Big I, Eye, Aye.

Westley, disguised as the Dread Pirate Roberts in the movie ‘Princess Bride’ uttered to his true love, “[life] is pain. […] Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling you something.” Based on this comment, Westley may very well be an existentialist or a nihilist. Franz Kafka’s short novel, The Trial, embodies this idea of struggle and the principles behind both nihilism and existentialism. Existentialism, pioneered by Soren Kierkegaard in the early 1800s, postulates that it is imperative that a being attempt to find meaning and identity in the everyday toil of a chaotic, empty world. Nihilism, initiated by the words of Friedrich Jacobi in the late 1700s, is similar but takes the notion further. Nihilists stand by the fact that life has no meaning whatsoever – no higher power; no morality; no truth. They also support the emptiness that existentialists apply to the world, but add to it futility, and that ‘death’ (not only physical, but moral and emotional) is inevitable. The Trial emulates these principles and shows a slow progression from existentialism to nihilism in the life and legal trial of protagonist Josef K.

Existentialism dominates the beginning of the book. As the story opens Josef K is accused and arrested early in the day. To add insults to injury, so to say, this is carried out in his own home and his jailers refuse to disclose the nature of his arrest. This represents the “[society] is unnatural and its traditional religious and secular rules are arbitrary” (http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/existentialism.htm) clause as it seems as if he arrested on a whim. The chaos dictated by existentialism is present in K’s perception soon after of the legal world -which essentially becomes his entire world during the proceedings. K’s aim to articulate, reason, and fight the ridiculousness of the trial further typifies the first portion of the book as existentialist. The setting of the sprawling court which is overrun by children, washing, and nonsensical architectural choices reflect these commonalities as well.
K. turned to the stairs to find the room for the inquiry, but then paused as he saw three different staircases in addition to the first one; moreover, a small passage at the other end of the courtyard seemed to lead to another courtyard. He was annoyed that they hadn’t described the location of the trial more precisely; he was certainly being treated with a strange carelessness or indifference, a point he intended to make loudly and clearly. (Kafka, pg 39)
The final sentence is of importance because Josef K.’s wanting to complain as well as the floor plan of the court is what make this scene existentialist. The important thing is that K. recognizes this, and will not stand for it.

As one can see, Josef K. sets boundaries for the irrelevancies of the system. He revolts, in small ways, and cuts his swathe in the sea of defendants. He passionately rejects the court, standing firmly behind his innocence. The existentialist principle of finding purpose and a sense of strength in being is what he earnestly chases. This can be seen as early as when he encounters his arresters. “”What sense?” K. cried out more, more startled than annoyed. “[They] ask what sense it makes, while [they] stage the most senseless performance imaginable?”" (Kafka, 45) Josef K. does not grudgingly settle down and accept the fact that a higher authority is exercising its power over him. He does not accept that he is, essentially, powerless by himself at his first trial. In fact, he considers the trials entirely arbitrary, saying “”…they [were] only proceedings if [he recognized] them as such.”"(Kafka, 15) K. was, to begin with, a nuisance, but also the essence of existentialism.

Differentiating between existentialism and nihilism may be difficult at first. Both concepts are anchored in the thought of anguish. The defining belief that identifies each is that, respectively, this anguish allows one to come to some meaning, or it does not. The middle section of the book, in which K. is in the thick of his legal proceedings, is tinged by a blending of the two ideologies. As Josef K. begins to slow down and sink into the mire of doubt and inept lawyers, his confidence in his beliefs slips. Coupled with the fact that both existentialism and nihilism are present during this period of time in the novel, the feeling of turmoil a reader experiences is explained. This is truly where the progression is obvious. One hint that existentialism still remains is his attempt to fashion his own petition.

To accomplish this K. would obviously have to do more than simply sit in the hall with the others and place his hat beneath the bench. He, or the women, or some other messengers, would have to besiege the officials day after day and force them to sit down at their desks and study K.’s petition, instead of staring through the grille into the hall. […] He recalled how one morning…he had suddenly shoved everything aside and taken out his notepad to have to try at drafting the general outlines of such a petition and perhaps making it available to his slow-witted lawyer. (Kafka, 126)

While unsuccessful, his attempt to ’swim’ instead of ’sink’ is evident. Not only this, but the act of taking matters into his own hands and placing the responsibility of his defence on his own shoulders keeps with existentialism. Both motions that Jacobi would have been proud of.

Despite this, nihilistic qualities are present in Josef K’s doings. Remember, nihilism states that morality is nonexistent in the world. One supporting example of this is K.’s inaction or inability to save two of his coworkers from the brutal flogging they received because of him. The offense was minimal, a mere few harsh words from K. pertaining to their behaviour. And yet, it was taken so seriously as to receive corporal punishment. K. has the chance to rectify the wrong done to the two boys but he in the end decides not to as it would endanger his ‘reputation’. At first, K. attempts to release the boys and explain honestly what had occurred but the flogger could not be swayed, and he soon abandons the two underlings excusing himself with the explanation: “the moment Franz started screaming, it was all over of course. K. couldn’t permit the assistants, and perhaps all sorts of other people, to arrive and catch him negotiating with this bunch in the junk room. No one could really demand such a sacrifice of him.” (Kafka, 85) This is in the very least unjust, perhaps even immoral. As Josef K. struggles between nihilism and existentialism, he sometimes falls and cowers at the feet of the immense task at hand. His own morality and truth begin to match that of the court – which is nihilism.

The culmination of the book completes the change in ideology. As the court consumes Josef K. nihilism overtakes existentialism, and his attitude is altered. This portion of the book exemplifies some nihilistic principles. One of the foundations of nihilism and existentialism is the lack of a higher power. The defining difference is that whereas existentialism relates godlessness with freedom, nihilism unites it with immorality, etc.. Josef K. takes a trip into a dim cathedral at one point and has an exchange with the priest, who also is the prison priest. This exchange cannot be seen as freeing, but rather as ominous. During this exchange K. never renounces God, but neither does he fully give himself over to the priest’s sayings. Finally, Josef K. gets restless and requests to leave, to which the priest asks: “”Do you want to leave already?” and “[although] K hadn’t been thinking of it at the moment, he said at once: “Of course, I have to go.” (Kafka, 223-224) The priest in the dimly lit cathedral realizes K. is losing faith. Alarmed he asks Josef K. if he “[can’t] see the two steps right in front of [him]. … it was the cry of someone who, seeing a man falling, shouts out in shock, involuntarily, without thinking.” (Kafka, 214) What these steps could lead Josef K. up towards is never explained, but assuming that height is usually correlated to light, truth and a Heaven-like place, K. is falling away from these. At the bottom? Darkness, godlessness, and untruth – the concepts of nihilism.

Nietzsche, one of the most famous writers on nihilism and existentialism, proposes that “[nihilism] is … not only the belief that everything deserves to perish; but that one actually puts one’s shoulder to the plow; one destroys.” (http://www.iep.utm.edu/n/nihilism.htm). The denouement of the book consists of what K. had been trying to evade throughout the novel – his final arrest and sentencing. It does come, in the form of two overly polite men in suits on the day of his thirtieth birthday. While they are debating who will do the honour of killing K, Josef K. has a revelation. “K. knew clearly now that it was his duty to seize the knife as it floated from hand to hand above him and plunge it into himself. ” (Kafka, 230) Although K does not seize the knife and murder himself, the shift in his frame of mind is quite evident. He is thinking as a nihilist would. Finally, as the knife is plunged into K, his death has come. He is unable to fight for his life anymore and this signals the complete death of existentialism.

Kafka’s The Trial is a tragic tale recounting a man’s journey from ignorance of himself as a being to ignorance of morals, truth and value. Placed against the backdrop of an elaborate court system, his trials and tribulations to remain alive and whole are underscored. With concepts drawn from both existentialism and nihilism, the journey is illustrated for readers in relation to truth, morality, death, and many other themes. A final quote from Nietzsche encapsulates the battle of The Trial perfectly: “The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If [one tries] it, [one] will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning [oneself].” (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/f/friedrich_nietzsche.html)

Trackback URI | Comments RSS