/lit/ - Literature

Well what do you expect, Kafka started with the ending and never finished the damn thing before dying. It's suppose to be ambiguous and confusing, part of what makes it so good.

>>1108760
i thought he died before finishing, "the castle."

i might be wrong. i would help op but i haven't read the trial in nearly ten years.

>>1108768

Most of Kafka's work was left unfinished, IIRC, that's why nearly all of his stories were published posthumously, even though Kafka had wanted everything to be destroyed after his death.

I always thought the ending probably would have been left confusing and ambiguous even if Kafka had polished it and published it himself. The point is that K's execution doesn't seem to make sense. No part of his trial has been comprehensible to him. All the rules are known only by some vague, abstract class of people who are pulling the strings, but whom K can never hope to meet (remember the "Before the Law" parable).

The thing about 'The Trial' is it actually just sucks.

>>1108870
>triptroll

it's a work about government obscurity at the time and the complexity of the law. not that hard OP. I read Kafka when I was a freshman in hs.

He didn't finish it OP

However, you can find notes by Max Prod on the intended ending as Kafka did tell him prior to his death.

Wow a thread on a decent book.

OP don't feel the need to have answered all the questions finishing it has left you with. I find that gives you a good reason to re-read it.

>>1108894

>Wow a thread on a famous book written by a widely renowned author on /lit/! I just assume that it's great even though I haven't read the boring clusterfuck piece of shit myself.

>After all I read The Metamorphosis and The Judgment and that shit was da bomb!

>>1108886

God if there's one thing I hate it's someone saying that something "isn't that hard" followed by a proclamation of their own incredibly feats of strength or intelligence.

Fuck your face faggot.

>>1108900

>>1108906

incredible -

It's not that hard to spell incredible I've been doing it since I was four and a half.

Darnielle what are you trying to prove here?

I hate when people have to get all vocal about hating something critically respected. I don't really care when all you have to say is that it "sucks".

I read The Trial before Metamorphosis & I'd have to say the former is alot better. It's definitely in my top 3 favourite novels evar.

>>1108942
Yeah I think he's just butthurt because he's being forced to read The Trial in one of his high school classes. Hence why I posted >>1108908.

>>1108942

I don't like the way you phrased your comment. As if this entire board only discusses terrible books and now that someone has come to discuss a real classic you have to comment on how unique that is; as if everybody hasn't already read most of Kafka's overrated cannon.

What did you like about 'The Trial' anyways? Okay well that question is stupid really, and if you don't answer I won't hold that as some sort of proof. I like a lot of books and I don't always feel like defending my tastes either. But the appeal of this book I have never understood.

>>1108958
I was just conveying my annoyance that 4/5 threads are on contemporary or fantasy novels that I don't recognise or care about. I'd rather hear about what classics I might add to my to-read list next.

I've only read it once so I can't describe why I liked it so much as I felt at the time of reading. I think it was that he creates such strong visual images with his descriptions despite (in my opinion) having a pretty low-level vocabulary for a classic author (is that just English translation though?). I was unable to get my head around the Priest's parable so there's some interest in the depth there too. It will probably be one of the first things I ever re-read.

>>1108987

I think that you are probably a remarkably non brilliant person and statements like...

>Contemporary that I don't recognize or care about...

Reinforce my view. Sorry we aren't all be little western cannon babies discussing Camus and Dostoyevsky with you esteemed intellectuals.

>>1108999

Ugh I hadn't decided on "We aren't all" and "we can't be". I really need to give my posts a read over more often.

>>1108999
>I think that you are probably a remarkably non brilliant person and statements like...

darnielle, can you refrain from saying shit like this? You're coming off like that shit-trip deepandedgy and it's no good.

i liked the trial. i just like how there is this system that is keeping k down and it's all designed to keep him from finding out why. i imagine people can feel like that sometimes and it's why the book is famous. the orson welles film was also cool. it's definitely worth it for any fan of the book.

>>1108999
I don't know how to respond to that really. The books posted here just seem random. Why would I bother with a book that might be lackluster when all the classics I've read so far have been great?

canon

>>1109017
>the orson welles film was also cool
dunno if i will ever see this. doesn't seem to be on megaupload.

>>1109026
well see it when you can. it's not the greatest movie ever but it's damn good. better than citizen kane imo. the ending was a little different but for the most part i remember it being on-point.

>>1109045
>better than citizen kane imo
hmm either that or godfather part ii is my favourite ever

what do you think is welle's best movie?

>>1109049
oh gosh. i've only seen kane and the trial by him. sorry.

my current favorite movie is, "brazil." it's slow but really great. it's like a dark comedic version of 1984.

The Castle is a lot better.

>>1109066
I'm still scouring the web for a .txt of it -_-

The one I found was a shitty .doc with no paragraphing.

>>1109066
i agree. the castle was funnier and the minor characters seemed more interesting imo.

The Trial is very straightforward if you know that the author had TB (usually a terminal illness in those days) while he was writing it. Hence the idea of a death sentence that to be carried out with no set date, with no charges, etc.

>>1109079
http://cache.kotaku.com/assets/resources/2008/04/kafkacastle.jpg

if you can, get this translation.

>>1109093
kl well I get access to a uni library next month.

>>1109090
It's also incredibly straight-forward if you know the slightest thing about bureaucracies and the crisis of modernity.

>>1109106
Be careful. Your family might eventually kl u if you turn into a textbook completely.

.>>1109106
oh we all know you're the expert, deepandedgy.

go away, loser

>>1109090
>>1109106
Novices.

The Trial is deliberately uninterpretable. Or rather, you can read anything into it, which is what makes it great. To say that's it's about tuberculosis or bureaucracy is kind of missing the point but it's not entirely false.

Just project your life into it.

>>1109326
wow there's at least one person as smart as me on /lit/...

>>1109332
>> at least as smart as funny
If not, more.

>>1109326
XD i hope you are joking. Kafka's work dealth with very specific themes. if you need a reference point study the painting movement of expressionism. the themes of religious/social anxiety, reaction against the materialism which came to dominate central european thought, fatalism, absurdity and human emotions (embryonic sense of psychology) were all present in the trial. the final scene of the trial is not deliberately obscure, but is like a dark mirror placed against the rest of the novel, what the protagonist stood for throughout the narrative condensed into a final moment of resignation. Kafka illuminated the edge of resignation, gave it a sparkling spirituality and offered it as the only possible response to life. It is beautiful. ;_;

>>1109326
>deliberately uninterpretable
Stupid way of putting it, everyting is interpretable.
Also,
>deliberately
Hi there E.D. Hirsch

>you can read anything into it, which is what makes it great
I can read anything into my newspaper on any given morning, that must make it a great fucking work of literature too!

>To say that's it's about tuberculosis or bureaucracy
To say that it's about TB or bureacracy is to give an interpretation of the text, which is all that is possible

>missing the point
there is no point

>Just project your life into it.
Grade A nonsense

Sandwiches if you step to me again I will beat your fucking ass black and blue.

>>1109347
Care to elaborate on these "very specific things" without resorting to vague terminology?

Also, did you just sparknote those themes or something? Sounds like high-school tier analysis.

>>1109355
You're neither deep nor edgy. I stand by what I say, and I'm not the first nor will I be the last.

>>1109359
i already did in the previous post. you must have preschool tier attention span or reading comprehension. either way, ''deliberately uninterpretable'' is a fucking pathetic take on Kafka and you know it.
>the themes of religious/social anxiety, reaction against the materialism which came to dominate central european thought, fatalism, absurdity and human emotions (embryonic sense of psychology) were all present in the trial. the final scene of the trial is not deliberately obscure, but is like a dark mirror placed against the rest of the novel, what the protagonist stood for throughout the narrative condensed into a final moment of resignation. Kafka illuminated the edge of resignation, gave it a sparkling spirituality and offered it as the only possible response to life. It is beautiful

That translation sucks.

I remember reading it and there was a character who was a female prostitute and they could have just said she was a prostitute instead of saying that she entertained men in her inn/restaurant/bar and took them to bed for money.

Kafka's short stories and novellas are very good try reading the hunger artist, the penal colony, and the metamorphosis.

>>1109378
looool

You just copied and pasted your vague argument. Am I supposed to be convinced now that you wrote it out twice? Kafka is uninterpretable because you can interpret him infinitely. Not sure how this isn't obvious to everyone. I got it when I read it in high-school, Borges got it, Harold Bloom got it.

You tell me he's not uninterpretable but then you list off 20 "themes" of what he's "about." Are you sure you know what you're arguing?

Protip: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=kafka+uninterpretable

>>1109378
>>1109401
He's got you there. You kind of just fell right into his argument.

>>1109401
>Kafka is uninterpretable because you can interpret him infinitely.
>uninterpretable
>infinite interpretations
you dun goofed
also, bloom and borges are shit-tier and i'm so sad to see they are so popular on /lit/. learn to read real critical theorists. the themes i gave weren't vague. if you can't clearly see how kafka fits in with the expressionist movement (geographically, thematically, historically) then you really are dim. but then again, i already knew that.

>>1109417
>bloom and borges are shit-tier and i'm so sad to see they are so popular on /lit/.

This guy's alright!

>>1109417
I can understand a dislike for Bloom, but I draw the line with Borges. I'm not saying he doesn't fit with your movement of expressionism, I'm just arguing against one single interpretation for what The Trial is about, why K is being punished, why Gregor turns into a bug, if he even is a bug.

Your themes aren't necessarily vague, but you throw down a dozen "big" themes all at once and you just further validate my point. If you want to situate Kafka within a specific time and place, then go ahead, you're not wrong, but you're not right either.

Don't writers just "do" like musicians/composers?

Or is it not as pure/more mechanical?

>>1109457
What? Do you think composers just let the music flow out of them like they're channeling some supernatural force? How old are you?

>>1109449
>I'm just arguing against one single interpretation
Think you'll start a trend bro?

>>1109449
What I don't understand is how you can say that just because there is no single ''correct'' interpretation (even though, if you consider Kafka's work as a corpus you will see the themes i mentioned come up again and again, and with this knowledge you can at least descriptively interpret his work) Some critical theorists ''intervene'' giving a structural notion to the work such as Kafka via Freud or Kafka via marx, etc. I would not go that far, and yet it is clear that Kafka recreates the same situation for all of his characters (this is something a lot of great writers do) you can disagree with the specific terms used to describe his work, but to say it cannot be described is untrue.

>>1109479
>What I don't understand is how you can say that just because there is no single ''correct'' interpretation, that there can be no interpretation.
fixd

>>1109471
No you fucking retard. But people tend to ask them "were you intending to use this theme" etc & the response is usually that they don't think about it in those terms. The interpret their own works themselves.

>>1109483
I don't know. music is more mechanical than literature is (well novels anyway--poetry is more kin to music) so it can't be the same. certain composers (wagner, beethoven other romantics and modernists and avant guarde composers) actually do make their themes intentional.

>>1109479
Well, I'm not saying it can't be described. Just that you can easily describe anything into Kafka. That doesn't make him devoid of meaning, but rich with meaning.

Mainly, I just rage a bit when I see reductive statements like, "Oh, that Kafka sure is weird but when you think about it, it's just all about tuberculosis/bureaucracy then everything makes sense."

>>1109495
>certain composers (wagner, beethoven other romantics and modernists and avant guarde composers) actually do make their themes intentional
>[citation needed]
How do you know they didn't name after the seasons afterwards for example?

>>1109500
oh i actually agree with you there, but thats what was vague about the themes i listed i guess. i think that good interpretation is descriptive, and tbh i don't think critics are worth too much. i can identify with the idea that you could read yourself into it, the idea of a dialogue between reader and writer (and ffs, i know this to be the appeal of writers like kafka) but I don't like it when people reduce this to ''dont fucking read into it just read the story!''

>>1109483
Protip:

Whenever you ask an "artist" a question, don't expect an answer. They'll reply to you with a convoluted, beat around the bush aphorism, that is itself a an exercise in art, albeit extremely unhelpful.

>>1109509
I don't know. With beethoven for instance his third symphony was dedicated to Napoleon. The final movement was intentionally changed to be a funeral march, in order to express Beethoven's despair at Napoleon's despotism. I see some intentionality in that. Wagner wrote extensively on aesthetics (well maybe not extensively, I have heard of a few essays which Nietzsche enjoyed) and I'm fairly certain he was intentionally incorporating themes into his operas (then again that is opera so not completely the same). John Cage was intentional with his artistic statements, I would think. I can't really cite, i'm kind of a dilettante when it comes to music.

>>1109519
why u do this?

>>1109022

Have they been? Or do you just like them because they are considered great works? I've read plenty of classics and there are a ton whose merit I either didn't understand, or else I acknowledged that the book had merit but the writing style or ideas presented weren't my cup of tea.

If you like every classic you've ever read than you are either;

1. Extremely lucky in your selections, or getting good recommendations suited to your specific tastes

2. Terribly non discerning

3. Not very well read at all

>>1109837

then* ffffuuuu

>>1109837
no.3: I'm on a journey of knowledge.

>>1109386
The fuck are you talking about? The only whore I recall was Leni

>>1109887
Take that back you cockroach!

It does speak to me that none of you found it to be about depression.

>>1108886

your 'interpretation' of the trial clearly reveals that you were a freshman in hs when you read it