Response to Camille

I just read Camille's response and I can not help to think that her and I were thinking very similarity as we were reading the book. Before this weeks reading selection, I had constantly wrote in my blog posts that I constantly had to reread selections because they seemed obscure and very unrealistic. However, after reading Camille's post, I realized that this past week I did not find myself doing this. I think this occurred due to the lessons that we learned in class this week. When something weird came up in a passage this week, I just thought to myself "does this relate to one of the three pillars?" A great majority of the time, it did and I was able to understand the reading passage.
One thing that Camille pointed out that really caught my attention was the fact that they make it seem as the government fixes every case that goes into the court so they win. This shows that the pillar of "state" is controlling them. What is the point of following the rules that a group of individuals make if they can just accuse you and convict you if you are not actually guilty? There is no point in actually following the rules if you live in a society that is similar to K.'s.

Chapter 7 and the Lecture

           This past week Mr. Shapiro has been lecturing about Franz Kafka and the reoccurring elements that appear in all of his stories and books. Lucky enough for our group, we are able to apply this new information that we learned into our term paper book. The main premise of the lecture involved three pillars that control society as a whole: church, state, and family. We are seeing this occur in The Trial more and more as the book progresses.

            In Chapter 7 particularly, we see this happen with the state. K. is engulfed in a trial and it is in this chapter that he starts to become more and more obsessed with it. In my opinion, K. is starting to see that the system that we instill our trust into might not be as honest as everyone believes. In fact, he is debating whether or not to fire his lawyer but does not because the courts are somewhat corrupted due to lawyers having relationships with some of the judges in the court system.

            What has been most interesting for me in this chapter is that as a reader, we are able to see that giant impact that this trial is beginning to have on K.’s life. He is even starting to give up the one thing that he used to care about the most: work. Before the trial, K. would have never forgot what a client was saying to him or leave multiple clients in his waiting room without acknowledging them before suddenly leaving without any notice. In my opinion, this relates back to the gist of the lecture as a whole. We are now seeing that K.’s whole life is being dictated by one particular pillar: state. Because of that, all of the other pillars are going to start to be affected. I think that Kafka is going to show later on that his familial relationships are starting to take a toll as well. Due to the fact that we learned that K. is not a very religious guy, I do not think that we will see the church make an impact on his life.

Comment on Ben's post

Camille Kelleher

Ben and I both posted about similar topics, the presence of the three institutions from last week’s lecture in this weekend’s reading. The emphasis on being born into guilt is definitely highlighted in this story because K’s trial is so random and unanticipated. Also, K’s inability to get out of this situation, irrelevant to the skills he has gained over his lifetime, only supports Kafka’s emphasis on predetermination. It is like we all born and die equal under the haze of undeserving guilt. I think that the only way I can make my life well spent is by accomplishing tasks and goals in my life that are separate from societal boundaries. As long as I achieve happiness at the end of my life, then I won’t remorse on my regrets.

Along with Ben, I think the least addressed pillar is the Church because K does spend some time with his uncle. I don’t like the uncle because he is very rude, malicious, and a social climber. I think that if a person associates himself with other people to improve his status then it only reflects badly on his personality because he didn’t progress as a person and achieve goals like those other people. The pillar’s motivating factors are implicit in the story when the uncle brings K to the lawyer’s house; however, I am surprised that the uncle waited for K after he disappeared with Leni. I figured, in regards to the threats we discussed in class, that the uncle would leave K behind and let him fend for himself because K disgraced and embarrassed him in front of his “colleagues.”   

This weekend's reading in relation to last week's lectures

Camille Kelleher           

After last week’s lectures about Kafka and his opinion on society, I thought about this weekend’s reading in a different manner and tone. There were certain descriptions that seemed really odd; but as I accepted my reaction, I also accepted that my extreme and isolating perspective is developed by society. If I lived in another world where different values were average and tolerable, then I may have accepted the aforementioned odd descriptions as normal. One example of these odd descriptions is the interaction between the young nurse Leni and K. on page 108 when they are inside the lawyer’s office. K. caressed Leni’s “physical defect” or webbed fingers, which later caused Leni, who smelt like pepper according to K.,  make a move on him. I find this whole exchange very random and strange, especially K.’s choice of diction. Yet, after the lectures this week, I stretched the events in this story to my own external judgment developed by society. This tiny moment of bizarreness may have reflected Kafka’s step outside of the three societal pillars that we discussed in class. His innovation in norms and creativity led me to isolation because I was viewing the interaction between K. and Leni in accordance with societal tendencies. Now, I wonder if our developed societal standards are keeping us from progressing in certain sectors of life as if we were blindfolded from investments that would yield a high return in both monetary and nonmonetary success.

It was hard not to notice the connections between The Trial and the three societal pillars, especially the state pillar given the subject of this story. On page 112, Kafka describes the judicial system and its unfair procedures, and the irony of lawyers. I think that the inability of the defendants to find out their accusations is very unbalanced, especially when the influence of lawyers is trivial. This skews the opinion of the jury, if there is one in this particular judicial system, and favors their decision towards the accusers who I assume is the state, “They (the administration) want to eliminate the defense as far as possible; everything is to be laid upon the defendant himself.” This is almost like a handicap for the government to make sure that they are always right and win every case. It increases their authority and legitimacy in the face of its ignorant and adherent citizens. When the defendants become more attached to this system, they want to transform it and change its principles to make it more practical and fair; however, the administration prevents the changes to secure their own benefits. Kafka descriptively lashes out against society in a somewhat satiric tone. It will be interesting to see how he addresses the two other pillars, the family and the church.

Comment on Vero's post

I have to agree with you, Vero. It seems that Kafka is really trying to grind the reader into this idea that the government is corrupt and inevitably a negative factor in our lives. He hints at the idea at least twice per page, and it has been getting quite repetitive and annoying. I think Kafka gives us too much information at a time. He seems to write with so much volume, and every word seems to be chosen on purpose to create that 'Kafkaesque' feeling to his works.

I enjoyed reading The Metamorphosis the most, probably because of the immense amount of creativity and detail employed. I also like the Penal Colony, again because of the creativity. But even in those works, I seemed to get bogged down by a copious amount of details that it feels like Kafka is ultimately writing in circles. You can't take any word for granted, even if you think you can, you can't. If you don't pay attention to literally every single word in the text, then you're going to lose your place in the plot and idea being expressed. I have to re-read most of the pages in the novel because I naturally take some words for granted, leaving me confused and doubtful of what I've read.

I haven't read as far as Vero yet, but K.'s transformation as a person is clear, and I feel that Kafka has a habit of transforming all of his characters, either for good or bad. In The Trial, I feel like it's for the worst, and that K.'s new lackadaisical attitude will begin to drive his spirit down to the ground, something Kafka employed on purpose to emphasize the institution's power to destroy an individual's spirit.

Last week's lecture

After sitting through the Kafka lecture, I started thinking about where/how this idea is expressed in Kafka's Trial novel and even in the outside world. The idea of being born guilty, based on the contradictions present in society's three main institutions (Church, Family, and State), is easily identified in the first chapter, when K.'s character is initially 'born' into the plot as being arrested for some unknown reason, ultimately guilty. It's obvious that the state is playing the biggest role in his arrest, but there has to be some other institution with or against the state in K.'s trial.

Another idea spoken about in the lecture was that no matter how hard you worked for something, society doesn't always tend to give you what you've been working toward. In K.'s case, he has worked extremely hard to get where he is as a successful banker, yet is challenged with his whole situation, due to society's institutions imposing their natural contradictions onto the public. The institutions each seek as much power as they can get, and through that process they must create rules to regulate and organize the public to reap as much power possible.

It may be extremely obvious in the novel, but so far, I have not seen all three institutions supporting each other in The Trial. K.'s family has not been mentioned too often, and any religious aspects to society also seem to be subdued to a degree. So, I was watching the movie Independence Day on Friday, and it was immediately clear to me that in the work, all three institutions work together in the film to create a great deal of American propaganda. You have the state working to fight and find away to fend off the destructive aliens. Religion plays the role of emotional support, especially in the final third of the movie, and the same can be said about family, yet family is magnified much more. The three are combined and paired up with some pathetic American war music to create some of the greatest propaganda to the United States Army and Country that I've personally witnessed. I know that this blog is meant primarily for The Trial, but I thought that this link was relevant to Kafka's ideas and possible endings to The Trial.

Im currently on page 88 and finished up chapter 5. I'm sure that the three institutions will begin to reveal themselves more toward the second half of the book, when we finally start to find out the true details behind K.'s trial.

Chapter 7

K’s bipolarity strikes again. Suddenly he is obsessed with the trial, and I want to know what it is that makes him jump back and forth from such extremes. Out of no where, this trial that is so important to his life; that pretty much dictates his freedom, becomes important to him again, and the carelessness that consumed him about the whole situation earlier in the book has completely disappeared.

            Although K has progressed and is now more involved in his trial, his lawyer is not doing much to help the situation. Once again, I noticed the unprofessionalism of the systems. Despite the fact that K wants to improve his situation, there are other obstacles that hold him back from proving himself innocent. I realized just how oblivious and unobservant Huld is as a person when Leni and K are fooling around right in front of him and he doesn’t even notice. To be a good lawyer, it is important to pay attention to detail and be alert, amongst other things, and those are qualities that Huld lacks. K clearly made a bad choice in hiring him as a lawyer. When he finally realizes that he is better off taking care of the trial himself, he finds it hard to stay motivated, even though he quit his job and devoted all of his time to the trial. K is always confronted with obstacles, and he never truly gets anything done. Whether it is his fault or not, K is definitely not the same powerful, correct man that he was at the beginning of the novel and it is kind of a let down.

            I really don’t like this book. Though I respect Kafka and his views, I hate the way he mindf***s the readers 24/7. I cant focus on what I’m reading and am always doubting if what I understood is actually what happened or if I was supposed to understand it in a different way. This novel is too much; so much information is given with so little value. He uses so many situations and words to say so little and it isn’t pleasant to read. We are repeatedly demonstrated through his writing that the government is corrupt and that the only way to get anywhere is through corrections. It gets boring. Out of all of the stories I have read by Kafka, this is probably my least favorite. 

Chapter 6

         By reading Chapter 6, my opinion of K. has changed dramatically. The chapter begins by us meeting his uncle, Karl. Uncle Karl has come to try to aid K. in every way that he can for the trial. The same thing that is shocking to Uncle Karl is what has been shocking for me throughout this whole process. K. seems to not care about what is going on. He stays calm and collected when many others would be panicking in this situation. In my opinion, K. is starting to connect the dots and figure out what is happening. He starts to think that people in the office might be responsible for what is occurring as displayed be his want to talk to his Uncle outside the office.

         It is also revealed in this chapter that K. is a little bit more of a snob then I originally thought. When Karl tell him that he has a friend who is a lawyer, K. is hesitant because the friend, Huld, usually defends the lower class. K. even points out that he is a higher up at a prominent bank. Many more things are revealed at the house which I think is going to change the story as a whole. At Huld’s house, we find out that his Uncle goes by Albert. This really confused me. Why would he go by a different name? Does he have something that he is hiding?

         At the house we learn that Huld is good friends with the Chief Clerk of the courthouse, who is currently present in the room. K. should have jumped on this opportunity and tried to prove his innocence. I felt that out of all of the people who were in the room, he seemed to be the one who cared the least even though the outcome of this case can dramatically alter K.’s future. Instead, K. is seduced by the nurse and ends up going to a different room with her. I feel as if this is going to play a huge role later on in the book. The Chief Clerk probably now thinks that K. has no interest in the case. He is not going to make an effort to help someone who will not even give him the decency of staying with him for a short meeting. K. really messed up here and he better find a way to fix this situation or he may up behind bars.