Kafka - The Trial

Should I Be Reading This?

Comparing Franz Kafka with a more modern author, such as J.K. Rowling, is much like comparing Wilt Chamberlain to Kobe Bryant. It is extremely difficult to compare these two NBA stars when they played sixty years apart from one another. There are so many factors to consider including: the quality of coaching, competition, etc. Just like Chamberlain and Bryant, Kafka and any modern author are very difficult to put against one another. Kafka comes from a place and a situation that is foreign to almost everyone who reads him. How can he be compared to anyone but himself? Who is it that determines if Kafka is great or not? Even in basketball, there are statistics (points, rebounds, blocks) that can be compared, but in writing the only thing that can be compared is sales. Going by that, J.K. Rowling is in a league of her own compared to Kafka. The point that I am trying to make is that you as the reader can be the only determinant of this greatness. Yes; schools and universities do make you read the novel but the only person that can decide if it is truly a masterpiece is yourself. This essay will try to explain my opinion of why I think Franz Kafka, and more specifically The Trial, is something that has been taught and analyzed for over fifty years.

The Trial, by Franz Kafka, is a story about a man by the name of Joseph K. He finds himself woken on his thirtieth birthday with the news that he is under arrest. Joseph K., or K. as he commonly referred to, knows that he has done nothing wrong and believes that someone is trying to yank his chain. K. plays along with the story for a while but slowly his situation starts getting more and more serious. This arrest is unlike any other. K. is instructed to appear at several court hearings, which are held in the most unofficial of places, an apartment. Kafka creates a world for K. that is unlike anything else. It seems that everyone knows about K. and his accused crime but himself. He hires a top-notch lawyer recommended by his uncle with the hope that it can get out of the trouble that he isn’t even aware of. The lawyer does absolutely nothing to help K. and his problems. The story concludes with K. giving up and letting two men take his life.

One of the most unique aspects of this novel is that the audience is left with a huge amount of questions open for debate. I found this style by Kafka confusing and frustrating while reading because it’s something that I’m not used to. However, looking back on The Trial, I feel like that confusion has not totally disappeared but the frustration has turned into a kind of admiration. From the start, Kafka made me question if K. was truly innocent. For some reason (possibly the way he treats women) there is a lingering question if Joseph K. actually did something wrong that deserves judicial action. I think it takes extreme talent to write something that will have readers argue over so frequently in the novel. Another example of this is when K. discovers “the Whipper” whipping two men in the lumber room of the bank. K. feels terrible because his complaints are what they are getting punished for. At first I was shocked when I read this. Then, the questions poured out. “What is happening?” “Why would Kafka ever include this?” “Is this foreshadowing K.’s eventual punishment?” These were just some of the questions that were whizzing around in my head. I believe that all of these “WTF” moments at times make you wonder how crazy of a person Kafka was in real-life. However, I also think that these moments add something special to the book that is unique to Kafka.

Something that also impressed me about this book was that Joseph K.’s situation and story is similar to many recent Hollywood movie plots in the last ten years. “The Truman Show”, starring Jim Carey, is a movie about the main character coming to the realization that the world as he knew it is full of actors and