Full Paper

Franz Kafka’s drive to highlight the corruption of government, as well as the lack of professionalism in modern Russian society is exceptionally portrayed through the characters and situations that prevail in "The Trial." The implications of his belief system are cleverly interlaced in the novel to express his dissatisfaction in the unofficial, unethical customs of the modern Russian government. Josef K.’s first arrest was certainly unprofessional; that is something that immediately stands out to the readers and establishes a precedent for the way the rest of the novel carries out. The first scenes instantly produce a sense of confusion and inquiry as to why something that is supposed to run in an official, political way is being handled so unethically.

K.’s arrest is inarguably one of the most important scenes in the story. Two clearly inexperienced agents from an undetermined source visit Josef K. to detain him, however they do not inform him of his charge. From these details it is clear that Franz Kafka intends to make a certain claim about the Russian government, and the scene marks the beginning of what turns into a comment on that society. The agents that visit K. show no professionalism; by their actions it is reasonable to deduce that they are simply doing their job without knowledge of the situation. During the first arrest, one of the guards says, “After all, our department, as far as I know, and I know only the lowest level, doesn't seek out guilt among the general population, but, as the Law states, is attracted by guilt and has to send us guards out. That's the Law. What mistake could there be?” (Kafka 78). It is evident from this statement that the agents are simply following directions and could be perceived as mindless individuals. Not only are they doing their job without questioning its justice, but also, they do not even consider asking themselves if the assignment is sensible. It is clear that they are uneducated by the question they pose at the end of the quote. At this point, the readers are given the idea that these guards live by the law and enforce it with no personal opinions or judgments. They one-track-mindedly do their job and do not care if it is not ethical. For them, if the law says it should be done this way, then there is no reason for it to be done differently. Now the reader asks him or herself: Why are unqualified individuals being assigned to official positions that are essential for a successful government?

The first court hearing of the novel is yet another instance in which K’s comment on modern society is blatantly underlined. The fact that the accused is notified of this hearing by telephone is already a sign that the judicial system lacks professionalism. He is given an address, but no time and no specifications. This court hearing is supposed to be something formal; something that is taken seriously by the system. However, this seriousness is entirely eliminated by the way the summoning is conducted. The lack of formality is prominent during K.’s arrival to the address he was given. He walks into the building, cannot find the courtroom, and is unable to find someone that can help him get to where he needs to be. After K. finally finds the unkempt, congested courtroom, he gives a speech addressing the unofficial way in which the entire event was conducted. K. is the controversial individual in this unsystematic government that charged him with an unspecified authorization, and in a way he personifies Franz Kafka. The author uses the protagonist to transmit his critique of the way the world functions.  

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 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 are not determined by what actually occurred in the cause, but rather by which party has stronger or more important connections.

When Josef 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 the case. There are many reasons as to why Josef 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 in their lack of order and justice that they claim to provide. 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.

This system in which the government possesses complete power over the people is referred to as totalitarianism. From the substance of the novel, it is clear that Franz Kafka wrote it to critique this form of government in modern Russian society. The people in power are capable of doing almost anything they wish and the law does not play a role in these decisions. It all comes down to the scanty and unofficial bureaucracy that Kafka comments on. Given by the content of the novel, it is evident that it takes place in a European setting representing an oppressive government in modern society. Different characters such as Titorelli, Huld, and Block demonstrate the shortcomings of this system and exemplify what it is to be a part of an authoritarian government that handles important dilemmas unjustly.

The parallelism between K’s arrest and his death is an essential part of the novel as a whole. Through the arrests at the beginning and the end of the novel, the inaptness of the government system, corrupt officials, and under qualified people taking on important roles is clearly visible and one is able to sum up the main themes that Kafka so cleverly emphasizes.

Josef K is captured and killed on his birthday, in the same way that he was arrested on his thirtieth birthday some time before. The guards that drive him to his execution are clearly just doing their job with no knowledge of the allegations. K. is killed with no justification; after all of the deviations in his trial, the biased politics, and the inadequate judicial issues that he undergoes, he is executed arbitrarily and with no explanation. Besides highlighting the haphazard actions of the government, this parallelism also evokes the idea that the totalitarian ways of the system are unchanging and challenging to escape. After everything K. goes through, it is somewhat shown that the law is not on his side, and that he is bound to have negative results. The analogous arrests at the beginning and end of the novel serve to demonstrate that this form of government is not progressive, and that it is difficult to come out of these unreasonable structures. This incident and closure to the novel not only underlines Kafka’s critique on the abuse of power occurring in Europe during these times, but also sums up the novel and confirms Kafka’s idea that there is no way of evading or overcoming these sorts of issues in a totalitarian government such as the one presented in the novel.

Kafka’s omission of the details of the trial also encourage the readers to understand that the book is not about Josef K.’s crime, (whether he committed it or not), but rather about the way it is handled by the government and the unscrupulous, inexpert officials that abuse their power and lead K. to his death. The public is left questioning whether or not K. deserved this undocumented punishment. Was it implemented in the right way, had he committed the crime he was accused of? We are never certain that K. is innocent, but regardless of this detail, we are confident that the legal affairs regarding this trial are never carried out professionally, and in the exclusion of these seemingly important details, Kafka achieves his goal of presenting modern Russian society as one that lacks principals of justice and professionalism.

From the moment of Josef K.’s arrest, the critique on totalitarianism and an inadequate government is surfaced, and the readers are acquainted with the main idea that Kafka promotes in his novel. It is through this event that the readers begin to grasp the fact that this world that K. lives in is not privy to professional and formal structures. The guards that first arrest him are mindless workers that not only arbitrarily, but also lightly, detain K. for an unspecified crime, yet allow him to go about his daily life. They resemble the defects of the totalitarian government that Kafka attempts to satirically characterize, and serve to mark the initiation of K.’s process in the court. From this point, the unorganized court hearing, incompetence of Huld’s job as K.’s lawyer, and the inexplicable assignments of undeserving people to high official positions are only supplements to this prefaced theme. The multiple situations in “The Trial” embody characteristics of a chaotic, informal, and partial bureaucracy. They collectively delineate Kafka’s perception of what modern society consists of, and by the end of the novel, (though unfinished), the readers wholly understand his commentary on how a totalitarian government brings society to its demise. 

Final Paper!

Camille Kelleher

Mr. Shapiro

AP English Literature and Composition

5 May 2014

Franz Kafka’s The Trial: Human Institutions and the Absurd

In his novel The Trial, Franz Kafka describes Josef K.’s encounter with a hidden totalitarian government and his transformation under the noted government’s pressures and disturbances in his life. The ongoing madness and Josef K.’s personal destruction captures the vulnerability of human institutions like the church, family, and state to human desires and the absurd, an existential idea that gives no meaning in the world besides the one that humans assign to it. Kafka criticizes mankind’s innate and destructive logic to create societal institutions that confine citizens and inevitably lead to the failure of human values and beliefs. These institutions attempt to deceive citizens by hiding life’s chaos and uncertainty, a process highlighted by the court system.

Throughout the book, Josef K. meets multiple characters who maintain their own different roles in society and possess exclusive knowledge of the court system. Their respective influence in the court system varies by character, but all of their interactions in the court system lead to minimal progress for Josef K.’s trial. All of them have inconsequential effect in Josef K.’s trial because they are subservient to the totalitarian government (Emen). Josef K.’s interactions vary with the characters given their role in society. Block the Merchant signifies a citizen who is enslaved to human institutions and causes his own self-destruction because he is attached to ideals designed to fail. He is overly conscious about his position in society and interactions with Josef K. because he establishes his opinion on artificial human values. When Josef K. asks him about his past with lawyers, he replies, “I’ll confide in part, but you have to tell me a secret too, so that we both have something to hold over the other with regard to the lawyer” (Kafka Ch. 8). His inability to escape the human institutions leads to self-destruction both in his personal life and career. He hired five more lawyers because he does not want to overlook anything that could be valuable to his case and spent everything on his trial attempting to ensure unconquerable success. While Block is trying to solve the system, there are other characters that simply accept its abusiveness.

Titorelli the Painter provides a different perspective on the court system. He paints portraits of court officials and gossips about the court with Josef K., but acts like a beggar when he tries to sell his artwork. The manufacturer who suggested that Josef K. talk to him says, “a person is naturally reluctant to allow himself to be advised by a fellow like that” (Kafka Ch. 7). Josef K. still talks to Titorelli because Titorelli encompass the same characteristics, illusive and ignorant, that judges possess since he personally works with them. Even though he is a source of information for Josef K., Titorelli is just another interconnected member of the court. His apartment is directly connected to the courtroom and provides intimate access for the judges to enter his bedroom. Titorelli represents the opposite of his role as a painter, one of creativity and freedom, because the judges demand to be painted “like the great judges of old” (Kafka Ch. 7). Titorelli says that he tends “to lose a good deal of artistic energy” because “the rules for painting the various levels of officials are so numerous, so varied, and above all so secret, that they simply are not known beyond certain families” (Kafka Ch. 7). The extent of control and censorship over Titorelli’s work is supported by all of his paintings following the same formula (Emen). Titorelli tries to sell different pieces of his artwork to Josef K. but all of the pieces look exactly the same, “It may have been intended as a companion piece, but not the slightest difference could be seen between it and the first one” (Kafka Ch. 7). The lack of freedom or creativity in his work establishes that Titorelli is merely a tool of the court system (Emen). Titorelli knows a lot about the court system and the judges but is unable to help progress K’s case. Although Titorelli works independently for the judges, the men who work for the system see Josef K.’s outsider-like weakness.

During his arrest, Josef K. talks to the inspector who accepts the idea of chaos and the absurd in everyday life. When Josef K. continues to hammer the inspector with primary questions about his case, the inspector replies, “think less about us and what is going to happen to you, and instead think more about yourself” (Kafka Ch. 1). This signals the start of Josef K.’s transformation from accepting the human institutions to eventually rejecting them at the end of the book.

Superstitions and traditions are prime examples for symptoms of human institutions that confine citizens and ultimately lead to the inevitable failure of human values and beliefs. They allow humans to place blame and effort on theoretical forces that have no definite effect on the respective humans’ futures and societal standings, “Don’t forget in proceedings like this there are always lots of different things coming up to talk about, things that you just cannot understand with reason alone, you just get too tired and distracted for most things and so, instead, people rely on superstition” (Kafka Ch. 8). There are plenty of irrelevant superstitions that exist in the court that determine the verdict, displacing the legitimacy of logic and reasoning, “There are lots who believe that, and they said they could see from the shape of your lips that you’d definitely be found guilty very soon” (Kafka Ch. 8). When society is characterized by superstitions, even though they are disproved by facts, it is hard to avoid them and they can have serious effects on decisions.  One tradition that is present in Josef K.’s trial is the reliance on lawyers. Lawyers are needed to win cases because they know how to manipulate the court system to win their cases. This is determined by their ability to manipulate other people and their decisions. Lawyers support a set of beliefs that theoretically yield a successful and evident conclusion.

The pursuit of success and a final, concrete conclusion is another tradition based on society’s absurd belief set. After Josef K. was initially arrested, he received a phone call from a court associate relaying information about his initial inquiry schedule. Josef K. was left with a false pretense that “they had selected the expedient of this succession of closely spaced but brief inquiries” (Kafka Ch. 2). The court had to disillusion Josef K. because he is only comfortable with the idea that it was everyone’s “general interest to bring his trial to a rapid conclusion (Kafka Ch. 2)” when this is actually unimportant to the court. Josef K.’s attachment to societal pretenses has no significance in the court system and even the universe at all. In the story, Josef K. tries so hard to conclude his case and maintain his innocence that he disowns his personal life and struggles to live because he simply cannot adopt a different set of societal beliefs.

Titorelli’s offering of different outcomes for Josef K.’s case shows the court’s alternate set of values and beliefs. Josef K. becomes more unsettled when he realizes that neither of the choices have a definitive conclusion and answer. The first option of apparent acquittal turns Josef K.’s trial into a viscous cycle of acquittals and arrests. The second option of protraction leaves his trial at the lowest level of the court without any progression past the initial stage. After listening to the descriptions of both options, Josef K.’s “head ached from the effort he had made to force himself to listen” (Kafka Ch. 7), Josef K. will never be at peace with his case and he has to accept that the future involves the court system’s pressure for control over his life. The totalitarian government leaves no freedom for its dependents and Josef K. has yet to accept and become comfortable with this idea because he cannot give up his autonomy that was present in his life before he was arrested. This whole conflict and lack of peace leaves Josef K. wanting more and making worse decisions because of his lack of flexibility.

The allegory presented by the prison chaplain in the cathedral addresses the paradox that humans believe ideas, values, and beliefs even though they cannot physically see it and its proof. It is about a man who is desperately trying to gain permission to enter a door and he dies before his wish is granted (Kafka). Everything about the plot is logical, but the setting and characters are somewhat allusive and are not at all identical with reality. The characters do not have any human characteristics or traits and are rather translated to motives. The man from the countryside is a persistent desire while the doorkeeper is like an obstacle to the identity of a hidden Law that neither of them knows (Deinert). The man from the countryside who is waiting for permission from the doorkeeper is like the man who is looking for freedom but always blocks himself from it or the man who is looking for absolute happiness but can never find it. They are all the same characters, a man desiring an absolute ideal that does not exist in reality (Deinert). This describes Josef K., because he never achieves a sense of isolation from the court system. There is no exit from the court system and there is no way to avoid the system. It is an absolute that engulfs everyone even though it cannot be felt nor perceived.

Josef K. loses a sense of hope and ambition as he spends more time under arrest and experiences the institution’s limitations. His transformation from before he was arrested to the end of his life highlights the weaknesses of the bureaucracy created by humans. Although Josef K. is nowhere near an adolescent figure at the beginning of the book, he has a sense of optimism as Chief Financial Officer for his bank and the future with Fraulein in his boarding house. He was aware of life’s unanticipated distractions and hardships, “When you’ve been in the world for thirty years already and had to you’re your won way though everything yourself, which as been my lot, then you become hardened to surprises and don’t take them too hard” (Kafka Ch. 1). Josef K. does not think the arrest is important because he assumes he is rightfully innocent since he has not committed a crime. On page 14 of the book (Kafka), Josef K. brainstorms many questions about his trial that are all based on logical observations and reasoning. Yet, as time continues after he gets arrested, he becomes more pessimistic about life and society in general and he realizes that there is really no definitive goal for humans to achieve in their lives. He becomes more secure with the idea that humans all have the same fate regardless of their class, gender, age, race, and culture. A sense of the human condition shines through near the end of Josef K.’s transformation: concerns including the meaning of life, search for gratification or evident conclusion, inevitability of isolation, and the awareness of the inescapability (Contributors). The men who kill Josef K. are formal and of higher society in order to show that an individual’s role is irrelevant to his vulnerability to hidden and oppressive institutions. Right before his execution, Josef K. realizes that the men who are able to thrive in the totalitarian driven society, like the executors, give up all instincts that would allow them to thrive in competitive, naturally selective reality and screams, “Like a dog!...as if the shame of it should outlive him” (Kafka Ch. 10). People’s perspectives and influences on an individual are more important than how an individual lives their lives, and that was Josef K.’s weakness in this totalitarian and bureaucratic environment.

Franz Kafka’s descriptive characters and their roles in the court system, the confinement of superstitions and traditions, the cathedral allegory, and Josef K.’s transformation highlights his vulnerability to manmade institutions like the totalitarian government and bureaucracy. This criticism of mankind’s innate and destructive logic places the importance of reality below the absurd and its ability to deceive all individuals.

Works Cited

Contributors, Wikipedia. Wikipedia. 24 4 2014. 4 5 2014 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_condition>.

Deinert, Herbert. "Kafka's Parable Before the Law." The Germanic Review (1964): unkwn.

Emen, Jake. Yahoo Voices. 27 6 2007. 13 4 2014 <http://voices.yahoo.com/franz-kafkas-trial-stylistic-perspective-on-401000.html?cat=38>.

Kafka, Franz. The Trial. Trans. Breon Mitchell. New York: Schocken Books, 1998.

Final Term Paper

In Kafka's novel, The Trial, a phony bureaucracy under an unnamed society of men control and ultimately wear down K. into a completely different person. The idea that social creations like a fake bureaucracy are created to manipulate people ultimately can change who we are at our core existence. In the beginning of the novel, Joseph K. is described as being a self made, hard working, and independent young man with a great deal of potential within himself. Kafka made K. in the beginning of the novel to be perfectly autonomous and perfectly fine with himself. He was described as being happy with himself, until he got arrested for no named reason. After that day, the decline in not only the morale but also the spirit of K. began. This deterioration of K.'s soul will help almost predict the way in which we live and function in our society today. Kafka's novel almost parallels something of a prediction of what is to come in the future for mankind, stemming from the idea that human nature is to do what we want to do, and be extremely selfish. 

K.'s transformation into the man he died as started as a completely different person. He did not rely on anyone, only himself. K. was a successful banker in an industry that fed solely on competition, another indicator of the great mental condition that K. was in before his arrest. He was described as being happy with himself, until he got arrested for no named reason. K. even is seen as describing the men who arrested him as "underlings" to him. He viewed the world around him as sub-par to him, and ideal present in some of the most successful people today. In the first chapter, during K.'s arrest, he tries to go above and beyond and try and look into why he is being arrested. He sneaks around and brainstorms ways as to why he would have gotten arrested, without deciding to give up. These ideals are not present in K. after the arrest, he just let's everything sort of play out, even if it's for the worst. K. transforms into a pragmatic person with his arrest. He stops the clawing and scratching that got him to the top of his food chain of his bank, and ultimately allows for his "trial" to overrun and transform him into that pragmatic version of himself. K. is demanding in the first scenes of the novel, and is seen as not wanting to back down from his territory. If he wanted something, he went out and did everything in his power to retrieve that want, something completely different about himself at the end. It's almost as if K. becomes an old man towards the end of the novel. After the day of his arrest, the decline in not only the morale but also the spirit of K. began. K.'s travel through the labyrinth of corrupt institutions in this novel help show the deterioration process of his soul and his growth into an old man (spiritually, not physically). 

All of the successful qualities present in K. during the brief encounter before his arrest quickly evaporated as his life went on after his arrest. His qualities of getting the job done, and finding a way to make things work out in his favor turned into qualities of sluggishness and inefficiency. A man once described as being persistent and climbing the ladder of success at his bank quickly took a 360 degree turn into someone completely different. The trial became too much for K. to handle, but it's not like he did not put up a decent fight. He started going to his trial "hearings" and soon realized that the whole system was basically some phony, societal based community of student lawyers. He becomes completely obsessed with his trial, showing up to the court rooms on days that weren't even assigned as days just because maybe there was a chance that he did have a hearing that day, and he accidentally forgot about it. This begins to show the obsessive behavior that K. develops over time, which leads to his ultimate demise as a character. The obsessive behavior displayed by K. in the middle of the novel begin to leak in his work. K. turns to the painter, Titorelli, for help. Titorelli offers some help, but gives no definitive answers, leading K. to hire a lawyer. K. gives his case up to someone else, instead of taking it by the horns and trying to take the case on by himself. The biggest turning point for K. is when he sees the lawyer's client who has the same problem as K. He shows to both K. and to the reader that once you're stuck in the trial system, you're stuck for life, and have to devote your life to basically just prolong your existence on the planet. So, instead of trying to find an answer to this, or working through the process, he just decides to fire his lawyer, and take the trial into his own (now lazy and indifferent) hands. Rather than working through the process with his lawyer, and prolonging his life span, he decided to throw in the towel and call it quits. The whole dynamic displayed by Kafka in this novel help show the deterioration of a once very successful young man with a lot of potential. Kafka uses K. and the trial to show how certain aspects of the governing bodies around us can sometimes change who we are and ultimately control who we are at our core existences.

The idea of changing who we are based on policies and structures put in place by the government stems largely off of The Trial. Kafka uses K. as an example of this deterioration of the human soul built off of societal institutions. Everything we build up as a society for the "greater good" of society itself can sometimes do more damage than good. As humans, we always have the intrinsic need to please ourself and satisfy our own needs over everyone else's. Kafka displays this in the phony bureaucracy placed in The Trial. Whoever created the bureaucracy obviously had bigger plans in mind for himself/herself, but promoted it as a good thing for society. K. is the example of the innocent bystander that is struck by the negative externality of the fake institution, which was operating towards the need or want of another human being in the web that makes up society. Therefore, what we create in society ultimately can (and usually does) hurt that same society. K. is Kafka's main emphasis on this idea, showing that even the most successful people in society can fall down based on the institutions that we perceive to be doing a good job for society. It's odd that Kafka seemed to be able to exaggerate and foresee such an imperceivable type of civilization. In the United States, we live under a government that seems to grow closer and closer into what seems to feel like something along the lines of what Kafka writes about. A governmental institution that could change innocent bystanders, just like K. With portions of the government like the NSA and all that the internet tracks, literally any person in all of the United States is under watch, and is under some suspicion at all times. It doesn't quite fit the extreme population that Kafka promotes in his book, but it definitely raises some eyebrows as to where we are headed as a nation and society. K. suffers to show the potential of a bureaucracy as radical as the one in The Trial. A bureaucracy that could take the most successful of people, turn them into crap, and then take their life. Whoever is under the control of an institution like that portrayed in The Trial has his/her own, personal, wants that will ultimately gained regardless of whose lives are taken in the process. In this case, it was K.'s life for the want of another. In other cases, it could be me or you.

All in all, K.'s transformation is a direct portrayal of Kafka's exaggerated ideas on government and bureaucracy and how it is all filled with crap to make everything seem good and happy. Government and the way government was brought up was by telling people that it was going to be implemented to help better our society. But as most of us know by now, people act in accordance of their own, individual needs, not the needs of others (only in a very small percentage of the population do people make an effort for others). When you have enlightened physiocrats like John Locke basically saying that the government will help us all and that if it didn't that we'd simply rebel and take it over again, they make it seem like government is a great idea. Kafka, on the other hand, believed that government could be dangerous, and it was evident in K.'s life/death in the novel that this was the case. In today's world, people constantly speak about the growing power of the government and the loss in power of privacy. Although not a part of government, look at Donald Sterling. The guy's whole legacy as this great NBA team owner was literally completely dismantled when his mistress recorded him. It happened so fast, almost too fast. A growing technologically advanced world mixed with a power hungry world ran by the government leaves the average civilian at risk of things like this, and that's what Kafka was emphasizing in his novel. His ideas are extreme, but the possibility of something happening like what happened to K. is looking more and more possible. People's individual needs and satisfactions will always outweigh those that are present in another person. The people leading our government today are people who are extremely greedy and are people who lie, a lot. Look at all of the campaign speeches and commercials. It's just all propaganda to get a certain candidate a seat in office and for them to reap benefits and to do what they want to do. Obama took advantage of a large African-American community to win office again, promising to take out our troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, yet he leaves them after two terms in office. It's just ridiculous to think of what depths these greedy people will go to to get exactly what they want. You think those men in the army want to stay in Afghanistan? No. Then why are they there? Because of their president, and their government taking advantage of others for the needs of their own. K. was the victim of this in the novel, being manipulated and worn down up until his inevitable death, much like some of our troops in the army. It's a bit of a stretch, but the connection is actually somewhat there. The fact that Kafka almost predicted this in his book a hundred years ago is incredible.

Word Count: 1844

Works cited and headers/titles will be on the printed version.

TERM PAPER

Max Bochner

Mr. Shapiro

Period 1

May 5, 2014

The Trial: A State of Alienation

Many people in society believe that in a time of need others will provide one with necessary aid in order to help in the predicament that one is situated in. This includes a wide range of people from friends to families to lawyers. However, In The Trial by Franz Kafka, we see that sometimes there is nothing that these people can do as a higher force may tie their hands. Joseph K. an ordinary businessman many trying to make a name for himself in society is arrested for a crime he is unaware he committed. Furthermore, the government refuses to acknowledge his request to inform him what the crime he is being accused of is. This pressure from the oppressive government causes him to be both alienated by society and stubborn to accept any aid being offered to him.

The governing body that is mainly responsible for alienating K. from society is the court. In the novel, the court represents a society where everyone is forced to conform and adhere to a specific standard. No one can be different and the court does everything in its power to attempt to alienate those who are different. When K. is initially arrested one of the guards points this out. They tell him “you should talk less in general; almost everything you’ve said up to now could have been inferred from your behavior, even if you’d said only a few words, and it wasn’t terribly favorable in any case,”  (Kafka Ch. 1). This guard is blatantly telling K. that no matter if he is being truthful or fictitious, the court has a way of turning what he says against him, so it is in K.’s best interest not to act at all as what he does can incriminate himself even further. The court sees itself as a body that is never wrong, which allows them to make the “correct” decision regarding every trial. In fact, at one point in the novel K. is told that because the court never sees its accusations as being wrong his life will be contained by this trial for an extended period of time. There is even a hint that the trial might be in existence for the entity of K.’s life. When K. hears this, he realizes that this is not the only one being oppressed by this power hungry governing body but that it is happening to many people in society around him. “What has happened to me is merely a single case and such of no particular consequence, since I don’t take it very seriously, but it is typical of the proceeding being brought against many people. I speak for them, not for myself!” (Kafka Ch.3). In this quote, K. is showing how a governing body such as the court has way too much power. In fact, they have enough control and influence in society to force K. to act by himself. Every single victim that K. is speaking about is alienated. They need to realize that the court is in complete control of every aspect of society not only the government. When speaking about the court a priest notes “It receives you when you come and dismisses you when you go,” (Kafka Ch. 9). In other words, the court controls more aspect of the world than K. can even tell. It influences the government and church, which shows its great amount of power. Many times when someone is in a state of alienation they turn to religion as a safe haven. However, this trial has even eliminated that factor. The church has been influenced by the court and makes it so K. cannot turn to this body for support on getting out of the isolation caused by the trial (Kafka).

Due to the corruption of the governing body, K. is forced to attempt to create a defense in order to rid himself of these ridiculous crimes. However, the theme of isolation heavily applies to this situation. K. is forced to take matters into his own hands and eventually defend himself due to lack of effort and focus from the outside world including Huld. K. begins to analyze each aspect so crazily that he believes only he will be able to defend himself in the correct manner. However, in terms of his defense this might have not been the best idea.  “Don’t go into shock at every word… You should be ashamed here in front of my client!... It’s senseless anxiety!” (Kafka Ch. 10). This statement was directed towards Block in front of K. by Huld, K.’s lawyer. It displays how even though K. might think that he is getting a fair defense, in reality there is nothing K. or Huld can even do about to alter his current situation. The court has isolated them and Block knows this. Block is acknowledging the fact that from what he knows about the courts through experience, it is not a governing body that you would want to mess with. He is explaining that K. should become nervous due to his blindness in this situation. Another very interesting aspect of the defense is how he is sent from person to person as everyone is starting to admit that they have no control. For example, he is sent from his uncle to Huld to the court painter. Everyone thinks that someone else will have a greater influence in the court than he will. However, K. neglects these professionals and decides to isolate himself and create his own defense. He shuts everyone out of his trial including his own lawyer. In fact, he does not even acknowledge the lawyer anymore when he starts to go to his house and eventually begins to sleep with his housekeeper instead. This upsets Huld and makes it so that he probably will not want to put a lot of effort into helping K. out. Although some may argue that K. forced himself into a state of isolation in this circumstance, did he really have a choice? No one in society had a fighting chance of changing the outcome of his trial. Due to this, it is the court that forced him into this state (Kafka).

At the beginning of the novel, Kafka characterizes Joseph K. as a man who devotes a significant amount of time to business. In fact, he describes himself as being a businessman thinks of himself higher than he does others in his workplace. K. describes how others were jealous because he is so devoted and excels in his occupational environment. However, the alienation that is caused by the trial begins to impede on this environment due to the fact that it is drawing all of his attention and time. People in his workplace begin to recognize this odd occurrence and attempt to alleviate any extra stress or pressure that is caused by work. In fact, the Vice President of K.’s company steals a client from K. and goes as far as explaining the predicament that K. is in to the client. “While his trial rolled on, while the officials of the court were up in there attic going over the trial documents, he was supposed to conduct bank business? Didn’t that seem like a form of torture, sanctioned by the court, a part of the trial itself accompanying it,” (Kafka Ch.7). In this quote Kafka is noting on the fact that it will be very difficult for K. to have this sense of professionalism when he has a daunting trial creeping over his shoulder. This just further alienates K. instead of helping him in a positive way. He is now forced to act alone in work and lets the trial consume more parts of his work. Even though the boss thinks that he may be helping Joseph, in reality, he is probably just creating more chaos for a man who does not need more of that. “Didn’t a painstaking defense simultaneously imply the necessity of cutting himself of as far as possible from everything else? Would he successfully survive that?” (Kafka Ch. 7). This quote explains the idea that the different aspects his life from before the trial kept K. sane. While others may think that alleviating work from a man may make him better, you are in reality taking away something that he is used to doing everyday and it makes him happy. This image that is created at the beginning of K. being a businessman is slowly beginning to disappear. He is now being looked at as a charity case who needs help in everyway possible or else he may not survive the trial. The trial is starting to take over the one part of his life that he cared the most about and once you take over that part of K.’s life, he is going to be completely shut out from the outside world. This situation is going to force K. to begin to work on his trial more and more ultimately causing him to fold and crash. If the trial did not consume his entire life, then he might have pursued his career further and ultimately had a better life for himself. The trial truly messed up his chances in this regard (Kafka).

The one reoccurring aspect in the novel that is most responsible for the alienation of Joseph K. is the unknown. Throughout the novel there is multiple significant events that cause K. to be isolated from society. If K. would have been told what he was being accused of at the beginning of his trial then he could have formulated a sufficient defense. As a result, he would not have been left helpless with a lawyer who has his hands tied. His personal relationships would have most likely remained intact as he would he would be clueless the entire duration of the trial. Furthermore, his business career would not have been ruined, as he would have had more time to devote towards the trial. However this is not the case and it is the unknown that causes all of these different institutions to turn against K. He has no choice but to give in. In fact, Kafka even notes, “K. felt threatened by from a thousand directions,” (Kafka Ch. 9). He is certainly being threatened by the trial as it is leading to both physical and mental isolationism (Kafka).

In conclusion, the novel ends with K. being killed by two men in suits on his own birthday. At this point in time K. has hit rock bottom in his trial. He has realized that no matter what he does that the court will control it and make it so that K. has no way of escaping the trial. By including the death at the end of the novel it makes it so K. dies alone. He was forced into this isolated state and ended up perishing because of it.

Works Cited

Kafka, Franz. The Trial. Definitive ed. New York: Knopf, 1957. Print.

Shmoop Editorial Team. "The Trial Quotes." Shmoop.com. Shmoop University, Inc., 11 Nov. 2008. Web. 4 May 2014. <http://www.shmoop.com/the-trial-kafka/quotes.html>.