Short Story Club: The Metamorphosis by Kafka

[stlukesguild]

I think the deadpan realism is what allows us to almost accept the absurd change... yet it also makes it more disturbing. If there were more elements to the writing that were of a fantastic or fabulists-like nature, I don't think it would be so disconcerting.

[Dark Muse]

I think the deadpan realism is what allows us to almost accept the absurd change... yet it also makes it more disturbing. If there were more elements to the writing that were of a fantastic or fabulists-like nature, I don't think it would be so disconcerting.

Yes, that is an excellent point. Placing this extraordinary event on the backdrop of such sparse realism is what makes the situation more believable for the reader. Both Gregor's reactions to what happens as well as simply seeing the daily lives of the family, and how systematically the sister looks after him is such a stark contrast to the metamorphosis itself.

It would not be so nearly disturbing and provocative if it was placed within a more surreal setting, because it would make Gregor's change an easier pill to follow if it did not stand out so strongly against his surroundings and his life.

[hanzklein]

If you ask me, the reason for Gregors' insect transformation is a metaphor for a crippling illness. The characteristics of Gregor are spot on for anyone who has been considerably ill and nauseous before. For example his difficulty in maneuvering, his disgust at milk which he used to love and his inability to speak properly. Kafka himself had Tuberculosis if I remember right, maybe he based this story on his experience. Something else supporting this is how often sickness is mentioned in the story. Also, the view outside of his window of the hospital disappears - a hospital is a place which cures illness. There's more to the story though, the painting could represent the fall of man with the snake around the womans' neck and also references Venus in Furs, an interesting book to reference in this story considering its nature. His father also pelts him with apples, perhaps another reference to adam & eve.

I've only read little outside of the main text which I just finished today, I plan to read more criticisms, essays and analyses sometime soon.

Edit: and about the ending, that's definitely quite puzzling and thought provoking. It seems a weird way to end the book. But about the maid, she symbolizes a cleaner. Maids are paid to clean, and she pokes pokes Gregor with a broom as a joke. A broom, as we all know, is a an item used to clean up messes. The maids ambiguity about how she disposed of him leaves an enormous room for pondering what it could mean. Even more puzzling is what it means when Grete transformed into a beautiful young woman by the end. I have some thoughts on this, but I'll leave it out.

[bouquin]

On the back cover of my book the family name of Gregor is printed as "Samson." I don't know if this is mere typographical error or was done on purpose, anyway it leads me to think of Samson in the Bible who wakes up one morning only to find out that he has lost his herculean strength because Delilah has cut off his hair.

[LMK]

On the back cover of my book the family name of Gregor is printed as "Samson." I don't know if this is mere typographical error or was done on purpose, anyway it leads me to think of Samson in the Bible who wakes up one morning only to find out that he has lost his herculean strength because Delilah has cut off his hair.

Is it only Samson on the outside cover or throughout the book?

It seems to me that the biblical analogy of Samsno would be the antithesis of Gregor; Samson believes his power was in his hair, so is weak (or punished by God for allowing it to be cut knowingly or unknowingly). However, Gregor seems to have been an insect long before he turned into one physically (whether he actually did, or as I have said before, if he just became physically abhorrent and no longer useful to the family).

[bouquin]

I wonder if Kafka himself might have wanted to make reference to Samson in the Bible when he gave the family name Samsa to the character Gregor. Maybe the two names have the same origin?... just like Joshua~Jesus, Miriam~Mary, for example. In my opinion, Gregor's circumstances need not exactly ressemble that of the biblical Samson's; suffice to say that they both experienced sudden and dramatic transformation in the span of a night's sleep, I think that would already merit comparison.

[LMK]

I wonder if Kafka himself might have wanted to make reference to Samson in the Bible when he gave the family name Samsa to the character Gregor. Maybe the two names have the same origin?... just like Joshua~Jesus, Miriam~Mary, for example. In my opinion, Gregor's circumstances need not exactly ressemble that of the biblical Samson's; suffice to say that they both experienced sudden and dramatic transformation in the span of a night's sleep, I think that would already merit comparison.

I believe Samsa is Hungarian for Samuel.

[kelby_lake]

The story could be viewed in terms of gender. Gregor asserts his masculinity through work and the power he has over his sister. His sister slowly takes this away- first by controlling his feeding, then by going to work, and ultimately by her fertility, which triumphs over his impotency. Grete can assert her feminity, and by extension, herself; Gregor cannot assert his masculinity, or himself.

[Midnight Pete]

Gregor was like an insect in his behaviour before the transformation- leading an unsatisfactory monotonous life of work, 'beetling away'. The family are disgusted with him when he turns into a literal insect...he's more human than they are. They're horrible to him.

When I read Metamorphosis I didn't get the impression that the trasformation from man to beetle was a literal one. First of all, and most tellingly, is is Gregor's own initial reaction. You would think a man who has just realized he is a giant insect would be horrified, hysterical with fear and suprise. But no. The way Kafka writes it, it's as if Gregor was not at all surprised to find himself transmogrified into a beetle. And the reactions of his family don't match up, either. Why do they not run away screaming when they see him?

In my opinion, Kafka never did indicate one way or another if Gregor was in fact a giant beetle or just a man who perceived himself to be a giant beetle and subsequently went insane.

[kelby_lake]

When I read Metamorphosis I didn't get the impression that the trasformation from man to beetle was a literal one. First of all, and most tellingly, is is Gregor's own initial reaction. You would think a man who has just realized he is a giant insect would be horrified, hysterical with fear and suprise. But no. The way Kafka writes it, it's as if Gregor was not at all surprised to find himself transmogrified into a beetle. And the reactions of his family don't match up, either. Why do they not run away screaming when they see him?

In my opinion, Kafka never did indicate one way or another if Gregor was in fact a giant beetle or just a man who perceived himself to be a giant beetle and subsequently went insane.

Fact of the matter is that he is a beetle, whether you regard the transformation as imagined or whether you regard it as literal. This beetleness is so pervasive that it has swallowed up whatever identity he had as a human, if he really had one at all.

[Kyriakos]

I think that he was indeed transformed into a giant beetle, and not just imagined himself as one. Also the reactions of the family, although not entirely logical, have fear and disgust in them.
Also the reaction of the three people renting the room is of equal surprise towards Gregor.

I think that Kafka wanted to replace, though, an obvious metaphor (being turned into a beetle, but being human in reality) with a state that was a manifestation of that metaphor in physical terms.

[FROADS]

I don't know if Kafka is the first, but to me he appears to be one of those few authors who completely disregards the interests of a reader. Which is genius in a strange way, lol.

When I first read this story, I really did think there was gonna be a happy ending. Well, a more resolute conclusion than to Gregor's forgotten simple death.

[wat??]

Very interesting about the sister being the character who changed the most, also, the note about maybe Gregor didn't turn into an insect, but had some other thing happen that changed him physically and made him less a part of the family in everyone's eyes.

It's interesting to note here that even though it's almost universally accepted in English translations that Gregor has turned into an insect (more specifically a cockroach) while he slept; the actual wording used by Kafka could possibly mean to convey something quite different.

Oddly enough Wikipedia mentions this and I've pasted a few paragraphs from the article on 'The Metamorphosis' below.

"English translators have often sought to render the word Ungeziefer as "insect," but this is not strictly accurate. In Middle German, Ungeziefer literally means "unclean animal not suitable for sacrifice" and is sometimes used colloquially to mean "bug" – a very general term, unlike the scientific sounding "insect." Kafka had no intention of labeling Gregor as any specific thing, but instead wanted to convey Gregor's disgust at his transformation. The phrasing used in the David Wyllie translation and Joachim Neugroschel is "transformed in his bed into a monstrous vermin."

However, "vermin" denotes in English many animals (particularly rodents) and in Kafka's letter to his publisher of 25 October 1915, in which he discusses his concern about the cover illustration for the first edition, he uses the term "Insekt.", saying "The insect itself is not to be drawn. It is not even to be seen from a distance." While this shows his concern not to give precise information about the type of creature Gregor becomes, the use of the general term "insect" can therefore be defended on the part of translators wishing to improve the readability of the end text."

[wat??]

If you ask me, the reason for Gregors' insect transformation is a metaphor for a crippling illness. The characteristics of Gregor are spot on for anyone who has been considerably ill and nauseous before. For example his difficulty in maneuvering, his disgust at milk which he used to love and his inability to speak properly. Kafka himself had Tuberculosis if I remember right, maybe he based this story on his experience. Something else supporting this is how often sickness is mentioned in the story. Also, the view outside of his window of the hospital disappears - a hospital is a place which cures illness. There's more to the story though, the painting could represent the fall of man with the snake around the womans' neck and also references Venus in Furs, an interesting book to reference in this story considering its nature. His father also pelts him with apples, perhaps another reference to adam & eve.

I've only read little outside of the main text which I just finished today, I plan to read more criticisms, essays and analyses sometime soon.

Edit: and about the ending, that's definitely quite puzzling and thought provoking. It seems a weird way to end the book. But about the maid, she symbolizes a cleaner. Maids are paid to clean, and she pokes pokes Gregor with a broom as a joke. A broom, as we all know, is a an item used to clean up messes. The maids ambiguity about how she disposed of him leaves an enormous room for pondering what it could mean. Even more puzzling is what it means when Grete transformed into a beautiful young woman by the end. I have some thoughts on this, but I'll leave it out.

I'm inclined to take this sort of stance as well. It seems pretty clear that whether the entire incident takes place in a dream, or is entirely metaphorical the transformation does not actually occur physically in the way that it's described.

Being transformed into an enormous vermin, for me means only that he has become insignificant, pathetic and a burden to his family. While all of the anthropomorphic shenanigans (wall climbing, being unable to speak or communicate...etc), which create a strange blurring of reality, don't necessarily contradict the idea that the transformation is purely that of perception.