Blog #1, Topic #1

Franz Kafka’s short story, “Before the Law,” can be read using a variety of different literary theories and criticisms. Two specific ways it can be read are through a Marxist lens, and through a psychological lens. While both readings are valid in their own ways, the Marxist one seems to be much more convincing in this case.

When summarizing “Before the Law,” my group tried to analyze it according to the conventions of Marxist literary theory. As the story’s premise is that of a “man from the country” trying to gain access to something he feels he has a natural right too, while a guard who is clearly of a higher social class than he prevents him from doing so, this seems to be a fairly valid reading. My group thoroughly discussed the possibility that the plot of the story was in actuality a metaphor meant to criticize way authorities treat the less fortunate when they come to them desiring justice. Accordingly, we took the word “Law” from the title to quite literally mean the law, as in the set of rules and protections a society upholds for all of its peoples.  One important detail to note is that this story was written around the turn of the 20^th century when the inequality between social classes was much greater than it is today. While the rich could afford things like lawyers and other legal help in order to get past the “gatekeepers”, who could be metaphors for various legal situations and processes, the poor of the time could not and would have to face much greater adversity when trying to make their way through the same trials, often having their efforts amount to absolutely nothing. This is reflected in the story when the countryman “spends everything, no matter how valuable, to win over the gatekeeper” and only receives passing responses in return. In the end the countryman has what little chance he had of accessing the law closed off to him after becoming an old man, which my group theorized as society abandoning him because he has nothing left of value and moving on while he is forever stuck where he is due to his social status, never getting what he rightfully deserves. Given the overwhelming amount of evidence presented in this text that leans towards it, it feels almost as though Kafka intended this story to be read with a Marxist viewpoint in mind.

Another way one could summarize this story would be from a psychological standpoint. In this case the term “Law” can be taken to have a much more figurative meaning then in the former. Perhaps the law could refer to a certain goal or way of life the countryman desires to reach; yet that is held back from him by societies standards, or in this situation, the gatekeepers. The gatekeepers may also be the trials he has to face in order to arrive at his goal, which, in what could be a criticism of people who clearly desire something yet do not have the will to face the challenges on the path to obtain it, the man backs down from after learning of their difficulty, instead meandering about and looking for an easier path to grab it from. In this case the beginning of the last sentence of the story, “Here no one else can gain entry,” would make a lot sense as it is his life alone that the countryman had the ability to take control of, yet didn’t because of his unwillingness to face what lay before him. This theory feels like much more of a stretch than the Marxist one though as a lot of the evidence seems more circumstantial and it feels like a reading that comes from more modern point of view rather than one that came about at the turn of the century.

All in all, the themes and circumstances surrounding the text as well as the plot presented within it seem to lead to the Marxist theory much more smoothly than they do to the psychological reading. Because of this it would probably be better to come at this story with a Marxist viewpoint in mind.