1000 words

One of the main critiques that Kafka brings to light in his novel, “The Trial,” is the idea that innocence has little to no importance in the outcome of a trial in modern Russian society. Many characters such as Huld, Leni, and Titorelli serve to demonstrate this lack of justice that is very perceptible in the system. The prolonging of the trial also alludes to the fact that no matter how innocent or guilty one may be, the trial’s results have nothing to do with what actually occurred in the cause, but rather which party has stronger or more important connections.

When Joseph K. is lured into Huld’s appealing yet unsupported convictions that innocence plays no role in the court, he finds it difficult to pull himself away from the lawyer. Besides Huld’s incompetence in professionalism and formality regarding his job and where he meets his clients, he delays K.’s trial and places insufficient attention on K.’s case. There are many reasons as to why Joseph K. postpones his separation from Huld; one being Leni, and the other being that he would not have found a better alternative. Huld’s justification for this theory that innocence is insignificant is that the only way to find positive results in a trial is to have connections in the judiciary system. Although Huld is supposed to be working for his clients, the way his character is presented shows that his clients end up as his slaves because they find themselves with no other alternative. Kafka believes that individuals in society always windup as slaves to the very systems that contradict themselves and lack the order and justice they claim to establish. Block, another of Huld’s clients, is the perfect example of an individual forced to work for the system. Huld is theoretically his lawyer, but because he has absolute control over his clients due to his hypnotizing claims, Huld is able to essentially abuse Block but still keep him coming back.

The reliability on connections in the system that Kafka criticizes in his novel is portrayed through Titorelli’s character. This painter, clearly unqualified and commonplace, is surprisingly an important figure in the court system. The readers ask themselves why such a seemingly trivial, mediocre individual holds so much power in the system, and they find that his high classification is a merit of the portraits of judges that he paints. Here is yet another character that represents the inadequacies of the judiciary system. Titorelli represents the placement of unskilled, mindless people in fundamental and critical positions in society. The people that are supposed to lead and sustain order are simply mindless fools that lack originality and innovative minds.