Kafka and the Dramatisation of the Guilty

Kafka draws the reader into the dramatization of the (guilty) loser to bugger off, to march on, to figure. And it is this movement which he let ons once more and again, not provided on the level of rational discourse, but on a great m whatever levels.- daimonHellers teaching is at best a or else enigmatic one riddled with unanswered questions and uncertainties. The reader of Hellers statement would first ask himself how Kafka draws the reader into the dramatization, then would question the visitation to come up, to transcend, to understand arrive, exit, understand what? Thirdly, one asks oneself what is the movement he describes again and again tipple the reader into the dramatization or the stroke to arrive, tell, understand. And lastly, one wonders what the many levels are that Kafka uses to communicate the rather ambiguous movement.The bankruptcy to arrive is a recurrent theme finishedout the novel. Probably the best example of it is the chastisement to arrive at a judgement. K is on trial for the sum of the novel, and neer is judgement passed on him. He is waiting for the court to arrive at a judgement during the course of the novel, yet at the kibosh he is only punished the court never arrives at a judgement. This undersurface be applied to most of the book for congressman Ks tribulation to arrive at the first hearing on time and the failure of his case to arrive at the highest courts. It is if events are placed in suspense, their windup shimmering ever so faintly in the distance and the reader, like Tantalus, attempts to make up the unattainable. misfortune to arrive may indicate that in The Trial the jaunt or process is more important than its conclusion was the original German manuscript not actually called Der Prozess? However, whatever be the meaning of the failure to arrive, it is instrumental in creating tension as the conclusion continues to be elusive.The failure to arrive can possibly be linked with the failure to comm unicate in that if one is still in the process of thinking and has not yet arrived at a conclusion, one would find it difficult to accurately describe the thought process to another, hence the failure to communicate. I intend that the most accurate way to define the failure to communicate can be found in Brinks interpretation of the novel. Brink sees spoken communication in The Trial as being unable to communicate anything. Take, for example, the advocates speeches. They are only if superfluous Huld turns endlessly around the period of time with out actually addressing it. Whether this is oerdue to the inadequacy of language or to whether at that place actually is a point or not one is not sure, but there is all the way a failure to communicate. I believe that the concept of failure to communicate in The Trial is perhaps partly created by the language utilize in the novel, most of which convey only abstracted logical concepts. The language used has no substance and therefore it is completely detached from man the syntax is represent but it makes no sense at all.Failure to understand also plays an passing important rle in the novel. It can be seen to follow on directly from the failure to communicate if one person cannot communicate, the other cannot understand. Perhaps the most important instance of failure to understand is Ks failure to understand the court system. He never seems to develop an adequate understanding of it from those who incur or claim to have an understanding of it. They are unable to communicate their understanding to K, thus charge K from arriving at an understanding or conclusion. This of course brings us stomach to the failure to arrive (at a conclusion) which in turns leads to the failure to communicate, and so on. agree to Heller, Kafka dramatizes these failures by creating forms in which they can interact with each other, i.e. characters. It is into this dramatization that Kafka draws us by a rather clever usage of basic property of human nature. Human nature is rather curious by definition, and Kafka uses this vista of human nature to entice the reader into a complete submersion in the world of The Trial. The failure to arrive at any conclusion or judgement is rather intriguing in that it creates a permanent sense of tension a menace hanging over ones head in suspended animation and the goal almost panoptical in the distance. One does not know whether it will remain suspended, restrain to life, or whether it is there at all. Indeed, one does not know if there really is a point or conclusion. This uncertainty, however, does not stop our involvement of the glittering conclusion. The sight of it makes the state of uncertainty even more bitter and the elusive conclusion yet more desirable.One is enticed into entering deeper into a tangle of uncertainties by this lure. The failure to communicate supports this. By using extremely ambiguous language, devoid of any substance and meaning, one is consta ntly held in a state of uncertainty. Bathed in this uncertainty, we feel the need to understand, to resolve the uncertainties. The failure to understand doneout the novel is echoed in the mind of the reader if the fibber and/or the text know zippo and/or communicate nothing it is natural that the reader is maintained in a situation where he understands nothing and his curiosity is aroused. Eventually the reader to becomes part of the drama. His failures to understand, communicate and arrive echo those in the novel and reinforce them, plunging the reader yet deeper into the labyrinth without a center.This movement is a downward cycle in which awe begets confusion, drawing the reader deeper and deeper into the text in a downward spiral. Heller declares that it is this movement which is described and communicated again and again throughout the text. It is indeed correct that this movement is repeated again and again it is a chain answer in which some begets more of the same and s o on and so forth. However, one wonders how Kafka manages to communicate this to the reader. It is certainly almost impossible to explain it through the medium of language since it has been explained in the text that language is ambiguous and only confounds and obfuscates. Yet by its own definition then, it is perfectly suited to describe this movement and feeling in the novel.Kafka uses the container, and not the content, in order to communicate the movement to his readers. Yet in a sense the content, or rather the lack of it, also helps to communicate the movement. One expects that a container contains. It is logical that and bearing should fulfill its definition. In ascribing to this logic, one falls even deeper into the text as one dependes for meaning and substance. One becomes lost and confused wading through all the superfluous packaging searching for the content. But there is no center there is no content. We echo K in his search for the high court, the philia of the cour t system. He fails because there is no nub there is no high court.