If "Kafkaesque" is used to describe something that is reminiscent of Kafka's work, then the film "Kafka" is quite Kafkaesque. I've viewed Kafka's work as representative of the absurd: the "normal" life of Gregor's, as a human, seems absurd indeed. However, the reader is not given a clear answer as to what is absurd and what is not: it is not clear what the theme of the novel is in this aspect, and we don't know what is "good" or "bad". There is an element of choice. It is up to the reader to decide whether Gregor's life as a bug or a human is more "human" and true. There is the question "What is humanity?" and Kafka himself does not judge the answer- the reader does. There is evidence from the novel Metamorphosis to support either theory. The bug can be considered human, as Gregor does more what he wants than as a human, but as a human, it is arguable that he is more human, as he fulfills his purpose, ect. Also, the family is a bit absurd as well- their feeble reaction to Gregor's transformation, and then how they evolve throughout the story. It can be considered that they have not changed at all, or have. It all depends on the reader.
This concept applies in the film. There is the normal world, and the absurd world. One would think that the normal world is the one with everyday events, and the crazier, insane world is the one with the torture, brain analysis, and whatever else was going on in the castle. However, the color that appears in the castle can contradict this theory. For us, color can seem like the normal world. And in the black and white world, where people do the same thing everyday and worry about little things, is absurd. There seems to be no point, and as they ignore the truth, what is the purpose of their life? The audience must choose for themselves what they believe. The question is also raised: "What is the real world?" and "what is normal?". Or even, "is there such a thing?"...
The movie and Metamorphosis both explore the idea of humanity. Is Gregor more human as an insect or a man? Is humanity progressing with creepy technology or ignoring the truth and staying put? I think one thing that is definitely "Kafkaesque" is the idea that the audience is left with more questions than answers.
This concept applies in the film. There is the normal world, and the absurd world. One would think that the normal world is the one with everyday events, and the crazier, insane world is the one with the torture, brain analysis, and whatever else was going on in the castle. However, the color that appears in the castle can contradict this theory. For us, color can seem like the normal world. And in the black and white world, where people do the same thing everyday and worry about little things, is absurd. There seems to be no point, and as they ignore the truth, what is the purpose of their life? The audience must choose for themselves what they believe. The question is also raised: "What is the real world?" and "what is normal?". Or even, "is there such a thing?"...
The movie and Metamorphosis both explore the idea of humanity. Is Gregor more human as an insect or a man? Is humanity progressing with creepy technology or ignoring the truth and staying put? I think one thing that is definitely "Kafkaesque" is the idea that the audience is left with more questions than answers.
i agree with you that the film was very surreal.im not quite sure how color made you think of the normal vs absurd though. i thought the color showed modernitity and that whole concept of moderninity, and a sort of clarity but then again it was very confusing. i dont understand what you mean by normal world vs absurd world, i think the normal world was absurd and mundane, painfully so at times. what sort of connotations are you suggestion with this notion of normal? is this normalacy real or a good thing? the film does give us many questions and few answers but what do you think of this notion of normal?
ReplyDeletesorry for the spelling and grammar mistakes above.
ReplyDeleteI think that's the point of the movie: that there is no normal world. What you say, "I think the normal world was absurd and mundane, painfully so at times" is exactly what I was trying to get at. The movie makes us question what is true, and whether there is such a thing. The color emphasized the two worlds --> their differences and their similarities. The movie was supposed to be confusing: because the world is confusing. At first glance one would say that the "castle world" is crazy and insane- but like you said, the "normal" everyday world is every bit as mad. This may be trying to say something about our world: what we view as normal and the lives we live are perhaps more absurd than we normally think they are.
ReplyDeleteOr, perhaps, that to be absurd is to be normal, and neither idea really exists by itself. That there is no absurd and there is no normal and the absurdity is normality.
ReplyDeleteabsurdity is normality i agree. but if the castle world is as a crazy as the real world why does that one feel more exciting? if the the world is monotonous and absurd what is it about each day that makes it better or worse than the others. it must be little things that change this, and since "small" things are as absurd as the "big" things, i think we can chose to view them however we want , we choose to appreciate i suppose.
ReplyDeleteYeah! Which is why I sort of defined "Kafkaesque" as something that leaves things up for interpretation and creates more questions than answers.
ReplyDelete