Analyzing Before the Law
My group resonated with a socioeconomic perspective when reading Kafka's "Before the Law". In the reading, we interpreted a man from the country as being disadvantaged using Marxist theory. Ultimately, characterizing the man as seeking entry into a hypothetical gate that represented the world of the wealthy. This could be seen throughout the plot in which the protagonist of the story (country man) is impeded by barriers as the antagonist purposely tries to exclude the man from being a part of his world. As the gatekeeper is speaking to the man he states,“if it tempts you so much, try it in spite of my prohibition. But take note: I am powerful” (Kafka). Here, the gatekeeper essentially sets himself aside because he has more advantage and is thus superior.
The gatekeeper essentially lets the man know that he can choose to defy his orders but should keep in mind the position he is in. When referring this back to the hierarchical pyramid, in society it is clear that the structure presents the rich at the top while the disadvantaged are set at the bottom. By observing how highly the gatekeeper is keeping the gate closed, it is clear that there are a number of reasons as to why the man cannot be let in; one being his financial status. Yet since the gatekeeper has done all that is in his power to make sure he (man) is not let in, he soon gives up. Towards the middle of the story, “the man, who has equipped himself with many things for his journey, spends everything, no matter how valuable, to win over the gatekeeper”. As a result, the man has realized that everything he has been doing will not make the gatekeeper budge. He will not be, under no circumstances, let in as much he tries which leads him to resort to bribery. Due to the fact that the man is of lower class, there is not much that the man could give in order to prove that he should be given access. This not only could be one point of view to analyze this story, but it is not far from how other individuals may feel when they sense that they do not belong. It is not uncommon for people to feel as if they are obligated to prove themselves and their capabilities through what they choose to wear and purchase, even if it does not fit their budget.
However, in overlooking the story in class and being able to hear the various ways my peers approached this same story, I would now go with the reader response approach. When looking at this through multiple perspectives, it is clear that there is no right answer, yet, some make more sense than others. For example, if a person who reads this story through a religious lens, the reader may interpret that this story is about a man trying to gain entry into heaven. The gatekeeper offers the man a seat outside the gate for him to sit outside waiting which accumulates to years. As time passes “the gatekeeper often interrogates him briefly, questioning him about his homeland …. questions, the kind great men put, and at the end he always tells him once more that he cannot let him inside yet” (Kafka). Here, the gatekeeper would represent God, and the reason as to why the man cannot get in despite his persistence is because he has committed mistakes or simply done bad deeds throughout his life that have made him an unworthy soul of being in the house of God. In the story, there is a place in which the man “recognizes now in the darkness an illumination which breaks inextinguishable out of the gateway to the law” (Kafka). The man is able to see a light through his years of being there, which represents the light one sees as they are dying. If the “law” actually characterized the idea of heaven there would be great similarities between what the man sees.
Overall, the story has the ability in being interpreted differently depending on how the individual chooses to approach and analyze the text. When reading the story through a socioeconomic approach, when one reaches the end they will realize that not every piece of the story will satisfy that approach strong enough so that it is not refuted. On the other hand, when reading the story through the readers approach, it allows the reader to create their own idea or meaning which could be related to God, heaven, or so on. By breaking down the text through the readers approach, individuals are given freedom to set the story from their own interpretation.
I liked your use of the quote: “if it tempts you so much, try it in spite of my prohibition. But take note: I am powerful” (Kafka). I thought this quote was powerful because it shows how the gatekeeper is aware of his authority, and abuses it by threatening the man with it. It reminds me of dominant groups in society using their wealth as a threat, knowing marginalized groups cannot fight back because of a lack of wealth and/or resources.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a good job during the first half of your response, breaking it down in a way that makes sense. I say this because the Marxist POV here might have been difficult to use in this story. But you adapted your own understanding of the story just like how you explain that the reader-response is the best theory to use. That at the end did mix in well with the overall view of the story. only thing I would advice is to always stay true to your beginning argument, referring to "When reading the story through a socioeconomic approach, when one reaches the end they will realize that not every piece of the story will satisfy that approach strong enough so that it is not refuted"
ReplyDeleteI liked both explanations of your group and your own critical theory and I must agree with you that the reader response makes more sense. I did however enjoy the idea of the gatekeeper being a type of social class, and how the man is trying to gain entry into it but ultimately is unable to, it reminds me of how the 1% is very hard to infiltrate and no one really has a definite formula on how to get rich.
ReplyDeleteThe readers response like you stated is a nice way to analyze the text based on your own perspective and upbringing. I agree with you that the gatekeeper could be seen as God and the man as the person trying to gain entry into Heaven and how this would be a way for someone with a religious perspective to view the text. I like how you quoted passages from the text as supporting evidence.
I like your comparison of the gatekeeper to God; although the connection seems very clear to me now, (having read your post,) I didn't think of this idea when I was writing my blog post. The gatekeeper and God both have a higher power to judge man as well as mysterious motivations and reasons that men cannot always interpret. They guard a dominion that men wish to enter, but may not be worthy enough to do so. However, one discrepancy in this comparison is that there are many gatekeepers, but only one God — I think this is worth acknowledging in a refutation paragraph.
ReplyDelete