Blog Post 1

SUMMARY OF “BEFORE THE LAW by FRANZ KAFKA”

In “Before the Law”, Franz Kafka presents a setting where a man tries to gain entrance through a gate that leads to the “Law.” At the gate stands a gatekeeper who denies the man entry. The man tries a lot of things to please the gatekeeper, in order to gain access to the law. He makes numerous requests and is never granted access. The story continues with the man’s requests being denied and he ends up dying outside the gates. During my reading of Franz Kafka’s short story “Before the Law”, I noticed a recurring theme of socio economic exclusion. I decided to look at the text through a Marxist lens.

The allegorical story seems to be a critique on societies exclusion of the working class and minorities. In many societies, both past and present, minorities and working class citizens have to go through lengths to get their civil liberties. “The man from the country has not expected such difficulties: the law should always be accessible for everyone.” The “Law” could symbolize civil liberties, but as witnessed by the man from the country, acquiring such liberties is not as accessible to everyone. Kafka could be emphasizing the plight that such peoples face every day and how our lives are predestined based on our birth rights. Furthermore, in the story the man makes numerous kind requests and is respectful to the gatekeeper but is never granted access to law. This, further highlights that just like the man in the story, in society a lot of the time, the circumstances you are in(class) often defines what you receive (the law). In this case, the man’s unfortunate circumstances hinder his ability to have access to the law.

In addition to this, I believe a Marxist lens is the best way to analyse Before the Law because of how Kafka symbolizes the Caste system in this short story. “But take note: I am powerful. And I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other. I can’t endure even one glimpse of the third.” Kafka continues his critique on societies segregation of people of different castes. The gates are a metaphor of the boundaries and lines drawn between the classes. The fact that the gatekeeper cannot even see the third gate, shows the trials people have to take to move up the caste ladder. Lastly, Kafka could be calling on people to take action against such injustices. “allows him to sit down at the side in front of the gate. There he sits for days and years.” Change is hard to come across. You do not just sit by patiently and kindly, you have to fight for law. The story could be a motivational parable to show that if you come from a lower class, you have to fight for your civil liberties instead of waiting for them to come by and being nice to the authority.

During my groups discussion, we approached the short story with Psychological theories. We talked about how the story could be a critique on the lack of attention towards people with mental health problems. The man in the story could be representing someone with depression and tried to fight his way out of it but was not successful and ended up dying upset. The story could be emphasizing on how we need other people to help the mentally ill fight their battles.

 We furthered our discussion on how the story highlighted our pre-destined journey through life that we cannot control. “Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you. I’m going now to close it.” Every single person has a different fate and a different path. We further discussed on how Kafka is presenting a harsh truth that no matter what we do, how we act to others, our lives have already been predestined for us. Just like the man in the story we sometimes think, our circumstances may change but in realist we are stuck on one path that we cannot alter.

While the psychological theories produce sound evidence and take an interesting approach to the text, I feel that the story is better approached through Marxist theory as there is more convincing evidence and symbolism about class structure and struggle. 

Blog Post 1, Topic 2

Benjamin Van
ENL 003
23 January 2017
Word Count: 517

Blog Post 1, Topic 2 – Bartleby’s Behavior

How Bartleby behaved throughout the story is a very reasonable response given his circumstances. Before coming to work as a scrivener at the Wall Street Law office, Bartleby worked as a subordinate clerk in the Dead Letter Office at Washington where he would spend all day dealing with letters sent to the deceased. It is very possible that before working at the Dead Letter Office, Bartleby was “normal” and would not have acted the way he did in the story. However, it is also very possible that after years and years of working and dealing with other family’s lost loved ones, it made Bartleby very mentally unstable, prompting changes in his behavior.

Luckily for Bartleby, he was suddenly terminated from his job at the Dead Letter Office after a change in administration and soon moved to New York where he took a job as a scrivener. This new career and lifestyle for Bartleby could have been a fresh start but unfortunately, a lot of the baggage from his old job seemed to come with him.

At first, Bartleby presented to be relatively normal and appeared to be an extremely hard worker. He would be seen constantly copying notes day in and day out with not very many breaks at all. Things soon started taking turns for the worse when Bartleby denying the boss of the law firm’s requests such as reviewing copied notes or running small errands. He then stops writing altogether. It is unknown what Bartleby wants after he decides to stop writing. He was then found to be using the office’s space as his living quarters and refused to move even when the office changed locations. Soon after, Bartleby was sent to jail where he lived the final days of his life in the courtyard, starving himself to death.

Bartleby’s classic line of rejection, “I would prefer not to,” seems to be important aspect of this story as well. The words by themselves don’t blatantly reject the boss’ inquiries but the meaning behind it seems to do so. This could be a representation of the internal struggle going on in his head. The split between his old life literally in the face of death and this new “normal” life seem to be having adverse effects on him. One can only hope to imagine the emotional and psychological trauma that years and years of reading hundreds upon thousands of reading letters addressed to the dead could do to a person. Therefore, this unknown and bizarre behavior at this time could be very well justified from the nature and conditions in which Bartleby came from.

Melville wrote this story during a time where psychological illnesses were relatively unknown and unstudied. I believe that Melville was trying to shed light upon this upcoming epidemic affecting many people throughout this time. Since this era, neuroscience has progressed forward tremendously and we now know a vast amount more about such illness. If Bartleby presented with the same conditions that he did back then during our current era, he would easily be diagnosed with some sort of psychological or personality disorder.

Blog Post 1: Before the Law

Olivia (Lulu) Sieling

Amiee Fountain

ENL 3

23 January 2017 

Word Count: 514

Blog Post 1: Before the Law

When reading a piece of literature, a person can interpret and critique the context in various ways.  These criticisms, theories, and studies provide a base to the thought process and allow multiple approaches to the meaning of the piece of literature. In my group’s interpretation of “Before the Law” by Franz Kafka, the reader response theory was initially the way we viewed the story. After more thought, the psychological theory is the more apt approach to the story. 

While initially discussing “Before the Law,” each member in my group had a different interpretation than the other. This obviously pointed towards the reader response theory. I took the story’s meaning in more of a literal analysis compared to my group’s analysis. I though of the story as being a symbol of law, including aspects of society and government. The gatekeeper continues to take time and money from the man who just wants answers. Although giving the gatekeeper these things may seem to help the man in his goal of understanding what lies behind the gate, nothing is achieved in doing so. Another person in my group though of the symbols in the story to be related to religion. The presence of “light” related to the holiness of God while the “gates” were a symbol of the gates in heaven. The money aspect in the story showed a connection to a church receiving money from its members. These different approaches to the story prove the reader response theory to be a viable criticism of the story. 

Once I reevaluated the story, I found the psychological approach to be extremely useful in critiquing the story. This analysis of the story expresses repressed thoughts relating to life’s purpose. The story is based around the interpretation of conscious thoughts of the man in the story. The man is trying to find his purpose in life and spends all of his time and money doing so, but at the end, the man’s purpose was never revealed. The author is trying to teach a lesson about people wasting their lives trying to achieve a goal or trying to find their purpose. The gatekeeper is a symbol of society which is constantly taking time and money from people, pretending to help but in reality, it’s not. As humans, we want to understand life but the Franz Kafka is teaching us that life doesn’t have to have a known purpose to be well-lived, so we shouldn’t waste our time or money trying to figure it out. 

I believe the psychological approach is more convincing due to the solid meaning behind the story. It is a straightforward approach to the story that includes all aspects of the story without leaving any pieces out. It is a more useful approach because it is relating to each person reading the story. Kafka uses the man in the story to teach people a valuable lesson about finding one’s purpose in life and the harm it can do.  

Blog #1 Topic #1

          After reading Kafka’s “Before the Law” my group immediately started discussing the Marxist criticism appeals of the story. The narrator describes the struggles of a country man who is trying to get into the law. The man believes “the law should always be accessible for everyone” this appears to be a common marxist idea. Yet the reality is far from the ideal as the man is barred from entering by a gatekeeper and is fed with empty hopes “It is possible…but not now.” The story contains cues of a class struggle, especially emphasized in the following statement from the gatekeeper “I am powerful. And I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other.” The gatekeepers statement illustrates a sort of hierarchy as the gatekeeper labels himself as powerful, yet lowly. As odd as it sounds, people with one title (gatekeepers) are increasing more powerful at each room/level, especially since the gatekeeper that the story is focused on claims to have nothing on the power of the third gatekeeper up from him. This revels that the subjects in each class hierarchy/structure are fixed and unable to move from their place. This is further supported as the story ends with the man never making it into the law.  

Alternatively, I read this story considering the concept of reader response theories. Although my group unanimously agreed to present our reading using marxist criticism, each member had different interpretations. When I read this piece a third time, I began to imagine how a person that is not a young college student would interpret this story. Remembering my conversations with my late grandfather, who spent his life getting suppressed by the communist culture of the Soviet Union, I would image him concluding that this story portrays the communists of the SSSR never allowing the Christian and even the Jewish minorities the opportunities. Not only to move up in class, but to get an education or even a job that would provide for a family. On the other side of the world, individuals from the late nineteenth or early twentieth century - when this piece was published, would certainly view this story differently. They would consider this story to be about the early stock market. The wall would be Wall Street, which symbolizes the stock market,  the gatekeepers would symbolize the people already in the stock market, who would not let other newcomers into the system. 

For me, the Marxist criticism appears to be more convincing. Speaking for myself, I feel that there is more evidence and support for this approach. I do however have to admit that there is a chance that I incline toward the Marxist criticism because explaining it feels easier than the other criticisms… For this reason, I believe than that the alternate - reader response theory would be more useful for the interpretation of this mysterious and ambiguous piece. My classmates had an interesting discussion surrounding this story which resulted in a diverse interpretation, each with valid evidence. I believe that in a more diversified setting the discussion would escalate the variety of interpretations, as we individuals filter this story through our minds, each saturated with unique experiences and knowledge. 

Blog Post 1, Topic 3

Let’s compare apples to oranges: both fruit, both round, but not the same. Arguably this euphemism can be applied to to Walt Whitman and Matthew Arnold: both accomplished poets, both utilized natural elements in their writing, but not the same. The two authors explored opposing mental states in their poems causing a discrepancy in their tones, Whitman’s poems exhibiting an uplifting attitude while Arnold’s are more depressing. This difference in tone acts as a crucial determiner in the modern reader’s ability to relate with these pieces. Whitman’s constructive tone compliments trending movements, such as the eco-friendly movement and black lives matter movement, while encompassing the core belief of this generation: unity. However, Arnold’s adverse tone does not relate because of it’s negative focus. In modern times, positive, progressive ideas are favored making it difficult to relate to darker pieces that dwell on problems instead of overcoming them.

Whitman’s winning positive tone works by draws inspiration from nature and describing it in relation to humans in such a way that creates as interconnected feeling which parallels with modern connections to the environment and to each other. By employing human-centric descriptions of outdoor elements, the universal connection between man and nature is established.  In Song of Myself  Whitman uses scientific language to disrupt the word flow, breaking down the mental barriers between nature and man. “My tongue, every atom of my blood, form’d from this soil, this air” (1 line 6-7). By using “atom” the line focus shifts to the logical point that everything is created out of atoms. Leading to the idea that all things are “formed” from each other, using the atom as an equalizer to reinforce the concept of a universal connection in a way that is relevant to the past and present. Another poem from this collection questions what is grass and Whitman’s answers elucidate the connections formed when nature become an internalized part of everyday life. Stating grass could be either “the handkerchief of the lord” or “a uniform hieroglyphic…Growing among black folks as among white” (6 lines 6, 12, 14). Both answers expand the presence of grass outside the confounds of nature, intertwining it instead with religious and race relations. Nature’s influences spread across varying aspects of life, allowing new analogies to be discovered. His united mentality represents this generation's focus on uniting together and his beliefs back of popular social movements touching on racism in the present.

But then there is poor Arnold whose negative poem fails to connect with the modern reader. No rather, his medium deals with less pleasant side of life appealing instead to the darker range of emotions. To do this he utilizes depressing nature depictions such as describing tides as bringing “the eternal note of sadness in” and being able to only hear the “melancholy, long, withdrawing roar” of “The Sea of Faith” to establish a recurring pattern of unpleasant emotion. (Dover Beach lines 13-14, 25, 21). By fusing nature and intense emotion Arnold is adding another layer of complexity to the poem, using the in and out motion of water to reinforce the repeating sadness throughout the poem. Despite this technique’s beautiful execution, the bleak tone still does not resonate with the modern ear. Unlike Whitman, Arnold’s poem does not have the benefit of perfectly falling into line with prevailing social movements. Rather his poem rebels against the current social push towards fighting for change. Instead of searching for solutions he chooses to revel in his problems, even expand on them. This is in obvious opposition to this generation’s progressive mentality that prefers to find solutions to unpleasant situations instead of exploring them deeply.

Word Count: 605

Blog 1 Topic 1

For the short story, “Before the Law,” my group and I chose a Reader Response Criticism and Psychological Criticism. These two criticisms were chosen specifically by my group because when we first spoke to each other about the story each if us shared a different opinion. A Reader Response Criticism basically states that no text can exist without a reader and that a text can change depending on the different readers that read the story. Then as my group and I continued our conversation about the story, we all agreed with the final decision of a Psychological Criticism. We all believed that the gatekeeper in the story depicts the idea of a human conscious belonging to the countryman. My group then also believed that the depiction of “The Law” represented exactly that, Law. For example, “I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other”. The first gate keeper is considered the main conscious, the main voice that is heard inside of everyone’s head. Whereas the other gatekeepers represent the sub-conscious and further more. The country man does not progress within the story because he is afraid of going against his conscious. Also, the story revolves around the idea of a person’s mind belongs only to them, which is why the statement “Here no one can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you” is meaningful.

            One other approach the class decided to take was the Marxist Criticism. The majority of the class went with a Marxist Criticism, since they believed the story depicted the idea of the divided social class. This idea impressed me since I personally did not think of it myself to begin with. In the story we only know each of the character’s job titles, and nothing more, which depicts the idea of social class being more important than anything else. Showing importance to a job title instead of a name suggest that a person of low birth or privilege is not as important as one born into a high position. “The gatekeeper often interrogates him briefly…he always tells him that he cannot let him inside yet”. This quote can be used to explain how those of a higher standing always question those beneath them, but never allow others to progress.

            I personally prefer the Psychological approach because it makes sense to me how the gatekeepers can represent a person’s conscious. Although the Marxist Criticism is just as convincing, I believe the Psychological Criticism is the best approach for this story. I thought the main point of this story was to explain that “you must learn to make a change, instead of waiting for someone else to make that change for you”. “The Law” represents a rule that some people might want to change, and in order to change that rule, action must be taken. I find this theory more useful when compared to the Marxist theory because I can find more evidence to base my opinions on. The majority of the countryman’s actions depicted solely on his psychological state during the story is also a convincing example for the Psychological Criticism.

Blog Post 1, Topic 2 Bartleby

I think Bartleby’s behavior is a mix of his circumstances and his paranoiac personality. As Melville left much space for imagination, we can imagine how much pain Bartleby had suffered from that gives him a “firm” and “mild” voice to reject the tasks appointed by his new employer. Starting with the old lawyer’s “vague rumor”, we know that Bartleby was abruptly fired by the Dead Letter Office at Washington when he worked to deal with the dead letters going to no one. Depressing and gloomy that job could be, however, Bartleby then got the chance to hug a new stage of life when he got fired in Washington and moved to New York. But he failed to do so.  

Some argues that the working environment of the old lawyer’s office typically reflect the coldness of Wall Street which drives Bartleby to abnormality and isolation. However, one must notice that he didn’t put effort to be “normal”. He chose to stay at the dark corner day and night, “gorged]” himself on documents, and had no personal life other than work. There is nothing unreasonable when an employee refuse to follow the order given by his supervisor in workplace. But as Bartleby did so three times, none of each time did he explained his refusal to anyone. When the old lawyer decided to keep him no more in the office and asked him to leave, he chose to ignore. When everyone moved to the new office, he chose to live a even more pathetic life by living in the old empty room. After he was imprisoned, he chose to stop eating and “asked” for death. Until the end, one can still strongly feel that Bartleby was conscious enough as he behaved. However, speaking of his paranoiac behaviors, I wonder what pushed him on this road at the very beginning.

Unlike to others in the Wall Street, what Bartleby had been dealing with was not cold money and stock, but the very humanity. He might had read thousands of undelivered happiness, longing, love, hope and forgiving, and then burned them into ashes like they never exist. His past certainly left him the trauma as when the old lawyer tried to move him out of the old office, he answered repeatedly, “I’m not particular” and “I would prefer not to make any change.” Who is “particular” then? Why making changes terrifies him so much? Probably Bartleby himself doesn’t have the answer. Seemingly all he wanted is keeping copying the documents, without any other reviewing tasks from the old lawyer. In Darwin’s natural selection theory, Bartleby’s unreasonable behaviors therefore can be seen as an unfit to his natural environment. His paranoiac personality from his past determined his unwillingness to change as he moved to a new city and had a new job.

Truly, Bartleby might acted differently if the old lawyer hadn’t put him at a dark corner, separate his desk with a folding screen, or give him money, ask him to choose in between ask him to go and he leave voluntarily. However, as Bartleby himself said, “I would prefer not to take a clerkship”. It’s not the matter of where to work. It’s the matter of how to live. He just simply doesn’t want to change (places to stay day and night, people to meet, works to do). Therefore, even Bartleby didn’t work in Wall Street, he wouldn’t wanted to change too.