general is implied to have felt isolated even before his transformation. The treatment of Gregor by his parents and sister as a response to this support is suggested by Kafka to be similarly insincere, as although his response to their poor treatment is usually ‘gentle and forgiving, his behaviour timid and submissive’ (Duttlinger 40) the ‘special warmth’ he expect as thanks for his intensity at work was never received (Kafka 482).

The metamorphosis itself acts as somewhat a turning point for this passive nature. In his insect form Gregor is liberated to act on his own primal and often selfish desires whilst the family are forced into their working roles to support something incapable of giving thanks. However, in contrast to Gregor’s previous subservience, they react with neglect and eventually violence towards him alluding once again to the exploitive power to harm superiors have over their workers, as condemned by Marxist theory. His father in particular is the least tolerant of his son’s new form and regularly misinterprets Gregor’s behaviours as violent (Kafka 483). This is somewhat ironic as previously he himself had allowed Gregor to misunderstand and distort the family’s debt in his mind leading to his downfall as a faceless member of the capitalist rat race. The family appear to place money above all else in their social hierarchy, with the three lodgers becoming of importance just by providing them with a steady income. Gregor is once again relegated to the bottom as the lodger’s presence is given favour when it threatens his safety – even his death is a humiliation also as the maid, (another person at the bottom of the social hierarchy), is the one to find him and dispose of his body. Arguably, the Samsas are portrayed more negatively by Kafka than the actual ‘monster’ Gregor.

In terms of gender identity, Kafka’s female characters are primarily shown through the masculine lens of Gregor’s narration, this often leading to incorrect assumptions about the meaning of their behaviour. Gregor’s mother is characterised as tragically humorous, as she is described ‘collapsing amid her spreading petticoats’ (Kafka 471) and continually fainting in her grief and confusion over the whole situation. Female characters are also included indirectly by Kafka through Gregor’s photograph, who often has a larger role as an inanimate object than the actual women of Metamorphosis. She represents female sexuality in a 19th century context – existing passively for men to find attractive in her ‘handsome gilt frame’ (Kafka 459). Gregor’s apparent sexual repression is also channelled through her, as the description of her figure as ‘upright’ and ‘swathed in fur’ (Kafka 491) is considerably more erotic than his brief encounters he has with real women.

The character of Grete similarly to her mother is often reduced to a purely impulsive character despite the ‘hard-won self-confidence’ she has gained. Her position as ‘expert’ towards Gregor and the attention she initially gives towards his wellbeing are dismissed as ‘childish defiance (Kafka 488)’. However, she is able to somewhat gain maturity and independence – this is suggested to have occurred due to the absence of Gregor who often expresses his affection for her, but also a stifling influence over her behaviour. As an insect, he often exaggerates her care, describing how she left him ‘to make him more comfortable’ and cared for him, despite this obviously being due to her own discomfort towards him. He planned to send her to a music school although she herself expresses little interest in music herself and her playing is described as neither ‘beautiful’ or ‘entertaining’ Arguably, Gregor’s interest goes beyond familial affection to a bizarrely erotic level as he expresses wanting to ‘kiss her throat’ at the sound of the violin, with Grete’s freedom suffering greatly from this (Kafka 502).. Even at the end of the novella her maturity and confidence in dealing with the whole Gregor situation is only rewarded by her parents choosing it ‘time to seek out a good husband’ for her – a new wave of male control is seen as an achievement for her independence (Kafka 511). Ironically, the character of Gregor becomes also restricted by patriarchal society– as he loses his humanity, he loses the power associated that was associated with his masculinity. This allows him to focus on creative interest stereotypically associated with women such as music and contemplating the love he has for his family. However, although he appears to be liberated from the stress of earning a living, Gregor is now socially and physically isolated. He becomes isolated to his room in a way comparable to historical treatment of women, as those deemed as hysterical or differing from social norms were often confined in the same fashion. The figure of the painted owned is suggested to even have dominance over him, with her erect posture while his own body deteriorates alone in his room. The theme of femininity is often a prison for the women of the Samsa family more so than Gregor’s transformation.

Masculinity and the pressure on the Samsa men to conform to it is often a cause for struggle in the narrative. Critic Sokel suggest that to ‘Gregor’s relationship to his father thus represents an exact paradigm of the worker’s exploitation by his capitalist employer, as described by Marx’. In turn, when he can no longer produce Gregor is treated as less than human by his father. The power struggle between father and son begins even before the metamorphosis, as Gregor’s promotion to salesmen gives him power over the family to displace him as patriarch. Gregor’s transformation exaggerates this, as the two are unable to co-exist with each other and all interactions end in violence. Physical form is shown to be of importance by Kafka as Gregor’s form after the transformation is diminutive, described as ‘pitifully thin’ and his behaviour as ‘quiet’ – his appearance now matches his defeated attitude (Kafka 459). The contrast between the ‘exhausted’ father under Gregor’s care, and the ‘huge’ man who asserts his dominance with ‘utmost severity’ over insect Gregor is evident (Kafka 492). This not only highlights the roles reversal that has taken place but how Gregor underestimated his father previously as he now dominates physically at the same rate Gregor’s insect body deteriorates ‘like an ancient invalid’ (Kafka 494). Masculinity is suggested to be earned through work and supporting the family, with failings to do so going against social norms and pushing the man further down the social hierarchy. Gregor only becomes distressed over his transformation when ‘his consciousness of work and organization is gendered once he realizes that he no longer has the body to work’ as stated by Ossewaarde (1008). When he becomes further distanced from his masculinity, he becomes more concerned about abstract animal concepts such as crawling on the walls and therefore begins to lose his humanity. Gregor’s lack of masculinity is finally restored as he chooses, in a dominant move, to die with Grete finally referring to him as a ‘he’ rather than an inanimate ‘it’ (Kafka 508). In relation to the Samsa women, masculinity is used to control and characterise them as inferior. Gregor’s mother is condemned as ‘not understanding’ the majority of the situation (Kafka 482) while Grete is congratulated for no longer being a ‘rather useless girl’ (Kafka 485). As a collective, the two are dismissed as weak by Gregor and told ‘you women don’t want to listen’ by his father (Kafka 491). They are even restricted from understanding the outside world as the newspaper is read to them by Gregor’s father. In the family’s reaction to Gregor’s behaviour, direct, masculine aggression usually overpowers the women’s concern for his wellbeing.

Overall, Kafka writes the Samsa family as primarily controlled by their respective identities in public and in private. Capitalist systems of work as described by Marx theory allow for exploitation of the men’s pressure to earn a living, whilst women are restricted to domestic roles of work only, this barring them from gaining power and social status outside the house. The family aims to conform to these norms of gender and capitalist behaviour but are ultimately prevented from doing so by the metamorphosis. The roles of man and woman, young and old are totally subverted by Gregor’s metamorphosis, allowing for freedom in Gregor’s interests and the liberation of Grete. This freedom however is always one sided however, with their parents forced into the roles left by Gregor against their will. Ultimately, Gregor’s death is the only way of restoring peace to the household, as the abnormality that drives them to violence and mistreatment dies with him also.

The story of The Metamorphosis is easily told. It is the story of a travelling salesman by the name Gregor Samsa who wakes up one morning transformed into a hideous and monstrous vermin; he of course retains the human faculties of thinking and feeling, he is held prisoner and hidden by his family in his room. Finally he slowly goes to his ruin and annihilation. From this bare and sketchy outline it is clear that like almost all other works of Kafka The Metamorphosis also has to be read not as an instance of realistic writing but as an allegorical piece. The story depicts a situation which should be seen as a poetic image which has an emotive appeal and immense interpretative possibilities.This Study attempts to examine Kafka’s work from philosophical and psychological perspectives. Specifically the works will be seen as Existential and psychological allegories.

The first sign of alienation which happens to gregor is his reaction to his physical change. Gregor Samsa feels that he has been treated as a lowly insect and comes to feel that he is one: the story makes the leap from “I feel like an insect” to “I am an insect.” [1] Whatever the causes, Gregor’s feeling is rooted in the collapse of his nature between impersonal self (outside) and I (inner self). This collapse can be accepted in the realm of dream. For Gregor Samsa does not at all desire such a transformation into an animal. On the contrary it happens to him suddenly – a frighteningly incomprehensible and strange occurrence.

Gregoe is far from identifying his ego with a beetle. It is true that he too, precisely, is in a state of unresolved conflict between work and ego. Gregor vacillates between two spheres. On the one hand, he is ruled by the rational, plan-making considerations related to his work: he wants to get up and carry on his business trip. “Just don’t stay in bed being useless,” Gregor said to himself. On the other hand, however, he curses his work, “the upset of doing business,” [1] the ‘torture of traveling,’ and he ponders, “How about going back to sleep for a few minutes and forgetting all this nonsense.” This “nonsense” refers to his metamorphosis into the beetle that inwardly he in no way accepts, but actually wants “to forget” in his sleep.

Gregor can look upon the dream metamorphosis only as a negative phenomenon that disturbs his daily work routine. The beetle acquires frightful characteristics; it becomes a “monstrous vermin” that is of no help to him but merely hampers him. When Gregor Samsa wakes up one morning from unsettling dream, he finds himself changed in his bed into a monstrous vermin … “what happened to me?” he thinks it was no dream. Gregor, thus, is in a waking state. The transformation that had taken place in his dream — characteristically in “unsettling” dream — suddenly overtakes Gregor upon his waking, as an incomprehensible occurrence that has “happened to him,” something that he accordingly, did not want, let alone, long to happen. He shakes it off as “nonsense” and reflects for a long time and in detail upon his strenuous career, upon his relationship to the head of his firm and he considers whether “he can now still catch the seven o’clock train. [1]

It does not enter his mind at all that he could perhaps be hindered in his business trip by his transformation. At the outset this consideration is beyond the scope of his imagination. For him the metamorphosis is non-existent. He remains rooted in the realm of the impersonal ‘one’. The “self” is a burdensome verminous bug, a monstrous creature of a nightmare that can not be real. In conflict with his job, he feels the estrangement, the missing “intimate” associations with people. What is more, he ponders on the idea that he would like most of all to “have quit long age.” Only his concern for his parents, who have to pay back a large debt they owe the head of his firm, has prevented him until now from having marched up to the boss and in Gregor’s own words,

spoken my piece from the bottom of my heart! He would have fallen off the desk!… Well, I haven’t given up hope completely; once I’ve got the money together to pay off my parent’s debt to him- that will, probably take another five or six years – I’m going to do it without fail. Then I’m going to make the big break. But for the time being I’d better get up, since my train leaves at five. [1]

There can be no doubt that this conflict, between his occupation and his desire to make the final break and become self-reliant and independent, was the cause of his “unsettling dreams.” Since the pressure of the moral obligation of his occupation prevails in this conflict, and since the fulfillment of his desire to become a self of his own is put off for five to six years, this desire must of necessity be felt as disturbing and as running counter to his work. The possibilities that offer themselves in the “dream” are simply to have the “self” remain in bed and freely and independently direct all the goings-on outside in the world, without being pounded to bits in the hustle and bustle of business which Gregor cannot accept. And the meaning of this terrible “metamorphosis” rests in the very fact that this “irremovable” self, the self that is “not to be got rid of,” this reality of the ego that struggles against the impersonal “one”, suddenly invades Gregor’s concrete daily reality, too, in a shocking manner. The seemingly fantastic unreality of this “vermin” is actually the supreme reality from which no one can escape.

What is new in Kafka’s creative writing and view of the problem is his realization that the ‘Law’ of man’s alienation remains hidden from modern man. Man has become the slave of the unknown law of the impersonal ‘one’ to such an extent that he does not know about his own self or his inner life any longer at all, he represses it and cloaks it again and again by means of calculations. Gregor, it is true, feels extremely uncomfortable in his business life, he senses the conflict through and through, but he believes, in turn, that he can get the better of it by means of mere calculations of a business nature. He calculates that when he has saved the amount of money he needs for his parents, he can then at last make the ‘final break’ and take the leap, and get away from his business firm. But he has no idea at all of where he will actually leap, of what potential forms of existence he would like to actualize. His own inner being remains alien to him. It is for this reason, therefore, that Kafka gives it a form that is quite alien to him, the form of a verminous creature that threatens his rational existence in an incomprehensible manner.

The most gruesome aspect of Gregor’s fate is not his metamorphosis. But the blindness with which everybody treats this transformation. Gregor will not admit it. “I’ll get dressed right away; pack up my samples, and go.” [1] His parents and his sister do not understand it. The self is what is absolutely alien, void and non-existent, not only in the world of business but also in the world of the family. To be sure, his mother and sister love him dearly. In a touching manner they try at first to improve his condition, to surmount their feelings at the sight of this vermin, to take care of him, to protect him, to see to the comforts of life for him, to preserve or once again evoke what for them was human and lovable in him. But the terrible truth of this short story is the realization that even the “most beautiful”, most tender relations among people are founded on illusions. No one knows or suspects what he himself “is” and what the other person “is”. Gregor Samsa’s parents, for instance, never had any inkling of this conflict, of the ‘sacrifice’ that he was making for their sake; “His parents did not understand this too well; in the course of the years they had formed the conviction that Gregor was set for life in this firm.” They had never dreamt that there was trouble brewing within Gregor, that something had been ‘out of order’ long before the eruption of this inner sickness in the form of the metamorphosis. They did not know that the essential in man can actually be concealed, distorted and destroyed if he is provided with no more than the ‘necessaries of life.’ Now that the distortion assumes visible features, they are at a loss and feel their son to be a ‘foreign body.’

By the same token, however, Gregor had also been mistaken in his relations with his family. “What a quiet life the family had been leading;” Gregor said to himself. He believed he had to provide his family with a pleasant, contented, secure life by sacrificing himself, by selling himself to his business. Through his ‘sacrifice’ Gregor had distorted his own self. But his sacrifice was meaningless. In reality Gregor’s parents did not need the sacrifice at all. His father possessed more money than Gregor knew about. According to this interpretation, despite the negative meaning of sacrifice, it has a positive meaning too. When the beetle Gregor hears his sister playing the violin, there is this decisive statement. “Was he an animal, that music could move him so? He felt as if the way to the unknown nourishment he longed for were coming to light.” [1] Here the meaning of this transformation into an animal first becomes clear. The matter at issue is the “unknown nourishment” that does not exist on earth. As an animal he is at the same time more than an animal. His alienation had the purpose of awakening in him the ‘longing’ for this ‘nourishment.’ The final intent of Gregor’s metamorphosis into a beetle is the escape into freedom, that longing for man’s ‘unknown nourishment.’ However, as his longing for music and for the unknown nourishment has already shown, Gregor finally does nevertheless free himself from his enslavement to the empirical world. His death is not merely a meaningless annihilation, but a liberation or realization. Gregor says, ‘yes,’ to his own death. He dies reconciled with himself and with the world.

He thought back on his family with deep emotion and love. His conviction that he would have to disappear was, if possible, even firmer than his sister’s. He remained in this state of empty and peaceful reflection until the tower clock struck three in the morning. He still saw that outside the window everything was beginning to grow light. [1].

It is no longer possible to understand this ‘self’ psychologically, as a determinable psychic state that can be explained in terms of the realm of feelings, wishes, hopes, dreams, striving, etc. Somewhat in the sense, perhaps, that in conflict with his business occupation there arises a series of ‘inner’ emotions, ideals, and goals which now represent, as it were, Gregor’s actual self which until now had been suppressed. Since Gregor has nothing but revulsion for the beetle such a sympathetic view of the metamorphosis is out of question. Besides, in that case, it would be altogether impossible to understand how such an inner life could assume, of all forms, the form of disgusting verminous insect. Even in the view developed by us, it is a matter of perversion of the self, since this self is suppressed or opposed by Gregor and must assume negative characteristics; therefore such a positive/sympathetic psychological interpretation is not possible. But the story makes neither a positive nor a negative statement about the transformation.

The metamorphosis is not of spirit, mind, or character. And this is precisely Kafka’s contribution to the literature dealing with the dichotomy of man’s heart and mind. Psychological interpretations of the story have to take this into account. The beetle remains something “alien” that can not be made to fit into the human world. It is “The Other”, “The Incomprehensible”, pure and simple, beyond the reach of any feeling or imagining. That is why Kafka instructed his publisher to ensure that the illustrator did not draw any specific insect on the cover page for the vermin of Gregor is something that can not be drawn. It is not only from the view point of the pictorial art that the insect can not be drawn but also from the view point of imitative art. It is only then that the beetle image contains truth. In this sense truth and the self are identical. The “self” is inexplicable, pure and simple. The beetle embodies the world beyond our conscious as well as our unconscious imagination. The animal, although

it is nothing but man ‘himself,’ is the absolute disaffirmation of the so-called ‘human world.’ The cleavage between the world in which Samsa lives and Samsa’s beetlehood is the cleavage between ‘imagining’ and ‘being.’ Since for Kafka the world beyond ‘imagining’ is in man himself, since there is no ‘beyond’ exterior to man, the ‘image’ the ‘parable’ of this beyond is necessarily an earthly image that is unearthly and that at the same time cannot be ‘drawn.’

The paradox of these circumstances is the reason why Kafka represents such beyond in the form of things or animals that incomprehensibly break into everyday existence, causing bewilderment and fright. It is interesting to note the difference in the use of the beetle image with reference to Raban and Samsa. If the self is represented as the beetle, Raban saw the world from the vantage point of a tranquil self.

To him the world naturally appears intolerable and disgusting. Samsa on the other hand wishes to remain in the world. For him therefore the tranquil self must appear as a terrible monster. That is why what for Raban is a beetle is for Samsa a monstrous vermin. Both the views can be defended as long as one remembers that for Kafka both together constitute human life. Kafka criticizes and affirms both. It would be wrong to interpret Kafka only through Raban’s or Samsa’s viewpoints. Both cross one another just as the names of both Raban and Samsa are cover names for Kafka himself. [4] Only when both the images of the beetle are taken into account will the full import of Kafka’s meaning become apparent.

The Metamorphosis is a good example for portraying the riskiest moment (awakening). Kafka said thatman is confronted by a world of impossible dimensions and he cannot but despair of comprehending its overwhelming and mysterious forces in the best form of surrealism. All he can do is to test his own capacity for understanding the real self (unconscious). Each fateful confrontation of the antagonist, self (unconscious being ) and world (ontology = the world of beings), brings with it hosts of mutually exclusive, indeed, paradoxical relations, riddles which seem to clarify but which eventually confound even further man’s impossible task of penetrating the puzzling relations of his world. These “riddles” are philosophical and theological, psychological and social; they extend to all spheres of human existence involved in man’s search.

Thus, with the loss of his world and of his position as bread-winner, which he unconsciously rejects in the course of the metamorphosis, Gregor loses the foundation on which his existence has been built up. The realization of this loss of foundation brings, with it both a deep feeling of anxiety and a bad conscience: the being that has lost 1606 Kohzadi et al., 2012 its foundation sees itself as “vermin”; the terrifying outward appearance is in itself the result of an unconscious selfpunishment. In fact, Gregor-inside-the vermin dreads the anxiety and the bad conscience to the point that he eventually desires his own death. However, since Gregor is now the materialization of his unconscious or pure self, banishing the creature amounts to killing Gregor altogether, that is, a complete and sustainable manner of being necessitates the harmonious coexistence of the Ego and the Other and the suppression of either of the poles can only result in un-being. So in his death he is both extinguished and set free and it is parallel with the family’s liberation.

The father’s assumption of authority by becoming a uniformed bank-messenger is the most obvious illustration and Grete’s yawn of freedom neatly ties the story to the transformation of the beginning. Yet this very conclusion has pushed us to the point of absurdity – reached by the simultaneous creation and dislocation of a particular world in which contradictory solutions, like constriction and freedom, obliteration and awareness of existence, equally apply.

Writers often intertwine their personal life experiences and emotions into their texts because it is with what they are most friendly. A writer who connects to their narrative carries more meaning in their text and develops a connection with their audience. Franz Kafka’s 1915 novella, ‘The Metamorphosis’ tells the tale of Gregor Samsa, a traveling salesman who woke up restless one morning to discover he had transformed into a ‘gigantic insect.’ Aside from being simply a fascinating plot, Kafka’s work also carries direct biographical references to Kafka’s own life. Franz Kafka, a Czech-born German novelist was largely regarded as one of the most pivotal figures of 20th century literature. His writings commonly explore the recurring themes of alienation, existential guilt, and absurdity. Universally known term ‘Kafkaesque’, has been used to describe such situations found in his writings. Franz Kafka utilises elements in ‘The Metamorphosis’ to form a literary model of the complicated relationship with his father, seclusion from society and illness.

Franz Kafka’s father, Hermann Kafka, was a notorious tyrant. Kafka’s relationship with his father is portrayed in some of his books as a hopeless conflict against an immense authority: for example, in ‘The Judgement’, ‘The Sons’ and most famously, in ‘The Metamorphosis.’ Kafka often discusses the belief that his father had destroyed his will, and made him feel permanently powerless. In Kafka’s 1919 autobiographical work ‘Brief an der Vater,’ (‘Letter to the Father’) Kafka bemoans his father’s attitude towards his academic endeavours; ‘What I would have needed was a little encouragement, a little friendliness, a little keeping open of my road, instead of which you blocked it for me, though of course with the good intention of making me go another road. But I was not fit for that… At that time, and at that time in every way, I would have needed encouragement.’ John Bonina’s analysis of Franz Kafka and Gregor Samsa discusses the similarities between Mr Samsa and Hermann Kafka; Like Mr. Samsa earlier, Kafka’s father was a business owner. Similar to Mr. Samsa, he was also controlling and repressive of his son. Hermann Kafka pressured Franz Kafka to study law, and Kafka received his doctorate in this field in 1906. After graduation, he worked as a legal clerk, but discovered this job to be unfulfilling and quit soon after. He then began to work as a traveling salesman for an insurance company, against his father’s expectations. Although this contrasts to Samsa’s father’s opinion regarding his son’s job, both fathers have interests that differ with those of their sons. Meanwhile, both Franz Kafka and Gregor Samsa struggle to find satisfaction in their careers, ‘Oh God, he thought, what an exhausting job I’ve picked out for myself! On the road day in, day out. It’s much more irritating work than doing the actual business in the home office”. This conflict of interest is one of the numerous similarities between the lives of Gregor Samsa and Franz Kafka. Now informed about the parallels between Kafka’s relationship with his father, readers can fill in in the missing gaps in their knowledge of the novel. Readers now know Franz Kafka chose to portray Mr Samsa as a harsh, domineering father in the text, as it reflected his own family. Readers also better understand why Gregor never quit his job despite his hatred for it, he was too fearful of his father to differ from his career preference regarding Gregor.

The most saddening aspect about Franz Kafka’s life was his utter isolation from society. As a Jewish man living in Prague, Kafka experienced the rejection and isolation that anti-Semitism brought upon his family. In ‘The Metamorphosis’, Gregor experiences a similar sense of loneliness after his family learns about his grotesque mutation into a monstrous vermin. The harsh treatment of society after this event, forced Gregor to isolate himself from the world, “The manager burst out with a loud ‘Oh!’ – it sounded like a rush of wind – and now he could see him standing closest to the door, his hand pressed over his open mouth slowly backing away, as if repulsed by an invisible, unrelenting force.” The manager’s reaction displays how Gregor’s isolation is also imposed upon Gregor by the people around him. Until his metamorphosis, Gregor’s isolation was self-inflicted, such as his habit of locking doors. However, society was now confining Gregor in the four walls of his bedroom. If we project Franz Kafka onto Gregor Samsa’s character, we see more similarities come to light.

In essence, readers can fill in missing gaps once learning the context of Franz Kafka’s life, as well as gain a better understanding of the reasons behind Kafka’s construction of characters and plot in the “The Metamorphosis.” Through knowledge of Kafka’s relationship with his father, readers learn that Mr Samsa was inspired by Kafka’s own patriarchal, domineering father. In the same sense, Gregor’s isolation was a reflection of Kafka’s own feelings of isolation and rejection from society as a result of his Jewish religion.

“Adfbafiwf dijabi dribankamishnit nadroobi ald kizohatro”

You would probably think the above-written quote is just a typo; Or maybe I’m not thinking right? Well, what if I told you this quote makes absolute sense to me? That I am assuming it makes absolute sense to you, too’? Because, to me, this is English – the language we are currently communicating in. Communication – it can be said that it is the most vital element to human survival – Or the survival of a human trapped in the body of a “monstrous vermin”.

I will investigate how communication, or lack thereof, in the Samsa family’s house is the root of all conflict in Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis. How from the lack of it, anyone is gradually alienated and dehumanized. “‘Did you understood a single word?’ the manager asked the parents, ‘Is he playing the fool with us?’” “All right, people did not understand his words anymore, although they seemed clear enough to him”

It is clear from the first interaction between Gregor and the Manager that Gregor’s speech is incomprehensible due to his metamorphosis. Gregor thought he would be understood, just like I thought I would be understood, above. Gregor thought so because he was able to understand himself; Why wouldn’t everyone else understand him, too’? Without proper communication, two parties simply cannot understand each other, and so was the case with Gregor and the rest of the world. First, they thought he was sick, so, they wanted to call a doctor; Then, the father suggested calling in a locksmith – they do not know what to make of the situation. If only Gregor was able to explain. Problems only kept occurring from there. This inability to communicate with his family harmed him in every way – physically (due to the morning incident and later his father’s attack), emotionally (the pain of his family detaching from him) and mentally (isolation and later alienation drove him to his death / caused his death).

“‘It must be gotten rid of,’ cried the sister; ‘That is the only way, father. You must try to get rid of the idea that this is Gregor.” This is the point of climax of Gregor’s alienation/isolation among/st his family. In his family’s eyes, he was not human anymore; Because, all of a sudden, they all could no longer understand him and gradually begun to step away from him until ultimately they could no longer relate to him because his lack of communication is seen as a lack of thought and humanity – although it is sad in Gregor’s case, this is human nature. No matter how strong a relationship is, it simply perishes/diminishes without proper communication; It may take longer with blood relationships, but eventually, you will get/reach the same result. There is no Gregor inside that “vermin”, and taking care of “it” has become a burden on the family (even though he was the breadwinner for a long time before his metamorphosis, taking care of his family), especially on his sister, who “had perhaps undertaken such a difficult task only out of childish recklessness.” (Page 40, Book,

His, sister, who he loved; His sister, who took care of him and cleaned after him during this hard time, now refers to him as “it” – that just broke Gregor; Made him feel betrayed, backstabbed, and eventually lead to his final stage of isolation, and eventually, his death. His sister did not see Gregor in the “vermin”, she just saw “vermin” as is. Both sides eventually give up. This is the consequence of Gregor’s “lack of all human contact”

No matter how strong a relationship is, it simply perishes/diminishes without proper communication; It may take longer with blood relationships, but eventually, you will get/reach the same result. Kafka did not mention this, but I think it is interesting to relate The Metamorphosis’s story to the biblical story of the Tower of Babel (Book of Genesis):

“According to the story, a united human race in the generations following the Great Flood speaking a single language and migrating westward, comes to the land of Shinaf. There they agree to build a city and a tower tall enough to reach heaven. God, observing their city and tower, confounds their speech so that they can no longer understand each other, and scatters them around the world.”

The Tower of Babel’s story parallels with the theme of Understanding and Communication in The Metamorphosis. Just how the family completely disconnected from and lost any connection to Gregor due to his inability to communicate, so did the men of the The Tower of Babel to each other. Whether or not Gregor’s metamorphosis was a punishment from God is left for individual interpretation.

To conclude, it is clear from the story that the loss of communication between Gregor and the world was the main root of all conflict, the breakdown of the family, his alienation by his own family, and his isolation – which all lead to his eventual death. Although his death was sad, it is Kafka’s way of proving just how essential communication and human contact are; Without them, life is not worth living, just as Gregor realized in his final stage of isolation. As mentioned in the beginning of this writing, communication is essential to us human beings; The lack of it could easily estrange people from each other, exactly like what happened between Gregor and his family. Gregor had no way of expressing his thoughts and his “inner human”, therefore, his family saw him as nothing more than what he appeared to be.

The novella “The Metamorphosis” by Franz Kafka is a short story about a man named Gregor that turns into a cockroach after waking up. The graphic novel also titled “The Metamorphosis” by Peter Kuper is an adaptation of Kafka’s novella that has illustrations to go along with the storytelling. Something that the two versions have in common is symbolism to represent and convey things such as tone and mood. However, there are differences between the two in how they utilize the symbols, as well as omitting or adding completely different symbols.

A recurring symbolism that is in both versions of “The Metamorphosis” is the cockroach, which Gregor turns into at the beginning of the story. The cockroach symbolizes the more difficult aspects of Gregor’s job as a traveling salesman and how it affects him and makes him feel. We can see these difficulties when Gregor monologues about them after waking up, “[W]hat a strenuous career it is that I’ve chosen! Traveling day in and day out … It can all go to Hell”(Kafka 94). Gregor describes how difficult his job is and how it dehumanizes him in a way. Without being able to build lasting friendships and constantly living in worry, it creates an emotional border between Gregor and those around him, such as his family. This border is represented as a cockroach as there is a division between humans and cockroaches because cockroaches aren’t people. This could also be an indirect way to tell us that those around Gregor see him as less than them, like a cockroach. Kuper takes these descriptions further by adding illustrations to visualize these hardships. On page 110, we see Gregor being shunned by one of his clients, being late for his train and sadly eating food. These illustrations help us better visualize what Gregor or the author is trying to describe. The cockroach is an example of how symbolism can influence characterization, as instead of telling the reader these details about how Gregor feels, they use the cockroach to embody these ideas and concepts. It’s also an example of how the two texts are similar as what the cockroach represents does not change very much when going between the two versions.

The symbolism found in both texts also affects tone, mood, and theme. Gregor’s boss is a good example of how symbolism between the novella and graphic novel can change drastically. Gregor’s boss, being his employer, can be interpreted as an antagonist of sorts in the sense that he is the man that inflicts the hardships that Gregor complains about upon waking up. This antagonistic image also ties in with the cockroach emphasizing the dehumanizing qualities being a traveling salesman has on Gregor by showing how his boss seems to care very little for Gregor’s well-being. This can be seen when his boss sends a man to inform Gregor that he will be fired for missing just one day. The graphic novel shows off this symbolism very well on page 112, depicting the boss scaled very large compared to Gregor and pointing at him in a condescending way. The novella also uses the boss symbol, but without the image to go along with it, it is a lot less impactful. The only mention of the boss in the novella is, again, when he is complaining about his job to himself, “If I didn’t have my parents to think about I’d have given in my notice a long time ago … talking down at your subordinates from up there, especially when you have to go right up close because the boss is hard of hearing”(Kafka 94). The image of pointing and looking down at subordinates is a dehumanizing visual that the authors want to portray, to further show the idea of how Gregor feels stripped of his humanity. The image offers a much clearer visualization of this concept than the novella, and that’s where the two versions start to detract and differ. The graphic novel has more creative liberty as it is not limited to text, but character design, colors, and different visual symbols such as the hourglass to help convey the original ideas Kafka wanted to portray.

Both versions of Kafka’s “The Metamorphosis” share very similar characterizations, tones, moods, and themes. However, the symbolisms used to convey these vary from being almost identical to having radical differences for the same concept. For example, the cockroach stays consistent between the two versions, not changing very much, while the boss gains extra characterizations in the graphic novel compared to the novella.

Abstract

This study focuses on the literature novels written by Franz Kafka and Thomes more.

Firstly, I will try to focus on corruption and deterioration on society within both books Utopia and Trial. This corruption in society leads to the new words ‘Utopia’ and ‘Dystopia’.Secondly, I will focus the meaning and roles these words in society and individual. Even if in both works content is different, it will show us there will be a connection the words’ Utopia’ and ‘Dystopia’.

Basicly, they complete each other. Without one of these words, we can not say anything related to each other.

In Trial by Franz KAFKA, we have protagonist who is living dystopic, gloomy, corrupted society. One day he get arrested by police and judged by a court with no sense. At the beginning, he has no idea what is his crime. With time progress, he is questioning himself even he is innocent. Because he is living corrupted society and judge system. It pushes him these ideas. This corruption leads him to psychological depression. The book ‘Trial’ states how corruption expands in all over society strongly.

In Thomas More’s ‘Utopia’ our protagonist Raphael Hythoday, who is a sailor traveled many countries of earth. So,he knows mercilesness, corruption of societies. He is the voice of Thomas More’s ideal earth order. For Thomas More, there is an island called ‘Utopia’ in which the system is perfect. He believes the perfection of the island. Progressively, he will mention system leads people happy than before. He also focuses freedom and equality in society on his work ‘Utopia’

In a conclusion, I will describe and make a thesis on the words ‘Utopia’ and ‘Dystopia’ in many perspectives. I will concern what these words leads to? and what is the result?

Also, I will try to focus on pscyhological transformation of our progatonists and how they transformed as a new person in different societies.

I will try to explain the content of my thesis with two chapters with two titles.

Introduction

This study aims to make clarify the corruption of the social system and law in Franz Kafka’s ‘Trial’ with the book ‘Utopia’ by Thomas More. These two books are different from each other. The main theme of ‘Trial’ is how society is awareness of being corrupted and actresses. But in ‘Utopia’ we have a contrary society and lifestyle. This thesis also includes meaning of the word ‘Utopia’ and ‘Dystopia’. In ‘Trial,’ we have dystopic events that happened to our protagonist. In the book ‘Trial’ Kafka uses some unexplained problems.It makes Mr.K, our protagonist, actless, depressed, and stressed. From beginning of the end, Mr.K didn’t know why he was judged in a trial. For him, there is no sense to trial him. He thinks that he is not guilty and innocent like a baby. But,as time progress, he accepts that he is guilty. He disappears in uncertainty and dark. This uncertainty makes him bored to be live and unwilling to do anything. So, I will make a comparison and make a conclusion between two books. When I quote from ‘Trial’ by Franz Kafka, I will also discuss these quotations within the book ‘Utopia’.From these works, we will see the depth of corruption in society in ‘Trial’. On the contrary, in ‘Utopia’ we will see how the perfect society and laws are run. With some examples and quotes, it will be understandable and analyzable. Both two books have great importance on world literature directly. Because many issues like the form of societies criticize in a futuristic way. Both books are concludes different and interesting topics in their times. So, it made them so popular and instructive. 7

Even in our society, we have some difficulties and problems being a perfect society. So this thesis, I hope, might be instructive for us to how to act proper in society as a whole.

This thesis answers some questions like; should we live in acceptance of uncertainty? What is a perfect society? How are law and society being corrupted? Is morality important to human beings?.

So, I choose these two works in my thesis. It will answer many problems in our society that are even happening now.

1. In chapter 1, our main topic is a society in ‘Trial’
2. In chapter 2,our main topic is Law and Judgement in ‘Trial
3. In chapter 3 our main topic is society in ‘Utopia’
4. In chapter 4 our main topic is law and judgment in ‘Utopia’

The word ‘utopia’

First of all, what is the meaning of the word ‘Utopia’ For the dictionary; an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect.

In general, someone dreams good things and orders like a country, we can say that it is our Utopia, dreamland. We feel good and comfortable in this land. In this place, everyone is happy and enjoys to be living in there.In fact, everyone has their own Utopia where they can live in peace. These Utopias are basicly imaginations of our desires. So, the word ‘Utopia’ is includes hopes and our dreams.

The first known Utopia was Plato’s ‘The State. In his work, he discusses the term ‘ideal state. In this work people were categorised like gold, silver,bronze, and iron social classes.

Why does the term ‘Utopia’ appear?

In a life-circle, we are challenging many problems like economic, social and moral. So, these problems leads the word ‘Utopia’With our imagination we are escaping reality and problems sprinkly. Corruption, bribery and low living standarts pushes our imagination to our Utopia’s. So, we can dream of a happy, peaceful place with a good standarts. Imagine it; almost every person in society is equal and peaceful. Who doesn’t want it? When you go home and put your head on pillow, you can imagine good things happening in your world;your imagination. Even if you’re so tired to work, you want to good things in your life which are happening every day. So, this makes UTOPIA.

I don’t know any place without disparity, corruption and bribery arisen. But for Thomas More’s character Raphael

Hytohady, it is possible. Even Raphael did not exist. Its all More’s imagination. He wanted to perfect society and order in his life. Of course it was not possible in England which bribery, slavery, and nonequality existed. Maybe he would believe with his heart that Utopia was exist in somewhere of the world. So, with his book ‘Utopia’ his imagination gave a birth the term utopia.

Also, Plato said something about ‘Utopia’. He mentioned the description of the word ‘Utopia’.

Plato speaks of logoi and doxai that participate in what we could describe as a conflict of values in the realm of soul: some of these are “false and braggart words and opinions” which sometimes “prevail in the conflict” (αὐτοί τε κρατοῦσι µαχόµενοι, 560d1) and manage to present the values associated to reverence and awe as folly or those which accompany temperance as “want of manhood” (560d). But the question is whether this conflict of values is possible in the just city of the Platonic utopia or, what is equivalent to this, in the well-ordered soul of the just individual. The answer is negative, because “when the entire soul accepts the guidance of the wisdom-loving part and is not filled with inner dissension, says Socrates, the result… is that each part enjoys its own proper pleasures” (586e).

The word ‘dystopia’

As we all know from Plato and Thomas More, Utopia is one of a perfect society, place, nation, and state whatever we think.

So what about the anti-term Dystopia?

Dystopia means the contradiction of a utopic lifestyle. It is kind of an anti-thesis of it. So, distopic society be explained like an authoritative and tyrannizer society. For the first time, it was used by John Stuart Miller as a ‘bad place’.Within a tyrannizer society, there were no private life in that ‘bad place’.So, they obey the tyrannizer society. Class, religion, characteristic, and sexuality was controlled by the system.

Why does the word ‘Distopia’ appear?

After wars, revolutions, and disasters dystopias appeared in history. It told us about the downfall of humanity. Life and nature was exploited quickly.

What kind of Distopias do we have?

Ecologic Distopia;In ecologic dystopia, human beings are alienated from nature. They have no relation to nature. It tells the disappearance of nature.

Economic Dystopia; One or most big companies are capturing society. They are manipulating society with their propaganda and advertisements. All sources even human life are controlled by them.

Politic Distopia; In political dystopia, there is a totalitarian order exists. All values in society are controlled by the government. There is no personal freedom and human rights.

Technological Dystopia; For this dystopia, the main problem of corruption is technology. Artificial intelligence, robots are symbolizing addiction of technology.

Chapter 1 Society in trial

‘Someone must have traduced Joseph K., for without having done anything wrong he was arrested one fine morning.’ Franz Kafka ‘Trial’ (pg.1)

Joseph K’s nightmare started with these lines. Without knowing anything that arresting by officers, he had to go police station. At the beginning of the story, he can not believe that he did some crime. When the officer entered the room, he was breaking the special area of Joseph K.Wıthout any permission, he go off half-cocked. When he knew that he was arrested, his servant looked him with bated breath. It shows how people was fear of being arrested. So, we could see the suppression of government on society and every single individual. They had to obey and do not rebel against the power of the government. So Joseph K. Seen as guilty in his neighborhood, Office, and society. He had some dialogue between a woman. So as a guilt Joseph K. Could not accept any woman except for immoral ones.

“you believe that I’m innocent then, do you?” “Well now, innocent … “ said the lady, “I don’t want to start making any pronouncements that might have serious consequences, I don’t really know you, after all, it means they’re dealing with a serious criminal if they send an investigating committee straight out to get him. But you’re not in custody now at least I take it you’ve not escaped from prison considering that you seem quite calm so you can’t have committed any crime of that sort.” Trial (pg.31)

His relationship between Mrs.Burstner was broken with these lines. She did not believe him anymore. She thought he was a crime and dangerous. So, without questioning Joseph K., she judged him by herself. Being arrested was very important for society and for the individual. Because in ‘Trial’ they had no idea about individual rights and privacy. So, they had full of fear being guilty or seem guilty. It was kind of a shame or evil sin for society. If you had no idea about rights, you would be corrupted and misused by the government and some noble person. Every single man of in society were obsessed with being innocent and submissive in this novel. For Joseph K. There was nothing to be afraid of. At first, he was sure about his innocence. But after some events that he lived, he began to question himself. So, this was leaded to him alienation from society and everything.

Throughout the book, almost everyone wanted to find and speak about Joseph K.’s guilt. Why they were very interested in? Because they were kind of robotic features in society. Their existence were not definite at all. Their only aim was gossiping after Joseph K. Any of them did not ask about Joseph K.’s guilt. They just predicted what he done. So, Joseph K.’s alienation fed them. They were lonely in their areas. Without any communication, they judged Joseph K. İn their rules and traditions. They were corrupted and this corruption lead to Joseph K.’ as an alienated person.

Franz Kafka tried to show the corruption of modern society in his book ‘Trial’.Society could judge people from one perspective. The government’s perspective was true for everyone. There was no objectivity in their ideas. They could not think subjectively. This objectivity is problematic for Joseph K. as a protagonist of the book ‘Trial’.

We could see that there were two antagonists of Joseph K. in the book ‘Trial’. The first antagonist was society itself. Their sense of justice was manipulated by some powers. Without question, everyone in the book ‘Trial’ obeyed the rules of the system. It was normal for society who were corrupted and manipulated by the power of authority. Authority was a controller of everything in modern societies.

It was not only dominating people’s ideas but also their fates. When these events were happening to society, how they dare to say something objectively to Joseph K.? They just knew how harsh being arrested and accused. They did not underlying things that Joseph was being accused. So the self-questioning was not existed in book ‘Trial’ except for Joseph K. These events leaded to him questioning what he had done and what he might thougt about this accuse.

For Franz Kafka, the power of totalitarianism was abusing and controlling people in every aspect. So he handled this theme very well in the book ‘Trial’.In totalitarian societies, people always being suppressed and judged in every single minute. There was not genuine ideas in a totalitarian society. Kafka described his idea with Joseph K., our protagonist in ‘Trial’.He was trying to explain the psychological development of Joseph K. from the beginning the end.

“How can I go into the bank when I’m under arrest?” “I see you’ve misunderstood me,” said the supervisor who was already at the door. “It’s true that you’re under arrest, but that shouldn’t stop you from carrying out your job. And there shouldn’t be anything to stop you from carrying on with your usual life.” Trial (pg 18)

For Joseph K. it was nonsense both being arrested and permitted to go work.He did not know his right of living disposed of by authority. With an authority, his breathing would have been limited with his brand ‘arrested’. The power of authority sticked on him a brand. A shameful brand for all people in Kafka’s society. But they could not understand that every man might made a mistake. Under the authority, they had no utter any word or idea. So being thoughtless made them a flock in a sheep herd. Their road was only single ‘the government and rules. They thought as ‘let sleeping dogs lie.’ So they were judging people critically. Because they had no idea about being arrested or accusing at all.

Joseph K.‘s alienation begins with kissing Mrs.Burstner in the novel. It affects both sides. After kissing there is nothing happened anymore. It reflects how relationships are problematic and corrupted in the novel. Joseph K. as a protagonist he can not control his life totally. Kissing Mrs.Burstner ends with alienation between Joseph K. and Mrs.Burstner.

Also, in the novel, bileratel relations are not good. It depends on Joseph K.’s half arrestment situation. Even in his apartment occupants sees him as guilty. As a result, they do not interact with Josep7h K. Also, his colleagues see him as a suspect. These events result in Joseph K.’s alienation and isolation as an individual in the novel ‘Trial’.

He turned to K. with the tone of someone who knows his facts and said, “you are a house painter?” “No,” said K., “I am the chief clerk in a large bank.” This reply was followed by laughter among the right-hand faction down in the hall, it was so hearty that K. couldn’t stop himself joining in with it. Trial (pg 48)

In this conversation between Joseph K. and the judge, Joseph K. wants to resist as an individual for all norms of society and government. At first, it worked but then the judge shut all crowd up. It shows how dominant is authority in Joseph K.’s society. This means that there is nothing about individualism and will not exist. The whole hall have to obey the judge who is representer of the government. Otherwise their biggest fear, being arrested will happen to them.

Kafka also explored the relationship between authority and law using K.’s efforts to uncover why he has been put on trial. In the first chapter, K. asks “what sort of people were they? What were they talking about? To which authority did they belong?

It shows us how the elements of individual life are ignored and corrupted in the novel. They can not act or move. It is a strict society. The members of this society are caged by the government.

Law and judgment in the trial

From beginning to end, the novel ‘Trial’ includes the harsh power of the law system. The system not only ruling people but also controlling their lives directly. It is easy to say that the members of society are afraid of being guilty. So, they can not move like an individual. There is no individual rights or sign of it. The only sign that we can see is harshness and fear in the novel ‘Trial’.

The mystery of the court is amplified by the locations it resides in the novel. The court is always referred to in the singular, even though it is located in a myriad of unexpected places. The first encounter K. has with the court is in an attic, past a warren of stairs and alleys. Later in the novel, the court is revealed to reside in many other places too; the punishment of disobedient warders occurs in a small lumber room at K’s bank offices, and when K. visits Titorelli the painter, court offices are directly next door. The painter remarks “didn’t you know there were court offices here? They’re practically in all the attics, why shouldn’t they be here too?” The court has a claim to an unexpectedly wide set of resources, including ownership of the painter’s premises and having control of a group of girls that pester K. on his way to see Titorelli. The painter explains matter of factly “everything, you see, belongs to the court.” The court is a single entity but has multiple locations and strange resources at its disposal. This is a similar notion to ‘the law’ which is referred to in the singular but comprises many personal and distinct parts. The singular noun is used to denote the unity of the system; the court in The Trial is a similar creature to the abstract ‘law’ of Kafka’s reality.

Kafka illustrated how legitimacy may be attained through time and practice. As the novel progresses K. learns that many other characters are not only familiar with the court but accept its workings, and slowly he comes to recognize it also. At the end of the novel, K. does not know whether the men who come for him are from the court; he merely presumes them to be so: “[s]o they’ve sent second rate actors to fetch me.”

Society in utopia

In the society in which Thomas More was born, there was a human condition in which people fell into poverty and the price paid in the most severe ways. It had a dimension of poverty, cruelty, and despair, as well as a dimension that pushed people into crime.

According to More, the most important cause of poverty is the aristocrats who have no benefit to society and exploit the foresight of others. Aristocrats, not only the people they exploit, but also because of their arbitrary expenditures, they both deprive people and the people they work with.

More, as another important cause of poverty, shows exploitation and monopoly in rural areas. By mentioning the increase in the cost of growing the agricultural land into the pasture and making it irreparable for agriculture and the increase in the cost of crime, unemployment, and the increase in crime caused by forced migration as a result of the passing of these pastures used for the wool trade to the monopoly of the rich minority, More, thus demonstrates the causes of the injustice and poverty.

More argues that the transformation of the mode of hierarchical relationship based on inequality between advantageous and disadvantaged people into an equality of affair is possible through the relevance of the private property, which he believes is the basis of social inequality and the social evils that result therefrom. In this context, the understanding of justice offered by More is understood from a perspective to establish social equality in accordance with the common good principle. For his reason, a just society is understood as a fair and well-organized political order in which social equality is established with reference to the common good principle, as in the case of the imaginary Utopian society. Accordingly, More, Utopia II. In his book, he proposes, through the design of society, that justice should be achieved, the elimination of private property, and the replacement of common property.

Gregor’s metamorphosis accomplishes several of his aims: First, it frees him from his hated job with an odious company by using disabling him from working; second, it relieves him of the requirement to make an agonizing desire between his filial duty to his parents—particularly his father—and his desperate yearning to emancipate himself from such responsibilities and dependence. It as a consequence allows him to “bug out” of his loathsome constraints yet do so on a degree of aware innocence, with Gregor only a victim of an uncontrollable calamity. Moreover, Gregor’s fantasies encompass aggressive and retaliatory motions against the oppressive firm. He accomplishes this by way of terrorizing the pitiless, arrogant workplace manager, who tells him, “I am speakme right here in the identity of your dad and mom and your chief.” On the aware level, Gregor pursues the clerk to appease him and invulnerable his advocacy for Gregor’s motive at the office; subconsciously, his threatening appearance and curiously hostile gestures humiliate his hated superiors.

Gregor’s trade additionally expresses his experience of guilt at having betrayed his work and his parents, at having broken the familial circle. It is a treacherous appeasement of this guilt complex, inviting his isolation, punishment, and death. His loss of human speech prevents him from communicating his humanity. His full-size size, though two ugh an insect (he is at least two feet wide), his ugly features, and his malodorous stench invite fear and revulsion. Yet his pacific temperament and lack of claws, teeth, or wings make him always greater susceptible than when his body was human. His metamorphosis, therefore, gives him the worst of each world: He is offensive in look however defenseless in fact, exposed to the merciless assault of anyone—such as his furious father—ready to exploit his vulnerability.

“The Metamorphosis,” then, can be seen as a punishment fantasy with Gregor Samsa feeling triply responsible for having displaced his father as the main breadwinner for the family, for his hatred of his job, and resentment of his family’s expectations of him. He turns himself into a detestable insect, thereby both rebelling in opposition to the authority of his firm and father and punishing himself for this revolt by searching for estrangement, rejection, and death. Insofar as Gregor’s physical manifestation constitutes a translation of the interior self to the exterior world, “The Metamorphosis” is a stellar fulfillment of expressionism.

This year, last May, my family and I visited the Czech Republic, specifically the city of Prague. It was an amazing experience, during which we learned very much about it’s past and present history. We admired the beautiful Romanesque architecture, we walked along the famous Charles Bridge, and we were able to watch the amazing astronomical clock and many places more, all of them full of beauty and interest. One day, exploring the Jewish Quarter, we came across one of Franz Kafka’s monuments. There, for the first time, I heard about Franz Kafka, one of Prague’s most famous writers. Our tour guide also introduced us to one of his best-known works: ‘The Metamorphosis’. Out of curiosity, I started reading the book The Metamorphosis. Pretty soon I was engaged in the tragedy of Gregor Samsa’s miserable life. In ‘The Metamorphosis’, the theme of life changes, and the way the author thinks of humans as insignificant and meaningless creatures demonstrates Kafka’s personal feelings and struggles to become what his father and family expected of him.

In ‘The Metamorphosis’, Gregor Samsa the main character was a young salesman constrained to what he thought were his obligations to his family. Nevertheless, through the horrible situation he experienced, when one morning he awoke transformed into a gigantic insect, is where he finally realized the true feelings of his family towards him. Gregor felt like if he had been used by his family before his transformation. “He had been able to provide such a life in so nice apartment for his parents and sister. But what now if all the peace, the comfort, the contentment were to come to a horrible end?” (Kafka 7). After his tragedy, Gregor was unable to work, and his family did not need him anymore. In fact, they thought he was a burden, that he was no longer part of the family and even worst, that he should have been eliminated to avoid family disintegration. Of all, Mr. Samsa, Gregor’s father, was the less sympathetic of his family. His reaction to Gregor’s catastrophe was hostile, rather than loving and protective.

“No plea of Gregor’s helped, no plea was even understood; however humbly he might turn his head, his father merely stamped his feet more forcefully […] he drove Gregor on, as if there were no obstacles […] his father gave him a hard shove, which was truly his salvation, and bleeding profusely, he flew far into his room’’ (Kafka, 9).

Again, Gregor’s family and specifically his father’s behavior was brutal. Instead of trying to help him somehow, and to emotionally support him, he is more intended to punish the poor Gregor. Moreover, not only Mr. Samsa was mean to Gregor, Greta, his sister, after being kind and tender, turned into a mean character. On one occasion, she refused to grant Gregor the title of brother and called him “monster” (Kafka, 38). In contrast to the rest of the family, Mrs. Samsa, Gregor’s mother, maintained her love and concerned about her son, until, against her will, she was forced to be away from him (Kafka, 19). After I finished reading ‘The Metamorphosis’, I learned the experiences of Kafka’s life were portrayed in his writings. I believe Kafka’s way of explaining his feelings through the character of Gregor was very effective. What he wrote in the book of ‘The Metamorphosis’, left me with the feeling that we all have to be very careful in the manner we treat others. We have to be respectful about their feelings and their personality. Furthermore, something I disagree with Kafka in his book ‘The Metamorphosis’ was the end. I have always liked happy endings and in the book, the story end was very sad. I did not like what happens to Gregor, he just dies, and his family ignores him completely and goes into a trip to the city thinking about Greta’s future.

In ‘The Metamorphosis’, Kafka portrays the world as an irrational place through an abrupt and unexpected opening to his book. Without explanation, Kafka utilizes ‘In Medias Res’ to immediately place his audience in the middle of the story with Gregor’s transformation into a pest. Through his use of this device, Kafka introduces an impossible situation and bizarre characters, which bring forth a sense of confusion from his audience to express the existentialist idea of the irrational world.

To portray the irrational world, Kafka utilizes ‘In Medias Res’ to throw his audience in the middle of a baffling event. In his first sentence, Kafka introduces Gregor Samsa, who had “transformed into a gargantuan pest”. Kafka abruptly presents an impossible situation without context or explanation, inducing a sense of disbelief. Yet in light of such events, Kafka continues through the story with no further comment, ignoring the shock of such an event, as if to force his audience to accept these absurd circumstances. By doing so, Kafka portrays the world as an irrational place filled with many such peculiar situations. Gregor then questions “What has happened to me?”; his confusion mirrors the audience’s own questions. Kafka provides no answer to this question and continues to propel the story forward, again fueling a sense of confusion. Kafka capitalizes on this perplexity and uses these unanswered questions to reinforce that no rational explanations exist in an irrational world.

Kafka further illustrates the irrational world through his character’s strange reactions toward Gregor’s transformation. Immediately after realizing his transformation, Gregor wants only to “sleep for a little while longer and for[get] all this foolishness”. Gregor, instead of being alarmed at his recent transformation into a giant bug, treats his predicament with indifference, opting to sleep instead of confronting the situation. Gregor’s dismissal of his transformation as an everyday event betrays rational thought, raising a sense of confusion. Kafka uses Gregor’s calm reaction to this unthinkable situation to illustrate that such strange situations commonly occur in an irrational world. Kafka also displays Gregor’s family responding in a similarly strange manner with “the father clench[ing] his fist… as if he wanted to push Gregor back into the room”. Gregor’s father demonstrates no sympathy and, rather than worrying about his son, he displays fury. His lack of sympathy or concern for his son rebels against the idea of a father figure, again raising confusion. The universally strange reactions from all the characters in the book hints that the story occurs in a world devoid of reason, and thus none of the characters can reliably exhibit rational behavior.

Through his use of ‘In Medias Res’, Kafka builds the feeling of confusion to display his idea of an irrational world. To accomplish this, Kafka introduces an unbelievable set of circumstances to depict a world saturated with impossible events and utilizes his unusual characters to illustrate a world without reasonable thought. In doing so, Kafka firmly establishes his story within the Existentialist framework.

The masked anxiety in Kafka’s ‘Metamorphosis’ is a rooted trauma from parental alienation which transforms Gregor’s self-image from human to bug. The behaviors in the narrative are mirror images of the author’s life and are reminiscent of his feelings towards his father. This parental alienation experienced during Kafka’s interactions with his father is further demonstrated by Gregor’s parents in the text. The self-neglect Gregor faces while being a dutiful slave-like character who is treated like vermin by his family literally transforms him into such. Therefore illustrating the intent of the narrative is to portray the trauma of parental neglect and poor self-image caused by these traumas.

The pressure Gregor feels, due to the obligations to his parents, sets him on a lower level than the rest of the family. They tower over him like gods tower over humans, yet they are human. This causes Gregor to shrink lower than his true nature- to the level of an animal. Kafka had no great duties to his father in life but felt judged by others. This made him feel like dead weight on his family much like the character Gregor thinks he is an inferior object to his creator. Both seem to believe they have failed to prove themselves useful to their loved ones. However, the animal body serves as a tool for Kafka to disassociate his mental upset and distance himself from the self-torment he feels. As an insect, he can feel whole. In letters written to his virtual love Felice, Kafka admits, “When I didn’t write, I was at once flat on the floor, fit for the dustbin” (62). Similarly, it seems as though Gregor instead of feeling angry towards his father’s deception replaces the emotions he has with self-loathing and guilt due to his father’s unrelenting disappointment. This type of family aggression most likely followed Franz to adulthood and manifested in his telling of the metamorphosis. In Kafka’s ‘Letter to My Father’, he says “Your extremely effective rhetorical methods in bringing me up, which never failed to work with me, were: abuse, threats, irony, spiteful laughter, and—oddly enough—self-pity” (Kafka, Franz. Letter To My Father, pg. 5)

Parental alienation is described as a child’s reluctance or refusal to have a relationship with a parent. One can see that Kafka’s letter to his father is a summary of how he rejects his father’s treatment. This form of alienation is caused by the parent’s “instrumental aggression”. This is aggression that is intended to target and hurt their offspring. Including unplanned attacks without the intent to influence the child that usually happens when a parent is provoked. This is usually the case when a toxic parent refuses to see that their method of parenting is harming the child. According to a peer-reviewed journal, ‘Parental Alienating Behaviors: An Unacknowledged Form of Family Violence’, authors say “With instrumental aggression, the target is essentially hurt in the process of the aggressor trying to obtain their goal” (Harman, Jennifer J., et al. 2018).

Kafka’s alienation of his father is likely what caused him to act the way he did in his self-portrayal of Gregor and the insect. Harman adds, “When the child rejects a parental figure, their behavior is often accompanied by a lack of overt ambivalence, guilt, or remorse for their rejection” (Harman, pg.1276). The guilt Kafka feels from his father is a transferred impression to the family dynamic in the narrative. The goal of the parents in the Metamorphosis is to use Gregor as a financial gain. This instrumental aggression is what causes their son to dissociate into his animal form. In, ‘From Marx to Myth: The Structure and Function of Self-Alienation’ in Kafka’s Metamorphosis, Sokel relates: “Marx observes, “produce only under the compulsion of physical need. Man, on the other hand, produces even when he is free of physical need, and only in this freedom is he humanly creative. . . . Such production is his active species being. By virtue of it, nature itself appears as man’s creation and his reality” (Sokel, 1983. Pg. 216).

Notably, in Gregor’s situation, he is only permitted little freedom from the responsibilities he has in the family. While his mother tells of how good of a worker he is, she explains Gregor has very little downtime because he is always busy. His role is to perform work for the needs of the household such as relieving debt that is not his own and to bring in money that is then relinquished. The only decent relationship he has early on is his connection to his sister, Grete. Gregor’s father is powered by the insatiable goal of using his offspring in this example of instrumental aggression. The character’s self-sacrifice and exploitation are what separates him from his humanity. (Sokel, 1983. Pg, 223). Moreover, when Gregor is transformed into an insect and realizes he is unable to keep up his duties he suddenly feels like a burden. He loses his self-worth because the only worth he had before the event was completing his tasks, yet they are no longer accessible. Instead, Gregor is then the object of his family’s shame replacing the former debt of his father.

Not only does he feel guilty for this, but perhaps feels guilt in not being able to send his sister to a music school as he intended. He was formerly close with his siblings, but Grete is seen mostly feeding Gregor moldy food and then reporting back how much he has eaten. Due to the rejection of his parents, Grete becomes his primary caregiver. When she sees he likes to crawl on the walls she removes furniture so he has more room, also it is noted she hates to look at him. Possibly indicating that she is ashamed to see her brother in his vermin form. Or that she realizes Gregor is no longer his past self she becomes indifferent to him and strips their relationship of its former meaning and enforces her new role.

When Gregor is exposed to his mother and causes her to pass out, Grete attempts to discipline him which causes him to escape the room. Later, Grete’s miscommunication to her father of the incident ends up in him being wounded with an apple by his father. Although this miscommunication hurts Gregor, Grete is indifferent to him and does not acknowledge him as her sibling but also as vermin. Not only is Gregor receiving Instrumental aggression from his parents but also his sibling who insists he is under her control. Her new role in the family is demonstrated when Gregor scares away their borders, causing them to lose the rent money. She insists that her family must not see the insect as their family but only as a burden. This finalization of character is what puts an end to Gregor. The story is an example of self-alienation, most probably caused and inspired by Kafka’s real-life events with his father.

The incompletion, guilt, and self-loathing Franz Kafka had adapted to during his life, is a demonstration of what parental neglect can do to its target. Moreover, this neglect can directly influence one’s self-image, worth, and development.