Kafka Before the Law

Nick Moran

Enl 10c

10 October 2018

 Nick Moran

Enl 10c

10 October 2018

After reading and discussing Before the Law by Franz Kafka, my group believed that the text lent itself to a Marxist critique.  Understandably, the constant struggle for power between the Gatekeeper and The Man as well as ideas of classism, material exchange, and autocracy all seem to flag the attention of Marxism as a critical lens.  However, when a psychological approach is applied to the text, a deeper meaning of character motivation is revealed.

One foundational element of psychological reading is understanding the conscious and unconscious desires of a character.  While reading the text, there is no doubt in regards to The Man’s conscious desire of wanting to get past the Gatekeeper and enter the Law.  However, the reasons for his ultimate failure can only be revealed through a psychoanalytic study of The Man and his unconscious desire.

Initially, the actions of The Man indicate that his journey is in fact controlled by fear and reluctancy.  It is conveyed in The Man’s decision making that he believes himself to be inferior to the Gatekeeper. For instance, take The Man’s thought process before deciding not to enter the gate:

the law should always be accessible for everyone, he thinks, but as he now looks more closely at the gatekeeper in his fur coat, at his large pointed nose and his long, thin, black Tartar’s beard, he decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside.

In this internal thought process a clear transition can be seen in The Man’s beliefs.  When he notices the stark, intimidating features of the Gatekeeper he immediately abandons his principles for a more cautious approach to his issue.  In doing so he reaffirms an inferiority complex that has already begun to develop into something strong enough to cloud The Man’s best and natural judgement.  This idea is further explored and strengthened when The Man begins trading away his possessions in order to convince the Gatekeeper of his worthiness. It signifies that The Man believes himself helpless and not in control of his own destiny.  In a sense, he sees his materials as having more of an influence over the situation than his own will or actions. What furthers the gravity of this idea of inferiority is when the Gatekeeper responds to this act by saying, “‘I am taking this only so that you do not think you have failed to do anything.”’ The Gatekeeper is actually very equalizing in his response.  He has no ulterior motive of taking advantage of The Man through material gain and actually offers a piece of backhanded advice, implying that The Man’s current means of attempting entrance will not do the trick. It demonstrates that the power complex between The Man and the Gatekeeper is just a construct in the mind of The Man. Lastly, a stunning sense of complacency is demonstrated in The Man.  By the very nature of trading away the materials he needs for a successful journey into the Law, he self sabotages and hurts his chances for progress.

This idea is explored throughout the text’s entirety however, spanning the lifetime of The Man himself.  His ultimate conscious goal is to enter the Law yet he refuses to take any risk in doing so. Yet in his indecisiveness he wastes his entire life away, waiting until death and defeating the purpose of not taking risk in the first place.  The clear gap in The Man’s stated goal versus the reasoning and consequence of his actions cry of a rift between conscious and subconscious desire. It becomes reasonable then to question The Man’s true convictions of entering the law with so many outside factors influencing his behavior.

Ultimately, between the two lenses of criticism, both Marxism and Psychoanalysis hold very valid arguments, and may even work well if used together.  For instance, in using the same examples, Marxist themes are found when The Man changes his thought process from entering the Law to waiting for the Gatekeeper’s permission.  Included in the Gatekeepers description is a fur coat — an obvious sign of class and status.  In both interpretations ideas of authority and power cause The Man to change his behavior.  Additionally, the material exchange which signified The Man’s inferiority complex also houses clear examples of economic decision controlling human behavior. When the two schools of thought are used together, they may offer a better understanding towards the internal thought process of an oppressed person and their personal disposition towards Marxist values.  

While the two forms of criticism have moments in which they build off of each other, the Psychological platform allows for an understanding of character motives which Marxist theory cannot produce. When put into the context of a psychological reading, the reader understands that the text is much to do about indecision and fleeting opportunity.  This running interpretation is nearly confirmed in the Gatekeeper’s conclusion to the story when he says, “Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you. I’m going now to close it.” This conclusion implies the same understanding that a psychological reading would produce.