The Treatment of People in Franz Kafka’s the Trial, Essay Example

Introduction

One of the main themes of Kafka’s “The Trial” is the lack of human interaction and empathy. The administrator, Josef K suddenly discovers that he is under arrest, but he is unable to find out why, and cannot discuss the issue with anyone around him. It seems like people are not persons in the novel, more importantly actors and “doers”. They have a task assigned, and need to complete it. The life of the characters is defined by rules set by institutions. Therefore, the main message of Kafka’s novel is that bureaucracy and the absolute power of institutions dehumanizes individuals and reduces their ability to interact with each other. Josef K’s situation is described as desperate, uncertain, and excluded. Those who are not treated as individuals, only cases will become excluded from the society, and this is a universal truth of humanity that today’s readers should reflect on.

Objectification – Major Theme

The major theme of the novel is the objectification of persons. In the beginning of the first chapter, it is evident that everybody is supposed to play their own role determined by the rules of the society and the institutions. As an example, Mrs. Gru­bach, the landlady is meant to bring breakfast when the bell rings. The stranger is there to inform Josef K, not to help him understand the situation. He does not show any empathy, and simply looks at the senior administrator as a subject of a trial who needs to be summoned and informed. He, however, does not find it necessary to inform him about the details and the schedules of the trial, or even the crime he is accused of. This creates a confusion in Josef K, and he feels like he is unable to do anything to stop the process. He simply becomes a subject. He realizes that he simply complies with the rules: “It immediately occurred to him that he needn’t have said this out loud, and that he must to some extent have acknowledged their authority by doing so” (Kafka, 3). Josef looks at everyone as a person with a role and purpose. The only exception might be Mrs Grubach, with whom he seems to find a common ground. In the novel, he seems to develop a connection with the woman, possibly because they have the same attitude towards life: accepting and completing tasks without asking questions. K believes that they have a shared understanding, and they accept not only the good things about each other, but the bad ones as well. When talking to Miss Bustner, he tells her: “You know how much esteem Mrs. Grubach has for me, she’s the one who will make all the decisions in this, especially as the captain is her nephew, but she believes everything I say without question” (Kafka, 35). Mrs Grubach seems to be the only reliable momentum in the life of K., and the one person he can count on. He knows that she would bring in the breakfast, and when she fails to do so he knows that something is seriously wrong. In work, he is an agent processing information, and is assigned various tasks, with rules changing all the time. At court, he does not know who makes the decision or who has enough power to influence the judge. K clearly does not know where he stands with people, as they are objects in his eyes, with a specific role and mission to complete, except for Mrs Grubach.

Women As Seducers and Supporters

Stereotypes related to women are clearly visible in the naturalistic writing of Kafka. When looking at a woman, Josef K simply thinks that she might be there to seduce him: “It briefly crossed his mind that the woman meant to entrap him on behalf of the court, but that was an objection he had no difficulty in fending off” (Kafka, 67). Further, he assigns women with a different role in order to find a purpose for the category: woman. He realizes that he uses women, as well as they use him: “I’m accumulating women to help me, he thought to himself al­most in amazement, first Miss Burstner, then the court usher’s wife, and now this little care assistant who seems to have some incomprehensible need for me” (Kafka, 130).

The role of women as serving their purpose and being objectified is commonly accepted by the society described by Kafka. Even K complies with the social norms when thinking about women, and looks at Miss Burstner as a sexual object: “K did not want to exaggerate anything, he was aware that Miss Burstner was a little typist who would not offer him much resistance for long” (Kafka, 97).

Lack Of Clarity and Lack Of Control

The absolute power and authority is assigned to the court, which seem to have no head, just employees. As Leni (Kafka, 129) tells K.: “there’s nothing you can do to defend yourself from this court, you have to confess”. The court, indeed, is also an object, instead of an institution, and is referred to as an abstract idea, instead of an institution with clear rules. This causes confusion, and K is faced with various opinions presented to him about his case. Everybody seems to have a different opinion and perception of power. Therefore, K is unable to create a successful strategy to defend himself. He goes on the defensive and it does not work. Next, he tries to attack and fails.  Therefore, he later accepts faith and authority he cannot fight against.

The Role of The Court and Authorities

When Josef K is arrested, he immediately tries to apply rules and the law on the situation. He looks up his identification documents, as he assumes that it is the “done thing”. However, when he asks for an arrest note, he discovers that he is unable to make the authorities comply with the rules: he is a subject of the law and higher institution. As such, he has limited rights, and can certainly not ask questions. There is, however, no clarity in the rules and the regulations, as Franz, the policeman tells his colleague: “Look at this, Willem, he admits he doesn’t know the law and at the same time insists he’s innocent” (Kafka, 9). Josef finds himself in a situation where he can simply not fight back or come out as a winner. He goes on the defensive, but even trying to state his innocence is difficult. He talks to people who are simply objects and actors, and cannot make decisions themselves. They simply follow the rules and the instructions of higher authorities.

One important aspect of Kafka’s novel is the invisibility of authorities and power. Josef indeed does not meet his accusers, and is unable to talk to those who started the trial. This way of dealing with people is a clear example of bureaucracy that handles numbers and statistics, instead of dealing with individual cases. The fact that the court is operated based on strict rules, and does not consider the case, the person involved, and the concerns of the accused shows that the lack of personal touch could result in a world of uncertainty and a hopeless society. The reason why Josef gives up the fight and complies with the rules and orders is because he cannot see his opponent, and he is frightened that he has no power. Josef’s only  wish is to clarify issues with someone who is competent enough and can give him an insight, but he can find nobody. As he tells himself: “I just need few words with someone of the same social standing as myself and everything will be incomparably clearer” (Kafka, 9), admitting to himself that he feels excluded and confused as he cannot get answers to his most important questions concerning his future. The lack of certainty  and power is what drives him into his paranoia, and makes him psychologically vulnerable. He no longer knows what to expect from the authorities and the court, as rules are being overwritten constantly. The roles of people and power levels are also often exchanged. When K enters the courtroom and is being laughed at by the audience, he notices that “judge had become quite cross but seemed to have no power over those below him in the hall”, which is the opposite of what one would expect. Likewise, when the student is being accused, he is told to have power. Nobody explains why and how he possesses power, and what its nature is.

Dependence

Dependence is another important theme of the novel: Franz depends on the court’s decision, and his future depends on how his actions are judged. However, the rules of bureaucracy are not clear, and he is trying to navigate his way through hierarchical rules. When he talks to the woman at court, he asks whether or not her husband “is wholly dependent on his superiors” (Kafka, 62). At the same time, K. realizes that he depends on the students, and needs to please them in order to secure his freedom. In the world of civil servants, there is a complicated interdependence, and the junior officials are dependent on the rules, as well as their own personal career goals. Leni warns K. that “Yes, later on you become very de­pendent on your lawyer”. In order to fully understand why Kafka describes dependence in various aspects, it is important to review existentialism as a main thought behind the novel. The author questions human existence itself, while claiming that the universe itself is absurd. Alienation of people is in the focus of many existentialist  authors, and Kafka as well. The alienation of K from the human environment and the objectification of individuals is a clear representation of questioning norms and social rules.

Conclusion   

Through the analysis of some of the most significant themes of Kafka’s “The Trial”, it has been revealed that alienation from the society, uncertainty, the criticism of rules and institutions all point towards the direction of questioning authority. Existentialism in Kafka’s novel is represented by describing the uncertainty in other people’s actions, motivations, and authorities’ actions.  Through the frustration of K, the author describes the individual’s struggle to understand the world around them, as well as the rules of the society. Josef K and Mrs Grubach share the same vision: they accept the absoluteness of free will, and do not judge people. While K makes assumptions about how the trial would work, who could support him, and how he could fight back, he does not clearly know the opponent. The power of authorities is almost abstract, and ever-changing. It is impossible for one person to navigate through hierarchy, understand what motivates others to act one way or another, and this creates a great level of uncertainty. Josef  feels like he is shooting in the dark, and cannot play if he does not know the rules. He becomes frustrated and knows that his freedom, or even his life is at stake, he can still do nothing to influence the outcome of the trial. This universal frustration of humanity with society, power, and even people makes the story of K relevant to modern  life situations. K wants to ask questions, but does not know who can answer them. He is confused by contradicted statements regarding the outcome of his trial, his chances, and even the accusation itself. He does not know how the trial would work, and rules are changing in front of his eyes, without his knowledge. He is dependent on the system, but also a subject of it. His fate is determined by chance and unknown rules and powers, resulting in him feeling helpless, hopeless, and frustrated.

Works Cited

Kafka, Franz. The trial. Vol. 318. PubOne info LLC, 1964.