What is your view of Franz Kafka?

[Lone Wolf]

yes, but I found that they spoke certain truths. What struck me most was Kafka's depiction of the tyranny of bureaucracy, the hopelessness of certain endeavours due to established socio-political structures and rigidity, as well as human blindness and indifference, even to one's own affairs.

I associate Kafka with hopelessness, indifference and absurdity of bureaucratism, too. While I find it easy to relate to these themes, he never had a large influence on me.

I wonder if you have read his diaries and letters. If you do you may form the view that he was ill, depressed, immature, mad. I do not think that anyone can claim that Kafka's work can solve any problem.

I think that evaluating the author an evaluating his work are two different things.

I think- although again i may be projecting too much- that it is a collection of allegories, written with the intention of self-examination. Kafka himself many times states that he has no idea of what he is doing, that everything in his mind is a blur, and he only wants to examine his dream world.

I don't care about the intention much. Once an author finishes his work, his options about it shouldn't hold more meaning then anyone else's options just because he's an author.

 

[GoodGame]

Another existentialist that I haven't had time to read.

 

[Kyriakos]

I don't care about the intention much. Once an author finishes his work, his options about it shouldn't hold more meaning then anyone else's options just because he's an author.

The opinnions of others about a story are crucial, since they recreate the story in their mind, and inevitably give it special characteristics along the way. Each person gives life to what he reads, and fills all the gaps with his own psyche. Which is why it is important that a book causes emotions and thought, if it is to become a classic

However we were specifically discussing whether Kafka was misinterprated. His obviously had his own goals with his writing, and my view is that people tend to not look at what he was, before forming a view of his work. Such an isolated person would not care for social critique, yet some examinations of his work, such as that offered by aelf, present it as something being about matters which are not internal.
My own view is that he was, to put it simply, way too introverted to produce a work which would not be full of himself.

 

[aelf]

However we were specifically discussing whether Kafka was misinterprated. His obviously had his own goals with his writing, and my view is that people tend to not look at what he was, before forming a view of his work. Such an isolated person would not care for social critique, yet some examinations of his work, such as that offered by aelf, present it as something being about matters which are not internal.
My own view is that he was, to put it simply, way too introverted to produce a work which would not be full of himself.

And why again is this important enough to warrant wishing that his works had been destroyed?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Such an isolated person would not care for social critique, yet some examinations of his work, such as that offered by aelf, present it as something being about matters which are not internal.

Maybe he was, but that doesn't make an interpretation contrary to that any less valid. As soon as the author finishes the last page of his work, "the author of the work" dies. It's perfectly consistent to claim that while Kafka saw his work as only reflections of his inner disturbed mind and never saw his work as a social critique, his work, in fact, makes a profound social critique.

Although this is steering to the off-topic discussion about the importance of author's intention.

 

[Kyriakos]

And why again is this important enough to warrant wishing that his works had been destroyed?

Writing something entirely introverted is not a crime, and moreover writing something entirely introverted and managing to create a living story is no easy achievement. My point was that if one really wanted to understand what Kafka was about, he should try to read carefully, and with as little projecting as possible, his notes.
There is a short story by Lucian, the ancient writer, in which Antiochos Soter, some hellenistic emperor, defeats an army of gauls in asia minor. Antiocho's army was inferior, however he had some elephants with him, the gauls had never seen elephants and panicked, which is why they lost.
Lucian concludes that his own art makes ussually the impression that those elephants made on the gauls, and even if it brings victory (his art is read) still it was not due to reasons having to do with the actual value of the work. In other words Lucian claims that his work is not being understood.
This is similar to Kafka's case. I think that his work makes an impression for wrong reasons. People read way too much of what they have inside them, in it, and cannot bother understanding what the actual work was. I think that Kafka was so ill that everything in his work is twisted and has a different meaning, but all that is lost. Keep in mind that i do not claim to be able to decipher him, but i can go below the surface of seing an elephant

 

[aelf]

Writing something entirely introverted is not a crime, and moreover writing something entirely introverted and managing to create a living story is no easy achievement. My point was that if one really wanted to understand what Kafka was about, he should try to read carefully, and with as little projecting as possible, his notes.
There is a short story by Lucian, the ancient writer, in which Antiochos Soter, some hellenistic emperor, defeats an army of gauls in asia minor. Antiocho's army was inferior, however he had some elephants with him, the gauls had never seen elephants and panicked, which is why they lost.
Lucian concludes that his own art makes ussually the impression that those elephants made on the gauls, and even if it brings victory (his art is read) still it was not due to reasons having to do with the actual value of the work. In other words Lucian claims that his work is not being understood.
This is similar to Kafka's case. I think that his work makes an impression for wrong reasons. People read way too much of what they have inside them, in it, and cannot bother understanding what the actual work was. I think that Kafka was so ill that everything in his work is twisted and has a different meaning, but all that is lost. Keep in mind that i do not claim to be able to decipher him, but i can go below the surface of seing an elephant

But I still don't understand the supposedly overwhelming influence of his intentions on the merit of his works.

So let's say he did it for entirely selfish reasons, maybe even to spite his readers because he was all angsty and mad. So what? You're assuming this attitude that everyone is interpreting his works incorrectly, unlike you who understand Kafka's true motive. Besides sounding kind of douchebag-like, your position is much ado about nothing.

There are very good reasons why his works can be interpreted in some ways. If readers interpret a text according to their own psyche it doesn't mean that all such interpretations are equally valid or invalid. So, as it stands, even though some interpretations might not follow the true motive of the author, they are still valid as long as they are following the text and they are probably invalid otherwise. The great divide that you're trying to impose between the (single) correct interpretation that is informed by the true motive and all other interpretations does not exist. There are good interpretations and there are bad interpretations. That's all.

You're beginning to sound like a certain elitist poster here. That's not a good sign.

 

[Mise]

What an author intended to do and what the author actually did may be two completely different things. If the author intended on creating a poignant and cutting social critique, but in fact made a self-absorbed, self-indulgent, self-pitying LiveJournal entry, we would dismiss the author's intentions without even thinking about it -- the intentions are completely irrelevant, because what the author actually created was something quite removed from their intentions. Similarly, if Kafka intended on creating a self-absorbed, self-indulgent, self-pitying LiveJournal entry, but in fact made a poignant and cutting social critique, we should again dismiss his intentions as irrelevant, and focus on what he actually achieved.

Of course, his intentions are interesting. But so are all the myriad interpretations any 16 year old English student can come up with. Meh.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

I've experienced his work more through other writers than through his directly, but I did start The Metamorphosis fairly recently. Unfortunately listening to the audiobook on the way to work on a packed train at 6am didn't do my mental health much good. It's easy to see why his ideas have had so much influence though.

 

[JonathanStrange]

I enjoy Kafka's writing. I've read most of his novels and short stories. I've even listened to audiobook versions and watched movies loosely based on his ideas because his ideas and writings are that intriguing to me.

I'm no scholar though, just a guy who reads too much and who tries to include some of the better known (or at least, better regarded) works of fiction.

 

[Agent327]

Another existentialist that I haven't had time to read.

What Kafka has written is far better than anything existentialist.

I've experienced his work more through other writers than through his directly, but I did start The Metamorphosis fairly recently. Unfortunately listening to the audiobook on the way to work on a packed train at 6am didn't do my mental health much good.

I can see how that might have a slightly disturbing effect...

 

[Huayna Capac357]

I haven't read Kafka. My Dad loves him though.

 

[Rossiya]

Born in Prague, German-speaking Jewish writer, clever, The Trial, Metamorphoses. That's my view.

 

[holy king]

Born in Prague, German-speaking Jewish writer, clever, The Trial, Metamorphoses. That's my view.

no, as with every dead writer who is getting at least some praise from some people you have to say he's overrated.

you're doing it wrong!!!!

 

[Rossiya]

I haven't read Kafka. My Dad loves him though.

Get over him. He's overrated.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Kafka or my Dad?

 

[Agent327]

Dads are probably more overrated than Kafka.

 

[Kyriakos]

I still dont get how Kafka can be seen as being about any kind of social critique; the behavior and interaction of characters in his work is entirely unrealistic, and childish. There is hardly any study of human character either, since the characters seem to be acting as if in a dream.
The only stories where there is a specific character are some smaller ones, when anyway there is only the main character, and his interactions with his limited world.

 

[carmen510]

This Video should tell you all you need to know about Kafka's works. Even if you don't get it, many people who have read or heard of Kafka will.