Portland State UniversityPDXScholar

University Honors Theses University Honors College

1-1-2013

Building Stories: Modernity, Socialization and Failure in Works ofFranz Kafka and Hannah ArendtChris CarpenterPortland State University

Let us know how access to this document benefits you.Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/honorstheses

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Theses by an authorized administrator ofPDXScholar. For more information, please contact pdxscholar@pdx.edu.

Recommended CitationCarpenter, Chris, "Building Stories: Modernity, Socialization and Failure in Works of Franz Kafka and Hannah Arendt" (2013).University Honors Theses. Paper 8.

10.15760/honors.8

brought to you by COREView metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk

provided by PDXScholar

1

BuildingStories:

Modernity,Socialization,andFailureintheWorksofFranz

KafkaandHannahArendt

By

ChrisCarpenter

Athesissubmittedinpartialfulfillment

oftherequirementsforthe

BACHELOROFARTSWITHHONORS

in

ENGLISH

ThesisSupervisor:JenniferRuth

PortlandStateUniversity

2013

2

TableofContents

I.)Introduction 3

II.)Public,Private,Social 12

III.)LaborandWork 26

IV.)TheArchimedeanPoint 42

Bibliography 61

3

I.)Introduction

Modernity,forHannahArendt,isprimarilyamatterofloss:authority,certainty,tradition,

andthepossibilityformeaningfulactionthatcanonlyoccurinapublicsphereinthefull

viewofequals.Themodernageiscoevalwiththeriseofsociety–theprivaterealmof

“housekeeping,itsactivities,problems,andorganizationaldevices,”1whichhasmixedwith

thepublicsocompletelyastomakethemindistinguishable.Thebasicbiologicalneedsof

humanity,oncerelegatedtotheprivacyofthehouseholdanddeemedunworthyoftrue

politicaldiscussion,havebecomepartandparcelwiththepoliticalprocessassuch.

Aristotle’szoonpolitikonhasbecomeananimallaborans,bringinghislaborintothe

forefrontofpublicdiscussion,indeedmakingitthetopicforpublicdiscussion.Thisshift

hasbeenmadepossible,inpart,bytheriseofreason,rationality,andscience,a

developmentwhichconsidersmanaspartofacosmicmachineoperatingunderuniversal

laws.ThecollectionofequalsthatcharacterizedtheGreekpolishasbecomeacollectionof

bureaucrats,placingtheirfaith,asitwere,inthedictumsofstatisticsand“behavioral

sciences,”which“aimtoreducemanasawhole,inallhisactivities,tothelevelofa

conditionedandbehavinganimal.”2

ItcannotbedoubtedthatFranzKafkaisamodernwriter.Somethingaboutthe

“tremendousworldIhaveinsidemyhead”thatKafkarelatedtousthroughhisnovels,

stories,andparableshasmanagedtoretainitsresonancealmost100yearsaftertheir

composition.Itisaworldwheremanmustbowhishead,wheretraditionisinscribedwith

a“sickness,”andthecertaintyallowedbyappealstoahigherpower–God,theKing,the

1Arendt,TheHumanCondition38(HC)2HC45

4

Platoniceidos–havecrumbledundertheonslaughtofmodernity:“NowhereinKafkadoes

thereglimmertheauraoftheinfiniteidea;nowheredoesthehorizonopen.”3Thisisa

worldwecanexperienceinanynumberofeverydaysituations,fromgoingtotheDMVto

hearingphysicistsexplainourworldintermsofquarksandbosons,numbersandsymbols.

Itseemscompletelyoutsidetherealmofcommonhumanexperience,completelyirrational,

butwearetoldthatthisisthewayitis,andwebelieveitbecauseitseemsliketherecanbe

noalternative.Theadjectiveforthiskindofexperience,“kafkaesque,”hasenteredcommon

parlance.FrederickKarldescribeshisconceptionoftheword:

What'sKafkaesqueiswhenyouenterasurrealworldinwhichallyour

controlpatterns,allyourplans,thewholewayinwhichyouhaveconfigured

yourownbehavior,beginstofalltopieces,whenyoufindyourselfagainsta

forcethatdoesnotlenditselftothewayyouperceivetheworld.Youdon't

giveup,youdon'tliedownanddie.Whatyoudoisstruggleagainstthiswith

allofyourequipment,withwhateveryouhave.Butofcourseyoudon'tstand

achance.That'sKafkaesque.4

ArendtwasnostrangertoKafka’sworks.AftercomingtoAmericatofleetheNazis,

sheworkedasaneditoratSchockenBooks,theimprintmostresponsibleforexposingthe

English‐speakingworldtoKafka.ShealsowroteanessayonKafkaforThePartisanReview

in1944,establishingherselfasoneofhisearliestcritics.TheprologuetoBetweenPastand

FuturecontainsadetailedreadingofKafka’sparable“He.”SheleadsthefinalchapterinThe

HumanConditionwithanaphorismfromKafka.

3Adornop.2464Edwards

5

TheextentofKafka’sinfluenceonArendt’sconceptionofmodernityisdifficultto

pindown.Mostoftheexistingscholarshipfocusesonheraccountoftotalitarianism,and

placesKafkaintheroleofprophet,predictingrealphenomenathatwouldn’toccuruntil

afterhisdeath.InheronlyworkfocusedexclusivelyonKafka,Arendtdeemshimabuilder

of“blueprints,”modelsthatare“theproductofthinkingratherthanofmeresense

experience.”5Kafka’s“unreality,”thesenseinwhichhisworksclearlydescribeaworld

thatisnotexplicitlyours,“exposethenakedstructureofevents”throughthepurelymental

activityofimagination.KafkadidnotlookaroundhimandseethebirthpangsofHitlerand

Stalin,buthedidseetheunderlyingconditionsthatwouldeventuallyleadtoveryreal

atrocities,thoughhecouldnothaveknownitatthetime.Kafka’svision,sotospeak,was

exemplaryforitsabilitytoseetheunseenandpassoverblindlythatwhichappearedmost

readily.6Hisparablesareorganizedaroundan“incident”like“raysoflightwhich,

however,donotilluminateitsoutwardappearancebutpossessthepowerofXraystolay

bareitsinnerstructure.”7Thisincidentisthemomentwherepastandfutureconverge,the

individualmomentoflivedexperience.

Inheressay,Arendtattemptstoreadakindofhopeintothenovels,acapacityfor

resistanceagainstaworldthatseekstodispensewiththehuman.SheassertsthatKafka

“wantedtobuildupaworldinaccordancewithhumanneedsandhumandignities,aworld

whereman’sactionsaredeterminedbyhimselfandwhichisruledbyhislawsandnotby

5Arendt,“Kafka:ARevaluation”pp.76‐77.(KAR)6“Theworldofthoserealitiesthatwereimportantforhimwasinvisible.”MaxBrod,quotedinBenjamin,p.1217BetweenPastandFuture,pp.7(BPAP)

6

mysteriousforcesemanatingfromaboveorfrombelow.”8Thisworldispopulatedby

charactersthataremodelsof“the‘commonman’asanidealofhumanity…themotorofhis

activitiesisgoodwill,incontrasttothemotorofsocietywithwhichheisatodds,whichis

functionality.”9ArendtseesakindofkindredspiritinKafka,andwantstoreconcilehim

withherproject,whichexploresthepossibilityformeaningfulactioninanagethatalways

seemstoprecludeit.FigureslikeJosephK.inTheTrialandK.inTheCastleareexemplary,

inheranalysis,forexposingthe“nakedstructure”ofmodernityinallitsshoddinessand

lackoffeeling.Theystruggleagainstitinanattempttobringaboutamorehumanewayof

living.

Arendtisfamousforaprosestylethathasbeendescribedas“literarypolitical

theory,”10orwhatsheherselfcalledsimply“myoldfashionedstorytelling.”This

methodologyencouragesreaderstoformtheirownresponsetoherempiricalresearch,

takingintoaccountamyriadofdifferentvantagepointsthatshelaysoutoverthecourseof

a“story.”Partofhercritiqueofmodernityisthecessationofthisopenness,thesensethat

inthemodernworldmeaningisprescribedaprioriaspartofnecessaryprocessesbeyond

ourcontrol,byaforcethatappealstonothingandnoone.Historyhasbecometheprogress

of“aninevitablesuperhumanlaw”11embodiedbytheworkingsofamachineinwhich

humansarecaught.Byemphasizingthehumanelementofhistory,Arendtinvitesus,or

ratherdemandsofus,tomakejudgmentsforourselves.Ratherthanpresentingher

accountsofmodernphenomenaasanobjectivereportofthefacts,Arendtdisclosesher

8KAR809KAR7610Dossa,111KAR74

7

ownsubjectivityandcompelsustoimagine(orrecall)thesephenomenaaslived

experience.“Shewritestomoveheraudiencetoengagewithherinthinking‘whatweare

doing.’”12

ThismethodologymakesiteasiertoaccountforherreadingofKafka,andits

potentialfaults.Hisworksaremadetofitintothestorysheistryingtotell,onethat

articulatesafallbroughtaboutbythealienatingeffectsofmodernity.Arendtstruggles

againstthisfall,andshereadsKafkaasafigureengagedinthestruggle.“Hewantedto

buildupaworldinaccordancewithhumanneedsandhumandignities,aworldwhere

man’sactionsaredeterminedbyhimselfandwhichisruledbyhislawsandnotby

mysteriousforcesemanatingfromaboveorfrombelow.”13Thisapproachisusefulfor

thinkingthroughArendt’sprogram,butfewcriticalstatementscouldbemoremisleading

withregardstotheKafkatext.Oneproblemisbaddata:shedidnotknowthatAmerika,

Kafka’sfirstandmostoptimisticnovel,wasactuallyhislastandthusreadshisworkasa

progressionfrompessimism(TheTrialandTheCastle)tohopeforabetterworld.Another

seemstobesimpleandwillfulmisreading.ManycriticsbeforeandafterArendthavetried

toreadKafkaoptimistically,butitisextremelydubioustoclaimthattheworldKafka

“wantedtobuildup”hasanythingtodowithgreaterhumanagency.JosephK.isexecuted

withoutgainingamodicumoftruthormeaningoutofhiswholeexperience.K.inTheCastle

withersawayofexhaustionafterendlessthwartedattemptstoreachthetitularfortress,

andisdeprivedtheopportunitytolivea“normal”lifeinthisverystrangevillage.Allof

12Iowethisquote,andmuchofthethoughtlaidoutintheprecedingparagraph,toLisaDisch’sessay“MoreTruththanFact:StorytellingasCriticalUnderstandingintheWritingsofHannahArendt”13KAR80

8

Kafka’sfictionendsinsimilarlymorbidfashion,ifithasanythingthatcouldbeconsidered

an“ending”atall.14

LikeArendt,Kafkaisengagedinastruggle,butitisonewithnocleargoal.Thereis

nolightattheendofthetunnel.AsWalterSokelnotes,“Kafka,inwriting,doesnotseemto

haveapreconceivedmeaning,afixedintention,inhismind.”15ItseemsKafkawrote

simplybecausehehadtoo,becauseitwastheonlythingthatcompelledhimtowardsliving

–nottothementionthefactthathewaspreternaturallygifted,toanalmostabsurddegree.

16Nevertheless,itisunlikelythatanyoneinhistoryhasexploredmoreintimatelythan

Kafkathequestion“whywrite?”Analmostendlessnumberofpagesinhisdiaryandletters

probethemeaning,theimpetusforwritingassuch.Ontheonehanditwasan

“impossibility,”17andontheotheritwasanabsolutenecessity.18Wecan,however,note

withonlyslighthesitancethathedidnotwritetofacilitatechange,todiagnoseanillness

thatneededcorrection.Hecertainlyobservedthe“sicknessoftradition,”19buthesawit

withtheeyesofsomeoneimmersedinaswampwithoutbeginningorend;thereisnocure.

WhileArendtreadstheKafka“hero”asengagedinastruggle,thecharactersthemselvesall

recognizethefutilityoftheirefforts,theSisypheannatureoftheirlabor.Farfromactive

agentsdisclosingthepossibilityfornewbeginnings,forbreakingoutofthemachine,the

14ThemajorityofKafka’sextantworkwasunpublishedinhislifetime,andmostlyunedited.TheTrial,forinstance,wasacollectionoffragmentswhichMaxBrodassembledashesawfit.15Sokelpp.3316He,ofcourse,knewthisverywell:“EverysentenceIwritedownisalreadyperfect.”17“[TheJewishwriters]livebesetbythreeimpossibilities:theimpossibilityofnotwriting,theimpossibilityofwritinginGermanandtheimpossibilityofwritingdifferently,andwecouldaddafourthimpossibility:theimpossibilityofwritingatall.”18“Mytalentforportrayingmydreamlikeinnerlifehasthrustallmattersintothebackground;mylifehasdwindleddreadfully,norwillitceasetodwindle.Nothingelsewilleversatisfyme.”19Benjaminpp.143

9

charactersaresweptupbythe“angelofhistory,”who“turnshisfacetothepast.”20

IfArendt’sKafkais,then,primarilyusefulforunderstandingArendt,perhapswe

mayuseArendttobetterunderstandKafka.Iwouldliketodothisbyutilizingsomeofthe

categoriessheexploresinTheHumanConditiontoshowhowbothauthorsmanagedto

diagnosemanyofthesameillnessesafflictingmodernity,eveniftheydidsobydifferent

meansandwithdifferentendsinmind.ForArendtthisendwashopeforthefuture,fora

thinking“withoutbannisters,”fornewpossibilitiesofaction.AsforKafka,Iwouldliketo

referenceWalterBenjamin’slettertoGerhardScholemin1938,inwhichhemakesavery

strangeclaim:

TodojusticetothefigureofKafkainitspurityanditspeculiarbeautyone

mustneverlosesightofonething:itisthepurityandbeautyofafailure.The

circumstancesofthisfailurearemanifold.Oneistemptedtosay:oncehewas

certainofeventualfailure,everythingworkedoutforhimenrouteasina

dream.21

Failure,intheBenjaminiananalysis,isKafka’send,theeventualtelosofhiswholewriting

project.Thisisanincrediblycontentiousstatement,andonenotwidelysharedby

Benjamin’scriticaldescendants.22Iwouldliketoarguethatheisactuallymorefaithfulto

theKafkatextthananyofthemoreoptimisticcriticswhofollowed.Failureisbuiltintohis

storiesinawaythatisfundamentaltotheirunfoldingintime.Ifthestoriesworktowards

something,itistherealizationthattheyhaveactuallybeenworkingbackwardsortreading

20BenjaminquotedinKAR75.MoreonthisconceptinPart3.21Benjaminpp.144‐4522ForDeleuzeandGuattari’sresponsetoBenjamin’s“failure,”seeLauraPenny’s“ParablesandPolitics:HowBenjaminandDeleuze&GuattariReadKafka”

10

waterjusttostayinplace.Kafka’sworldis,inBenjamin’sterms,a“swampworld.”23The

“infiniteidea”isalreadyrecognizedasimpossible,butthedesireforitalwaysremains.This

isthewayeverything“worksout”forhim“enrouteasinadream.”Thatthisdesiremust

endinfailureleadstoakindofnegativerevelation,“anegativeachievement,anegative

eliminationofallsignificantdifferencebetweenconsciousnessandexistence.”24

ByreadingKafkathroughanArendtianlens,andkeepingthisreadingdulysituated

withintheBenjaminianteleologyoffailure,Ithinkwecangainsomenewinsightsintothe

waymodernityfunctionsinhisstories.WhileArendtherselfmighthavebeenalittle

disappointedinthepessimismsuchananalysiswillinevitablyentail,whatitlacksin

optimismwillhopefullybemadeupforinfaithfulnesstothefigureofKafka.Wemust

alwaysrememberthatthisisthemanwhosaid“thereishope–aninfiniteamountofhope

–butnotforus.”

IwillfocusontwoofKafka’sstorieshere,“TheBurrow”and“TheGreatWallofChina.”The

narratorsofbothstoriesanalyzeabuildingprocess;thekindofstructureattempted,the

reasonsforbuilding,andthewayseachprojectconstitutethesubjectsinvolved.Ichoose

thesestoriesbecausetheprocessofbuildingprovidesagoodcontextforconnectingKafka

toArendt’scategoriesofthevitaactiva.Thekindoflaborinvolvedinbuildingthem,the

specificspacestheyenclose,andtheambiguousgoalsofbothprojectsareverymodern,in

thattheyarecritiquedthroughascientific/logicalframeworkandsituatedwithinaworld

23Benjaminp.13024Thorlbypp.80

11

whereallcertaintyhasdisappeared.BothinvokeKant’sdictum“Sapereaude!”25andboth

ultimatelyrunupagainstapointwherethedictumfails.Fortheburrower,itisthe

intrusionofamysterious“whistling”withnodiscerniblepositioninspace,anintrusion

thateventuallyleadstothecollapseofhisworld.Allhiseffortstodiscoverthenatureof

thisphenomenonfail.Forthenarratorof“TheGreatWall,”itistheexistenceofa“high

command,”infinitelydistantfromthepeopleitrulesover.TheChinesepeoplehavea

maxim:“Trywithallyourmighttocomprehendthedecreesofthehighcommand,butonly

uptoacertainpoint;thenavoidfurthermeditation.”26Thesecharactersare,inasense,

caughtupinthe“machinery”ofEnlightenmentrationality,buttheycannotuseittotheir

advantage,muchlessunderstandit.IwillreturntothisnotionwhenIdiscussthe

“Archimedeanpoint,”theprivilegedoutsidevantagefromwhichonecanseeeverythingas

awholeandunderstandit.

Forallthethematicsimilarities,thedifferencesinthetwostoriesareprobablymore

illuminating.“TheBurrow”isnarratedbyanasocial,solipsisticanimal‐humanhybrid

concernedonlywithhimselfandhiscreation.“TheGreatWall,”ontheotherhand,involves

anentireempire,anditsnarratorisconcernedwiththeworkingsofamultitude.Byputting

thestoriesintoadialogue,wecangainsomeinsightintoArendt’sconceptionofhumanity

asaplurality:“…thefactthatmen,notMan,liveontheearthandinhabittheworld.”27For

Arendtthisistheconditionofaction,“theonlyactivitythatgoesondirectlybetweenmen

andwithouttheintermediaryofthingsormatter.”Bypresentingtheindividualasabeing

drivenpartiallybyanimalinstinctsandpartiallybyman’srationality,asopposedtothe

25Kant26Kafka,TheCompleteStories240(KCS)27HC7

12

populationofanempirewhichisdepictedasakindofabstracttotality,Kafkashowstwo

differentwaystothinkthroughthevitaactivainthemodernage,specificallyintermsof

thepublicandprivate.Arendtanalyzesthepublicsphereasthespacewhereinthe

individual,freedfromtheconditionsofnecessity,mayengageinpoliticsandcreate

somethingnew;forKafkaasforArendt,theconflationofpublicandprivatedismissesthe

individualandsubjectshimtothesameprocessesofhistoricalnecessityasthepopulation.

Thisconflationisthe“social”sphereofhumanexistence–“theriseofhousekeeping,its

activities,problems,andorganizationaldevices.”28Theonlywayoutofthismodern

“machinery”appearstobethedream,attainedinmomentsofinaction,pointingtowards

theimpossible.Thedream,inAdorno’swords,“confirm[s]therealityofeverythingelse,

evenifitshouldbethatdreamrealitysuggestedperiodicallybypassages…soagonizingly

drawnouttheyleavethereadergaspingforair.”29

II.)Public,Private,Social

ForArendt,theriseofthesocialistheconditionofmodernity,theelementthatmost

singularlydistinguishesitfromtradition.30Inantiquitythepublicandprivaterealmswere

sharplydelineatedbyseveralfactors:thekindofactivitypermitted,thetypeofsubject

allowedtoparticipate,andtheparticularphysicalspacethatmarkedtheproperdomainof

each.Theprivaterealmwasboundtotheprocessesofnecessity,thedailycaresinwhich

28HC3829Adorno248.AdornoisspecificallyreferencingTheCastleandAmerikahere,butIthinkthestatementholdstrueforKafka’sworkasawhole.30“Theemergenceofthesocialrealm,whichisneitherprivatenorpublic,strictlyspeaking,isarelativelynewphenomenonwhoseorigincoincidedwiththeemergenceofthemodernageandwhichfounditspoliticalforminthenation‐state.”HC28

13

eachhumanbeingmustlaborinordertosurvive.Mattersofeconomicsandindividual

prosperity–materialinterests‐werealsoreservedfortheprivatebecausetheyaredriven

by“wantsandneeds,”31anddonothingforthehighercategoriesofactivitywhichcanonly

beundertakenoncepurelybiologicalmotiveshavebeentakencareof.Thisiswhyslaves

weresocrucialtothefunctioningofboththepolisandtheRomancity‐state;theyallowed

thecitizentoshrugnecessityandjoinhisequalsinpolitics,philosophy,andthearts.

“Everythingmerelynecessaryorusefulisstrictlyexcluded.”32Thehigheractivitieswere

notonlypropertothepublicsphere,theyweretheverydefinitionofpublic.Equally

importantwasthepresenceofotherswithwhomonecouldengageonequalfooting.The

privaterealmofthehouseholdmightwasthe“centerofstrictestinequality,”33andeven

themasterofthehousewasnotfreewhenhewasinitbecausehewasstillburdenedwith

thecommandofothers.

Everyactivityperformedinpubliccanattainanexcellencenevermatchedin

privacy;forexcellence,bydefinition,thepresenceofothersisalways

required,andthispresenceneedstheformalityofthepublic,constitutedof

one’speers,itcannotbethecasual,familiarpresenceofone’sequalsor

inferiors.34

Theriseofthesocialmarkedthespillingoveroftheprivateintothepublic,anda

completereconstitutionoftheorganizationalprinciplesthatgovernanddefinethelatter.

Fortheancientsthisstructuraltransformationwouldhavebeenunfathomable.

31Arendtnotesthatinantiquityevenslavescouldamassarespectablefortune,butthisofferedlittleconsolationfortheirexclusionfromthepublicsphere.HC5932HC2533HC3234HC49

14

Participationinthepublicspherewaspracticallythewholemeaningofexistence,andto

sullythekindofactivitythatitalonepermitted,byfreeingthetediumandbanalityofthe

householdfromitsconfines,wouldhaveseemedutterlyabsurd.Wewilldiscusssomeof

thecausesforsuchatransformationlater,butfornowweneedonlyconcernourselves

withitseffects.

Byconflatingtheprivateandpublic,humanitybegantoconsideritselfenmasseasa

kindofconditionedanimal,apopulationratherthanaplurality.The“phenomenonof

conformism”becametheimpetusfortheconcurrentriseofthesocialsciences,whichare

possibleonlyinsofarasmen“unanimouslyfollowedcertainpatternsofbehavior,sothat

thosewhodidnotkeeptherulescouldbeconsideredtobeasocialorabnormal.”35The

“rules”spreadtocoverlargerandlargerswathsofpeopleandspace,aimingtoassimilate

everyoneintoacertainpredictability.Perhapsmostemblematicofthisstatistical

predilectionwasthedevelopmentofeconomics,whichhashadprofoundimpactsonthe

organizationofsociety.36Labor,thenecessaryactivityofsustaininglife(whichwewill

discussfurtherinthenextpartofthisessay),wasliberatedfromtheprivaterealmand

givensingularimportanceinthepublicdiscourse,andthesecurityofit’shandmaiden

property–“thelabourofourbodyandtheworkofourhands,”inLocke’sterms‐37became

theoverridingconcernofpolitics.“Originally,”Arendtnotes,“propertymeantnomoreor

lessthantohaveone’slocationinaparticularpartoftheworldandthereforetobelongto

35HC4236Eventheterm,“organizationofsociety,”alreadyspeaksvolumestothekindofchangeArendtisarticulating.37HC111

15

thebodypolitic…”38Onlywiththeriseofthesocialdidtheinteriorofthisprivatedomain

anditsattendantconceptofownershipbecomeamatterforlegislationandinterventionin

thepublic.39

Theimpactofhumankind’ssocializationisstampedallovertheworkofKafka.The

depthofhisinsightintothewaysthatitshapesandconfoundstheindividualisonehis

mostscrutinized(andcelebrated)contributionstomodernliterature.Toseetheeffectsof

this,weneedlooknofurtherthanthe“hero”ofTheTrial,JosephK.,consumedand

destroyedby“agreatorganization…whichnotonlyemployscorruptwardens,stupid

inspectors,andexaminingmagistrates…butalsohasatitsdisposalajudicialhierarchyof

high,indeedthehighest,rank,withanindispensibleretinueofservants,clerks,policeand

otherassistants,perhapsevenhangmen.”40Mendefinedbyjobs,endlesshierarchieswhich

obeyarbitrarylaws,hawk‐eyedattentionpaidtoprivateactivitiesanddesires,the

inexorableprogressionofprocesseswhichseemcompletelyoutsidehumancontrol.

Totalitarianism,themostatrociousexampleofsocializationtakentoitsextreme,appears

latentinKafka’sworldview,asArendtherselfassertsin“ARevaluation.”41Moreover,the

effectsofmodernprocesseslikecapitalismandself‐alienationachieveexpressioninstories

like“TheMetamorphosis”thatarethenonplusultraofmodernhumanexperience,giving

voiceto“sociallyforbiddenfeelingsandthoughts,”whilealsorevealinga“censoring,

concealing,andthusrepressivesidethatmadetherebelliontheytriedtoexpress

38HC6139AnimportantpartofArendt’sanalysis,whichwewillnotdelveintohere,consistsoftheriseofso‐called“marketforces”andthecommodificationofalmosteverythingthatcanbeproduced.Ileavethisoutmainlybecauseitisfartoolargeatopicforthescopeofthepresentinvestigation,andalsobecausethetwoKafkastoriesI’vechosenhaverelativelylittletodowithexchange,productivity,andotherconceptsrelatedtocapital.40QuotedinKAR7041ForananalysisofKafka’sinfluenceonTheOriginsofTotalitarianism,seeDanoff

16

unrecognizabletoconsciousness.”42Arendtisquiterightwhenshenotes

Onlythereaderforwhomlifeandtheworldandmanaresocomplicated,of

suchterribleinterest,thathewantstofindoutsometruthaboutthemand

whothereforeturnstostorytellersforinsightintoexperiencescommonto

usallmayturntoKafka…”43

“TheGreatWallofChina”providesadifferentperspectiveontherelationship

betweenpublic,privateandsocial.Thestoryhastheformofa“report,”ananalysisof

structuresandconditionsratherthananarrativerelationofeventsunfoldingoverlinear

time.Weknowthatthenarratorhimselfhasaparticularvantage,avillageinthesoutheast

ofChina,andhasonlyanecdotalknowledgeofmuchofthesurroundingcountry.Hehas

traveledsome,buttheexpanseoftheempireissolargeastobepracticallyinfinite,andso

hisknowledgeislimited.Assertingtheimpossibilityofcontactwith“thenortherners,”he

claimsthat“thelandistoovastandwouldnotletthemreachus,theywouldendtheir

courseintheemptyair.”44Despitethisapparentspatialrestriction,theinfluenceofChina’s

leadersisomnipresentinallcornersoflife.“Ourleadersknowus,”hesays,“They,

absorbedingiganticanxieties,knowofus,knowourpettypursuits,seeussittingtogether

inourhumblehuts,andapproveordisapprovetheeveningprayerwhichthefatherofthe

houserecitesinthemidstofhisfamily.”45TheimageofBentham’spanopticon,sooften

invokedinKafkacriticism,seemsinescapablehere.Thepryingeye,peeringintothe

confinesofhumanity’smostprivateexperiences,passingjudgmentthatcanneitherbe

42Sokel1743KAR7744KCS24145KCS241

17

confirmednordenied.The“anxieties”oftheleadersunderscoresthesensethatthesource

ofjudgmentisneithertheaustere,unquestionabledeityoftheChristiantraditionnorthe

collectionofhigh‐mindedequalsthatconstitutedthepolis.Theseleadersaresubjecttothe

sameworriesastheirsubjects‐onlymade“gigantic”‐andeminentlyconcernedwiththe

“pettypursuits”whichmakeuptheactivitiesoftheprivaterealm;theyareGodsfashioned

inman’simage,butthisaparticularkindofsocializedmanwhothinksprimarilyofdaily

needs,quotidiancares,andreflectsthesethoughtsbackontotheorganizingprincipleofhis

ownlife.“KafkadepictedasocietywhichhadestablisheditselfasasubstituteforGod,”

Arendtwrites,“andhedescribedmenwholookeduponthelawsofsocietyasthoughthey

weredivinelaws–unchangeablethroughthewillofmen.”46Divinity,the

unquestionabilityofanauthorityhandeddownfromonhigh,requiresobscurity.“Themost

obscureofourinstitutionsisthatoftheempireitself,”47thenarratorsays,andhe

emphasizesoverandoveragaintheextenttowhichtheChinesepeoplecannotevenbe

surethattheirEmperorexists.48Theopacityoftheleaders,theabsoluteimpossibilityof

engagementwiththeminanyform,precludesanyformofresistance,anychanceat

rebellion.Thediffusenessoftheleadershippresencemakestheirinfluenceamatterof

internalization,adeep‐seededinfectionthatspreadsoutwardexponentiallylikeavirus.

EveryoneinChinaissusceptibletoitbecausethebeliefinitsvalidityissocrucialtotheir

senseofnationalidentity,thebindingagentthatpreventsindividualsfromfounderingina

46KAR7247KCS24248Additionally,thereaderremainsunsurewhoexactlyisinchargehere.Thehighcommand,theEmperor,and“natureGods”areallconsideredseparately,andthereforemustbedistinctentities.Thisambiguityemphasizestheextenttowhichthegazeofauthorityextendsintoeveryfacetofprivatelife,andpermitsnothingintermsofreciprocality.

18

seaofuncertainty.

Arendtwritesthat“thephenomenonofconformismischaracteristicofthelaststage

ofthismoderndevelopment,”49andwecanseethewaysthisplaysoutasnecessityin“The

GreatWall.”Theconflationofthepublicandprivate,thesenseinwhichthereisnospacein

whichtheeyesoftheleadershipdonotpry,fosterstheconformityoftheChinesepeople.

Buttheinnatedesireofhumankindtobinditselftoacoherentworldviewisnotenoughin

itselftoensurethatfragmentationdoesnotoccur;thereisalwaysamaterial,private

concernthatoverridesallothers.Theriseofsocietyis,afterall,notmerelypredicatedon

anabstractidealthatproceedswithorwithoutspecifickindsoforganization;socialization

requiresreificationinordertobecomedominant.In“TheGreatWall,”thebuildingofthe

wallprovidestheconcretestructurethatmakestangibletherathermysticalscopeofthe

empire.Incasethereisanydoubtastothecodependenceoftheempireandthewall,the

narratormakesitexplicit:“FarratherdoIbelievethatthehighcommandhasexistedfrom

alleternity,andthedecisiontobuildthewalllikewise.”50Bygivingthewallandits

conceiversaneternalquality,thewholeprocessofsocializationthatthewallengenders

appearstoprogressinevitably,asakindofdialectic.51Moreover,thehighcommand

elevatesthecraftofmasonry“asthemostimportantbranchofknowledgethroughoutthe

wholeareaofChina,”52ensuringthatreificationofconformityattendstothesamedesires

astheabstractidealswhichwillbeliefintheleaders’eternalpathofinevitability.

49HC4050KCS24251Consideredasadialecticmovement,itisinterestingthatthestorybeginswithanassertionofcompletion;asifthedialecticalsynthesishadbeenachieved.However,asweshallsee,thewallisneverreally“finished.”TheystillhavetobuildtheTowerofBabel.52KCS236

19

Education,thesystembywhichapopulationlearnsnormsandvalues,prioritizesthewall

totheexclusionofallelse;including,wemightassume,thecriticalfacultiesthatwould

underminethelegitimacyofthewallandthehighcommand.Herewehaveakindof

mockeryofthepursuitofexcellencefoundinthepublicsphere,carefullydirectedand

promotedbyanxiousGodswhothinkonlyintermsoftheprivate,and“seethebodyof

peoplesandpoliticalcommunitiesintheimageofafamilywhoseeverydayaffairshaveto

betakencareofbyagigantic,nation‐wideadministrationofhousekeeping.”53

If“TheGreatWallofChina”providesacompellingexampleofsocializationatwork,

“TheBurrow”seemstobeitsopposite.Theburrowerisfiercelyindividualistic,non‐

conformist,andasocial–theoppositeoftheChinesewall‐builderwhogoesabouthistask

withtheweightofthenation,“acurrentofbloodnolongerconfinedwithinthenarrow

circulationofonebody,butsweetlyrollingandyeteverreturningthroughouttheendless

leaguesofChina.”54Theburrower’sstructureisdesignedtosecludeitssubjectfrom

society,nottointegrateit.Healsowishestomixhisbloodwithhisbuilding–“Iwasglad

whenthebloodcame,forthatwasaproofthatthewallswerebeginningtoharden”55‐but

worksateverymomenttoassureitisonlyhisbloodthatseepsintothestructure.Privacy

andsolitudearepanaceasforallthatailshim.HeappealstonoGod‐likeauthorities,and

constantlyrebelsagainstthenaturalconditionsgiventohim.Inmanyrespectsheseemsto

bethe“deviation”whichsocialsciencefailstoaccountfor.Butthisismisleading.The

burroweris,infact,justasconditionedbythestricturesofsocietyasanyChineselaborer.

Togettohowthisisso,wemustfirstexaminehisplaceinArendt’sdelineations.

53HC2854KCS23855KCS328

20

Everythingtheburrowerdoesisintenselyprivate.AsHermannWeigandnotes,“hethinks

ofnothingbuthimselfandhisburrow,”56directingallofhisinquiriesbacktowardshis

myopicfocusonprivacy,securityand“self‐glorification.”Eventheselfanditscreationare

integrated;HeinzPolitzerwrites:“Literallythecreationharborsthecreator;moreover,it

swallowshimuptosuchanextentthathehimselfisdeniedanyidentification.”57The

narrator’screationisanintegralpartofhimratherthanapassiveobject,anextensionof

hispsycheratherthansomethingthatpsychereflectsupon.Inthisanalysis,theburrowis

notsomethingthenarratorcanobserveorappreciate,orratheronlytotheextentthatthe

selfcanobserveorappreciateitself;itishimselfthathewatches,andhimselfthathegloats

overinhisobsessiveandpedanticcommentary.“WhatdoIcarefordangernowthatIam

withyou,”hesays,addressingtheburrowdirectly,“Youbelongtome,Itoyou,weare

united,whatcanharmus?”58Theburrow,then,isanextensionoftheburrower’sbody,the

placewherethemostprivateprocessesimaginableoccur;digestion,reproduction,

defecation,etc.59Assuch,thelifeoftheburrower/burrowfollowsthesamelogicasthe

progressionofthebiologicalprocess.Theburrowisnotsomethingtheburrowermerely

usestofacilitateamorecomfortablelifeoralifefreedfromthecaresofnecessity;by

identifyinghimselfwithhisburrowtosuchagreatextent,theuse‐valueoftheburrowas

anobjectbecomesatieddirectlytothelife‐processwhichconsumesitselfcontinuouslyin

ordertoexist.Thustheburrowmustremainforeverinmediares,lestitscompletionbring

aboutanendtotheprocessthatsustainsitscreator,justaslaborisnecessarytosustain

56Weigand15457Politzer32258KCS34259Benjaminwrites:“ForjustasK.livesinthevillageonCastleHill,modernmanlivesinhisbody;thebodyslipsawayfromhim,ishostiletowardhim.”

21

humanlife.Asin“TheGreatWall,”ournarratorbeginshisstorywithanassertionofthis

completion,andintheendthecessationoftheprocessbringsabouthisself‐destruction

throughthemysterious“whistling,”whichseverstheprogressionoflifeandplantshima

presentwithnofuture.Afterindeterminatetimespenttryingtoascertainthecauseofthe

whistling,andthecommencementof“experiments”whichonlydisfiguretheburrow

becausetheylackthedialecticalforcewhichpropelledallpreviousefforts,60theburrower

canonlyhunkerdowninhisCastleKeep,“choosealovelypieceofflayedredfleshand

creepwithitintooneoftheheapsoftheearth;thereIshallhavesilenceatleast,such

silence,atanyrate,asstillcanbesaidtoexisthere.”61

Whatrelevancecanthisstrangeanimalandhisobsessiveattractiontohishome

haveforthehumaninmodernconditions?Forone,itshowsthedisintegrationofthe

privaterealminthemodernworld.Inantiquitytheprivateexistedasacounterpartofthe

public,enablingthetransitionthatwasnecessaryforamantoshedhisfamilial

responsibilitiesandtakeonthepublicdutiesofthecitizen.Ifwesawin“TheGreatWall”

howtheconflationofpublicandprivatecanleadtoanomnipresentauthoritythatseems

unassailable,herewewitnesswhathappenswhenthepublicdisappearsaltogetherandthe

onlyrecourseleftforanindividualislocatedintheprivateactivities.Thisdoesnot

diminishthedesireforthebenefitswhichthepublicsphereafforded,however;theyare

merelydisfiguredbytheabsenceofaproperplaceforexpression.Thedisintegrationofthe

privateisnotanidiosyncrasyofKafka’sstrangedream‐world.Itistheoutcomeofacertain

60Wewilldiscussthisfurtherinthenextsection,butashortquotecan’thurt:“…thistimeeverythingseemsdifficult.Iamtoodistracted,everynowandthen,inthemiddleofmywork,Ipressmyeartothewallandlisten,andwithouttakingnoticeletthesoilthatIhavejustliftedtricklebackintothepassageagain.”KCS35061KCS358

22

setofconditions,waysofthinkingandactingthatonlyemergeinthesocializedworldof

modernity.

ForArendtonlyananimalcanliveatrulyprivatelife,“deprivedoftherealitythat

comesfrombeingseenandheardbyothers…deprivedofan‘objective’relationshipwith

themthatcomesfrombeingrelatedtoandseparatedfromthemthroughtheintermediary

ofacommonworldofthings…deprivedofthepossibilityofachievingsomethingmore

permanentthanlifeitself.”62Forourburrower,whohasnoapparentinterestininteracting

withanyoneorengaginginanykindofcommonspace,theself‐glorificationwhichheso

assiduouslycravesfindsitsobjectintheburrow,withhimselfastheobserverrevelingin

thestructurewhichheidentifiessodeeplywith–“..itisasifIwerenotsomuchlookingat

myhouseasatmyselfsleeping,andhadthejoyofbeinginaprofoundslumberand

simultaneouslyofkeepingvigilantguardovermyself.”63Theroleoftheotherinthepublic

sphereisexcluded,andthenecessaryconditionofhumanity–beingamongstothers–is

relocatedtothespaceoffantasy,thedreamofdoingawaywithothersandyetstill

achievingthe“joy”ofobservingtheselfanditsself‐aggrandizingobjects.ThewayKafka

mixesthenaturalcaresoftheanimal–food,security,safety–andthe“higher”aimsofthe

humancreatesastrangedysfunction,acancelling‐outofthepublicandprivatethatleadsto

nothingbutendlessanxietyandfear(aswellassmallmomentsoffleetingjoy).

Arendtnotesthe“moderndiscoveryofintimacyseemsaflightfromthewholeouter

worldintotheinnersubjectivityoftheindividual,whichformerlyhadbeenshelteredand

62HC5863KCS334

23

protectedbytheprivaterealm.”64“Thusmodernproperty,”shewriteslater,“lostits

worldlycharacterandwaslocatedinthepersonhimself,thatis,inwhatanindividualcould

loseonlyalongwithhislife.”65Theburrowermakesclearthatlosinghispropertyis

analogousto,ifnotworsethan,losinghislife.Hisceaselesswatchingfromabove,his

temporarywishtofleethespotforeverratherthanexposeittohisenemies,indeedallof

hisactivitiesoncehehasdecampedfromtheinteriorillustratehisverybodilyand

biologicalconnectiontotheburrow.Itisasifheconsidershimselfasanappendageofthe

burrow,onethatmustbeamputatedifnecessaryinordertomaintainthehealthofthe

largerbody.Toconsiderone’shomeinthiswayisonlypossiblewhentheprivatesphereis

thelastrecourseandallpossibilityofmovementiscutoff;inshort,whenthepublicsphere

hasdisappearedandtheprivatebecomesthetotalityoftheworld.

Thisdoesnotruleoutthepresenceofothers;itonlyrestrictstheirparticular

constitutionfromthesubjectiveperspective.Therearesome“others”in“TheBurrow,”and

theycharacteristicallytaketheoutwardformofpredatorsandbandits.Duringhisshort

livedhuntingexcursiontothetopside,theburrowerobservestheactivitygoingonnearthe

entrance:

Hereenemiesarenumerousandtheiralliesandaccomplicesstillmore

numerous,buttheyfightoneanother,andwhilethusemployedrushpastmy

burrowwithoutnoticingit.InallmytimeIhaveneverseenanyone

investigatingtheactualdoorofmyhouse,whichisfortunatebothformeand

64HC6965HC70.Incontemporarytermswemightthinkofthebelligerenthome‐ownerstandinginfronthishousewithariflescreaming“Overmydeadbody!”Ratherdeaththanlossofproperty.

24

forhim,forIwouldcertainlyhavelaunchedmyselfathisthroat,forgetting

everythingelseinmyanxietyfortheburrow.66

These“enemies”shownointerestintheburrow,notherenoranywhereelseoverthe

courseofthenarrative.Theirenmityisentirelyconstructedfromimagination.67The

burrowerrelatesanincidentthatoccurredinhisyouth,whenhewas“nothingmorethana

humbleapprentice,”68inwhichhehearsanoisefromoutsidetheburrowthatresembles

hisownlaboringsounds.Inthisearlystageofhislife,theotherismerelyasourceof

curiosity;thepotentialforpublicengagementhasnotyetclosedentirely.“Iprobablywould

nothavebeendispleasedtoseetheburrowersuddenlyrisingfromtheground…”69Itis

clearthatasthebuildingoftheburrowprogresses,anditgetsclosertotheidealburrow

thatitscreatorhasinhismind,theconceptofprivacygrowinimportanceuntilitbecomes

all‐consuming,asiftheburrowerbecomesmoreawareofhisownbodyandthusmore

awareofitsmortalvulnerability.Insteadofovercomingthisexistentialanxietyby

transcendinghis“life=spanintopastandfuture,”70i.e.byenteringthecommons,he

followsthehistoricalprogressionofsocializationandturnsinward.

Ofcoursewemustrememberthatheisananimal,notahuman,andsubjectto

differentkindsofinterrelationalcriteriathan,say,thecitizensofChina.71Butpartofthe

mystiqueofKafka’sanimalstoriesisthattheyseemfamiliar,constantlycompellingthe

66KCS33467Neartheendofthestory,afterhehaspracticallygivenuphopeforhisburrowandhimself,hebetraysasmuch:“Outsidetherenobodytroublesaboutmyburrow,everybodyhastheirownaffairs,whichhavenoconnectionwithme.”KCS35268KCS35569KCS35670HC5571AsBenjaminnotes,thisisofteneasytoforgetinKafka:“ItispossibletoreadKafka’sanimalstoriesforquiteawhilewithoutrealizingthattheyarenotabouthumanbeingsatall.”Benjamin122

25

reaction“’that’sthewayitis,’andwithitthequestion,“’wherehaveIseenthatbefore?’”72

despitetheirnon‐humansubjects.Arendtdescribeshowthedisappearanceoftheprivate

life(“TheGreatWallofChina”)ortheprivatelifeitself(“TheBurrow”)hasforcedtheKafka

character“intoabandoningallhumantraitsandintofulfillinghisfunctionasthoughhe

wereinhuman.”73ForbothArendtandKafkathisisaloss,somethingtheformermakes

explicitandthelatteralludestothroughobliquedesires.In“TheGreatWall”theChinese

expressthedesiretotouchtheemperor,tofeelhispresenceintheirlivesinatangibleway:

…thereisalsoinvolvedacertainfeeblenessoffaithandimaginativepower

onthepartofthepeople,thatpreventsthemfromraisingtheempireoutof

itsstagnationinPekingandclaspingitinallitspalatablelivingrealityto

theirownbreasts,whichyetdesirenothingbetterthanbutoncetofeelthat

touchandthentodie.74

Thisweaknessisoneofthe“greatestunifyinginfluences”ontheChinesepeople,the“very

groundonwhichwelive.”ThesenseisthattoseetheEmpireasahumaninstitutionwould

destroytheveryfoundationsofitsorganization.Thewallreifiestheempirebyclosingitin

andunitingthepeopleinacommonlabor,butitsimmensity,theinfinitescopeofit

reachingbeyondallhumanunderstanding,isanecessaryconditionforthepopulation.The

establishmentofapublicsphereisprecludedbythisimmensity,bytheprivacyoftheir

desiretofeelthebodyoftheleader,bytheconformismengenderedbytheirunwavering

faithinthisincorporealidea.Thenarrator’semphasison“theground”reinforcesthe

notionthattheveryconstitutionofrealityreliesontheempireforcoherence,deprivingthe

72Adorno24673KAR7674KCS247

26

Chineseoftheirownground,theirownprivatespace.75Theyhavelosttheirbasic

humanitybybecomingdependentandforsakingtheiragencytoactintheworld.

Themostimportantpointinthisdiscussionofpublicandprivate,fromthe

Arendtianpointofview,istherequirementthatbothspheresco‐existsimultaneouslyfor

eithertohaveanyrealdistinction.Theriseofthesocialistheblurringofthelinesthat

separatethem,theirconflationunderconditionsthatdestroythesanctityofeachandbring

themunderasingle,infinitelycontrollablerealm.“TheBurrow”and“TheGreatWall”

describethisprocessintwoverydifferentwaysandfromtwoverydifferentperspectives,

buttheoutcomeisessentiallythesame:thesocialsubjectcannotactinanyrealsense.The

Chinesepeopleareruledbyadisembodiedauthoritythatcannotbeknown.Theburrower

issimilarlyruledbyanunknowableauthority,butitisaforcelocatedwithinhimself,

predicatedbyanimalinstinctivenessmixedwithahumanpenchantforself‐glorification.

Thepointisthatbothactinaccordancewithacertaininevitabilitythatclosesoffthe

prospectforsomethingnew.“…Iknowthatmytermismeasured,thatIdonothavetohunt

hereforever,andthat,wheneverIamwearyofthislifeandwishtoleaveit,Someone,

whoseinvitationIshallnotbeabletowithstand,will,sotospeak,summonmetohim.”76

III.)LaborandWork

InTheHumanConditionArendtmovesfromconsideringthespacesofhuman

activityandtheirtransformationunderthesocialtotheactivitiesthemselves.Thefirsttwo

75Itisalsoshows,oncemore,howtheprivatehasexplodedintotherealmofthepublic.Thereisno“my”ground,thereisonly“our”ground,noindividuals,only“thepeople.”76KCS334

27

categoriesofthevitaactivaareworkandlabor.77Sheadmitsthatmakingadistinction

betweenthesetwoconceptsis“unusual,”asnotevenMarxsawfittodrawthisline.

Nevertheless,Arendtclaimsthatthedistinctioniscrucialtounderstandinghumanactivity,

andcitesthefactthateveryEuropeanlanguagecontainstwoseparatetermsforthese

activities,“andretainstheminthefaceoftheirpersistentsynonymoususage.”78

Assheprovidesshortdefinitionsforbothconceptsatthebeginningofthebook,I

willquoteheratlength:

Laboristheactivitywhichcorrespondstothebiologicalprocessofthe

humanbody,whosespontaneousgrowth,metabolism,andeventualdecay

areboundtothevitalnecessitiesproducedandintothelifeprocessbylabor.

Thehumanconditionoflaborislifeitself.

Workistheactivitywhichcorrespondstotheunnaturalnessofhuman

existence,whichisnotimbeddedin,andwhosemortalityisnotcompensated

by,thespecies’ever‐recurringlifecycle.Workprovidesan“artificial”world

ofthings,distinctlydifferentfromallnaturalsurroundings.Withinits

borderseachindividuallifeishoused,whilethisworlditselfismeantto

outlastandtranscendthemall.Thehumanconditionofworkisworldliness.

79

Laborisrepetitiveandnever‐ending,concernedsolelywithbiologicalprocesses

thathumanssharewithanimals.InArendt’sview,abeaverconstructingadamora

77Iwillnotdiscussthethirdcategory,action,primarilybecausetheconditionsforArendtianactionareneverpresentedinKafka.Actionisemancipatory,constructive;Kafka’scharactersarealwaysmiredinapresenttheywishto“obliterate.”78HC,seefootnote3onpp.8079HC7

28

squirrelgatheringnutsforthewinterarebothactivitiesthatfallunderthecategoryof

labor,asbefitstheoperativetermdenotingthesubjectoflabor,theanimallaborans.Slaves

arealsoanimalslaborans,excludedfromthepoliticalrealmwhichistheonlyarenain

whichcitizenshipandmeaningfulspeecharepossible,andhencetheonlyoneinwhich

someonecanbetrulyhuman.80Itisthepresenceofothers,thesinglebeing’splacein

pluralmankindthatdefineshumanity,and“theactivityoflabordoesnotneedthepresence

ofothers.”81Theproductsoflaborareimmediatelyconsumedandleavenotraceonthe

world,andtherebyhavenoeffectonhumanityasawhole.

Thisisnottosaythatlaborisnecessarilyasolitaryactivity.Marx,afterall,spenthis

entirelifetryingtoestablishlaborastheessentialconditionofhumankind,thethreadthat

tiesusalltogether.82Arendtacknowledgesthatlaborisabsolutelynecessary;itisthe

elevationoflaborintoaprivilegedpositioninthehierarchyofactivity83,itsentranceinto

thehallowedsphereofthepublic,thatshe(inoppositiontoMarx)seemstodecry.“The

ratheruncomfortabletruthofthematteristhatthetriumphthemodernworldhas

achievedovernecessityisduetotheemancipationoflabor,thatis,tothefactthatthe

animallaboranswaspermittedtooccupythepublicrealm.”This“uncomfortable”triumph

haseffectivelyeliminatedthepublicsphereasaspaceofaction,degradingitfromthe

collectionofequalsengagedinpoliticalactivity‐likethatoftheGreeks‐intoakindof

80ThereferencetoslavesisAristotle’s,cited(butcertainlynotendorsed)byArendtonHC8481HC2282ThefactthatMarx’sidealsocietyendsupabolishinglaborisacontradictionthatArendtexploresthroughoutthischapter.Ex.“…therevolution,accordingtoMarx,hasnotthetaskofemancipatingthelaboringclassesbutofemancipatingmanfromlabor;onlywhenlaborisabolishedcanthe‘realmoffreedom’supplantthe‘realmofnecessity.’”HC10483seeHC17forthereversalof“hierarchicalorder”ofthevitaactiva

29

bedroomwithnowalls,with“privateactivitiesdisplayedintheopen.”84Theascensionof

laborhasenabled“socializedmankind,”the“reversalofalltraditions”whichcharacterizes

modernity.85Whileallhumansandanimalsmayrequirelaborpowertoenablelifeandthe

survivalofthespecies,thisrequirementisonlythebarestminimumforlifetoexist.

Humanityneedsmorethanthistodistinguishitselffromanimalsandtocreateahistoryfor

itselfthatenduresbeyondthesinglelife.

Partofthisneedisfulfilledbywork,whichprovidesdurabilitybymeansof

fabrication:“homofaberwhomakesandliterally‘worksupon’asdistinguishedfromthe

animallaboranswhichlaborsand‘mixeswith.’”86Thisdurabilityisnoteverlasting.Weuse

theproductsthatworkcreates,andthisuseeventuallycausesdecay,areturnto“theover‐

allnaturalprocessfromwhichtheyweredrawnandagainstwhichtheywerecreated.”But

byaddinganelementoftemporallongevitytothehumanartifice,mankindcanachievean

approximationofthePlatonicIdea,thefantasticmodeltowardswhichanobject’screator

strives.Whiletheproductofworkisassubjecttotheinevitableprocessesofdecayasthe

productoflabor,themodelitselfsurvivesandensurespermanence.Achairmaycrumble

backintobitsofwood,butchairsingeneralremainviable,regardlessofthebiological

existenceofthebuilder.Thisenablesastablecontextthatdelineatesmanfromnature,

providinga“man‐madeworldofthings…ahomeformortalmen,whosestabilitywill

endureandoutlasttheever‐changingmomentoftheirlivesandactions.”87Thisiswhat

Arendtmeansby“worldliness.”

84HC13385HC8586HC13687HC173

30

Theproductsofhomofaberareuseproducts,designedandcraftedwithaspecific

endinmind.Theendjustifiesthemeanswhichareusedtoachieveit.Forexample,the

chairjustifiescarvingthewoodandthewoodjustifieskillingthetree.88“Duringthework

process,everythingisjudgedintermsofsuitabilityandusefulnessforthedesiredend,and

fornothingelse.”AsArendtnotes,themeans‐endsrelationshipcreatesaceaselesschain,

onewhereeachproductmustleadtoanother,morerefinedproduct.Thusthereisactually

noultimateendandhencenowaytojustifythemeansinthefirstplace.

Foranend,onceitisattained,ceasestobeanendandlosesitscapacityto

guideandjustifythechoiceofmeans,toorganizeandproducethem.Ithas

nowbecomeanobjectamongobjects,thatis,ithasbeenaddedtothehuge

arsenalofthegivenfromwhichhomofaberselectsfreelyhismeansto

pursuehisends.89

Inotherwords,oncetheworkprocessstops,thefruitsoftheprocessnolongerbearthe

finalityofanend.Theyareabsorbedbackintotheprocessitselfandbecomethemeansto

somethingelse,somefurtherend.Thechair,forexample,mustprovideamorecomfortable

mannerofsitting,orbesoldforprofitafteritisfinishedinordertofitintothecategory

“chair”andnotbejustanarbitrarilynailed‐togethercollectionoflumber.Theonlywayout

oftheendlesschainistoinvoketheKantian“means‐in‐itself,”whichamountstotautology

whenwearetalkingaboututility.90

88ThisisArendt’sexample,HC15389HC15490Nordoesthewayoutconsistofmakingman,ratherthanobjects,an“end‐in‐himself.”Forthisisto“degradenatureandtheworldintomeremeans,robbingbothoftheirindependentdignity.”HC156.Humankindreliesonitsworldliness,itspresenceamongcreatedthings,todefineitsownhumanity.

31

Artontheotherhand,whichhasastrainedrelationshiptobothworkandlabor,is

createdwithoutanyintentionofusefulness,makingitmoredurablethantheproductsof

homofaber.Thecreationofartpartakesofworkthroughreification‐likeuseproducts‐by

handswhichtransformtheideaintoatangibleobjects:poems,paintings,sculptures,etc.

Artspringsfromfeeling,whichistransformedintothought,whichcanthenbecomethings

andentertheworld.Asopposedto“cognition”and“science,”thought“hasneitheranend

noranaimoutsideitself,anditdoesnotevenproduceresults.”91Thephysicist,whose

mentalprocessiscognition,searchesforasolutiontoaparticularproblem,andoncethat

solutionisfoundtheproblemisdissolved.Themeansandendsarequiteclearanddistinct.

Fortheartist,whoseparticularproblemsareasinsolubleasthe“questionforthemeaning

oflife,”92theprocessisnotsosimple.

Kafkarevealsthestrangenessofhisconceptionofmeansandends,laborandwork,

inadiaryentry,inwhichhedescribesawishto“attainaviewoflife(and–thiswas

necessarilyboundupwithit–toconvinceothersofitinwriting),inwhichlife,whilestill

retainingitsnaturalfull‐bodiedriseandfall,wouldsimultaneouslyberecognizednoless

clearlyasanothing,adream,adimhovering.”93Heexplicatesthiswishbywayofanalogy:

…asifoneweretohammertogetheratablewithpainfulandmethodical

technicalefficiency,andsimultaneouslydonothingatall,andnotinsucha

waythatpeoplecouldsay:“Hammeringatabletogetherisnothingtohim,”

butrather:“Hammeringatabletogetherisreallyhammeringatabletogether

tohim,butatthesametimeitisnothing,”wherebycertainlythehammering

91HC17092HC17193Wagenbach45

32

wouldhavebecomestillbolder,stillsurer,stillmorerealand,ifyouwill,still

moresenseless.94

Ontheonehandwehaveatextbookexampleoftheworkprocess,“painfuland

methodical,”movingtowardsausefulend,thatisafinishedtable.Yetthisprocessisalsoa

“nothing.”Whatcoulditpossiblymeantobuildatableandalsotodonothing?Common

senseimpliestheendasbuiltintotheformulationastable‐building,leadingtoaveryclear

andestablishedpurpose.Byemphasizingtheco‐existenceofthisnormalwayofthinking–

“Hammeringatabletogetherisreallyhammeringatabletogether”–andtheongoing

processofnothingness,the“senselessness”oftheendismadeclear.Thetableisreal,yetit

meansnothing,becauseitisnotanend‐in‐itselfandrevealsitselfinutilitariantermstobe

justanotherendlessprocess.Ineffect,Kafkawishestohavehiscakeandeatittoo.And

further,byusingthisanalogytoillustrateawishforaparticular“viewoflife,”withits

“naturalfull‐bodiedriseandfall,”theconvergenceoftheworkprocessandthelifeprocess

manifeststhepatentabsurdityofascribingameaningtolife,nolessthantoascribea

meaningtowork.Itisthislackofmeaning,thislackofsense,thatmakestheentireprocess

realandworthwhile,oratleastsustainable.Onecouldsaythat,forKafka,thisistheentire

raisond’êtreoftheworkofart.Theworkofartisasmuchalabor‐inthatithasno

meaningbesidesthesustenanceoflifeitselfandisconsumedbytheartistaspartofthis

“full‐bodied”lifeprocess‐asawork,inthatitaimstowardareifiedobjectwithausebut

nosense.Kafka’swayoutofthemeansandendschainistodenythattheendexistsatall,

94Wagenbach45.Fordifferingviewsofthispassage,seeWagenbachp.44‐46andCorngold130‐132(LambentTraces).Alsoworthconsideringisthispassagefrom“TheKnockattheManorGate,”quotedbyBenjamin:“Icannottellnowwhethersheknockedonthegateoutofmischieforoutofabsenceofmind,ormerelythreateneditwithherfistanddidnotknockatall.”KCS418.Therearecountlessmoreexamplesofthecontradictioninmanyotherstories.

33

atleastassomethingattainable.Theobjectofworkquaartisa“dream,adimhovering.”

Thisdreampointstowardssomethingimpossible:“Itisentirelyconceivablethatlife’s

splendorforeverliesinwaitabouteachofusinallitsfullness,butveiledfromview,deep

down,invisible,faroff.”95

Kafkamakessuretonote,immediatelyfollowingtheexpressionofthisdesire,that

“hecouldnotwishinthisfashion,forhiswishwasnotawish,butonlyavindicationof

nothingness…”96TheworldofKafka’sstoriesisnotthisfantasyoftable‐buildingand

doing‐nothingco‐existing;whileImustconfessI’mnotsurewhatthatkindofworldwould

looklike,wecanbecertainthattheKafkacharacterinhabitsaworldinwhichevery

processresultsinasomething,evenifthatsomethingisunfathomable.Aswehave

established,thesecharactersliveinasocializedworld,anditisonlyinthiskindofworld

thatKafkacanexpresstheinevitablefailureofthiswish.Inthemodernworldthereisno

wayoutofthemeans‐endschainthatsocializationentails.

Fortheancients,inArendt’sanalysis,theproductsofworkwouldhaveonly

ancillaryconnectiontotheactivitiesofanimallaborans,becausetheformerexistsina

world,whereasthelatterhasnoworldbesidestheonelocatedintheindividualbody.

Whileitistruethatthehomofaberhastoeat(andthuslabor),thisnecessitycanbe

satisfiedeitherbyleavingtherealmofworkandtemporarilybecomingananimallaborans,

orbyhavingslaves;theimportantthingisthatthehomofaber’sproductsarenot

immediatelyconsumed.“Theman‐madeworldofthings,thehumanartificeerectedby

homofaber,becomesahomeformortalmen,whosestabilitywillendureandoutlastthe

95Diaries39396Wagenbach46

34

ever‐changingmovementoftheirlivesandactions…”97Theonsetofsocialization,withits

unequivocalemphasisonuse‐valueanditsconflationofpublicandprivate,bringswithit

thesubsumptionofworkintolaborandthealienationofhumankindfromitselfandthe

productsofitswork.Everythingisevaluatedaccordingtoitsuse(includinglaborandthus

humanlife),andeverythingwhichachievesitsendisconsumedbysomethingelse.

Inanessayon“TheMetamorphosis,”WalterSokeldefines“self‐alienation”as“the

individual’sestrangementfromhishumanityor‘humanspeciesbeing,’i.e.,fromthe

individual’smembershipinthehumanspecies.Theindividualisestrangedfromhimself

insofarasheisalienatedfromhisessentialnatureasahumanbeing.”98InArendtian

terms,Sokelisdescribing“lossoftheworld.”Inordertoovercomeself‐alienation,inthe

Marxistview,workmustnotbe“dictatedbyexternalneedsorthecommandsofothers,”

but“chosen,partiallyatleast,foritsintrinsicpleasure.”Onlyinthiswaycanworkbean

end‐in‐itselfandnotameansforsomethingelse,andthusmancanrealizehishumanity

throughhisownfreewill.Itischaracteristicofmodernitythatthepossibilityforthiskind

offreelaborisexcluded,afactSokelseesexemplifiedinGregorSamsa’sactivities–always

“externalized,”alwaysbelongingtosomeoneelse.99

Wecanalsoseethemanifestationofself‐alienationin“TheGreatWallofChina.”The

primarycauseofthisisthewall’s“piecemealconstruction”;theimportanceofthismethod

inthebuildingprocessissogreatthenarratorcallsit“oneofthecrucialproblemsinthe

wholebuildingofthewall…IfIamtoconveyandmakeunderstandabletheideasand

97HC17398Sokel21799“Fornotonlyishislaboralientohistruedesires,butitssolepurpose,itsfruit–thesalaryorcommissionthatitaffordshim–doesnotevenbelongtohim.Gregor’stoildoesnotserveitsownexistence.”Sokel218

35

feelingsofthattimeIcannotgodeeplyenoughintothisveryquestion.”100Thenarrator

beginshisreportbynotingthatthepiecemealconstructioninmanywaysdefeatsthe

purposeofthewallitself.Thegoalisostensiblyforitto“beaprotectionagainstthepeoples

ofthenorth,”whichraisesthequestion“howcanawallprotectifitisnotacontinuous

structure?”101Asthenarratornotes,theenemiesofChinahaveabetterviewofthe

constructionthanthebuildersthemselves,andteardownthesectionsfasterthantheycan

goup.Theanswertothisconundrum,ofcourse,isthatthewallisnotdesignedfor

protectionatall.Itsrealpurposeisthemobilizationof“twogreatarmiesoflabor,”which

aredividedintosmallergroupsoftwentyandtransferredtoallcornersoftheempire

wheneverthey’vefinishedtheirfive‐hundredyardsections.Furthermore,the“morepurely

manualtasks”areundertakenby“ignorantdaylaborers,”overwhichawell‐trained

supervisor“capableofenteringintoandfeelingwithallhisheartwhatwasinvolved”102

presides,creatinganotherecheloninthelaborhierarchyandincreasingthedistance

betweenworkerandfinishedproduct.Inshort,itseverstheChinesecitizenfromhis

humanconnectiontohomeandwork.103Thisconnectionisreplacedbyloveforthewall,

forthenation,fortheemperor,andageneralsenseofunitythat,ineffect,turnsthe

pluralityintoapopulation.104

100KCS238101KCS235102ibid103J.MitchellMorsehaswrittenaninterestingarticleontherelationshipbetweenKafka’swallandtherealGreatWallofChina,whichistenuousatbest:“…Kafka’smythhasnothingtodowiththegrimfactsrecountedbyZhewenandLuo.”104“Accordingly,whiletheywerestillexaltedbythejubilantcelebrationsmarkingthecompletionofthethousandyardsofwall,theyweresentfar,faraway,sawontheirjourneyfinishedsectionsofthewallrisinghereandthere,camepastthequartersofthehighcommandandwerepresentedwithbadgesofhonor,heardtherejoicingsofnewarmiesoflaborstreamingpast…”etc,etc.

36

Arendtarticulatesthemoderndivisionoflaborperfectly:

Sincenoneoftheactivitiesintowhichtheprocessisdividedhasanendin

itself,their“natural”endisexactlythesameasinthecaseof“undivided”

labor;eitherthesimplereproductionofthemeansofsubsistence,thatisthe

capacityforconsumptionofthelaborer,ortheexhaustionofhumanlabor

power.

Whatislostistheconnectionthehomofaberhastotheobjecthecreates.The“ignorantday

laborer”isextremelydisconnectedfromthefruitsofhisactivity,contenttoofferhis

servicesfor“goodmoney”andthusinvestingnomoreinthewallthanthemeansforhis

ownsubsistence.ForKafka’snarratorthisfigureisoflittleinterest,almostagivenunder

theconditionsinwhichChinaexists–despite(orbecauseof)thefactthatthisgroupmakes

upthemajorityoftheChinesepopulation.Therealconundrumisthewell‐educated

mason/supervisor,indoctrinatedfromayoungagebyaschoolsystemfocusedentirelyon

thewall,whofeelshimselftobe“apartofthewall,”105butwillneverseetheproductofhis

laborinitsentirety.Forthiscategoryofworkersomethingmorethanthemeresubsistence

ofthelifeprocessisrequired.“Masonsofthatkind,ofcourse,hadnotonlyadesireto

performtheirworkinthemostthoroughmanner,butwerealsoimpatienttoseethewall

finishedinitscompleteperfection.”106Thisimpossibledesiresustainsthemasonthewaya

paychecksustainsthedaylaborer.Itgivesmeaningtothesupervisor’sexistence.

Yetbothcategoriesofworkfaceasimilarproblem:theendofthelaborprocess,the

productionofthewallorthemoneythatresultsfromit,isdisconnectedfromthelabor

106KCS237

37

itself,muchlikethemodernfactoryworkerwhohandlesonetaskthateventuallyleadsto

somethingusefulonlyafterhundredsofothermundanetaskscometogetherasifbymagic.

In“TheGreatWall”thereisalmostinfinitefaithintheplanning,theforesight,thethought

thathasgoneintothebuildingfromatleast“fiftyyearsbeforethefirststonewaslaid”107

andpossiblyfrom“alleternity.”Thisfaithisabsolutelynecessarytothestabilityofthe

structure,tomaintainthe“groundonwhichwestand.”InasenseKafkatakesthelogicof

theassemblylinetoitsfarthestconclusion,imaginingaprocesswhereinneitherthe

laborernorthesupervisoreverseesthefinishedproductyetcontinuestoworkasifitmust

exist,fortoacknowledgethefutilityoremptinessofthetaskwouldbetogiveuponlife

itself.Inthiswaythemeansbecometheend,andworkbecomeslabor.

UnlikeMarx,Arendtfindsnosolaceinworkorlaborasanend‐in‐itself.108Thisis

thegenesisofherentiredistinction.Theessenceofhumanityinitsuniquenessisitsability

toconstructahistoryandtocontinuouslybeginsomethingnew;labor,even“free”labor,

canonlyrecyclethelifeprocess(whichmeansnothinginandofitself).Thewalldoes

achievethedurabilitythatconstitutestheproductofwork–“thewallwastobea

protectionforcenturies”109‐butthevastnessofthespaceit(supposedly)enclosesmakes

ituselessasanobject.Ifweinsistonascribingausetothewall,fromaboveasitwere,itis

toprovidethematerialconditionswhichpromoteconformismandreifiesthediffuse

powerofthehighcommand;this,however,presupposesthatthehighcommandactually

107KCS237108“Withinacompletely“socializedmankind,”whosesolepurposewouldbetheentertainingofthelifeprocess–andthisistheunfortunatelyquiteunutopianidealthatguidesMarx’stheories–thedistinctionbetweenlaborandworkwouldhavecompletelydisappeared;allworkwouldhavebecomelaborbecauseallthingswouldbeunderstood,notintheirworldly,objectivequality,butasresultsoflivinglaborpowerandfunctionsofthelifeprocess.”HC89109KCS236

38

exists,afactwecannotbetoosureof:“whereitwasandwhosattherenoonewhomIhave

askedknewthenorknowsnow.”110Nevertheless,somethingcalled“thehighcommand”

animatesthedesiresoftheentireChinesepeople,totheextentthatwithoutit“neitherour

booklearningnorourhumanunderstandingwouldhavesufficedforthehumbletask

whichweperformedinthegreatwhole.”111

In“TheBurrow,”whichhasoftenbeenreadasanallegoryofKafka’sownstruggles

asanartist,112theactivitiesoftheburrowerareapparentlymotivatedmorebyinternal

processesthantheexternalforcewhichanimatestheChineseworker.Ifweacceptthe

allegorical‐biographicalreadingforamomentandrecallKafka’stable‐buildingprocess,we

canseehowthedistinctionsbetweenlaborandworkgetmixedupwhentheartisticobject

isbothusefulandpurelyaesthetic,a“nothing.”LiketheGreatWall,theburrow’sostensible

useisprotectionandsecurity,butitalsofacilitatesaprocessthathasnoend,theeternal

recurrenceofalifeprocessthatfindsmeaningin“self‐glorification.”Theburrowerwishes

withallhishearttodetachhimselffromanyusefunctiontheburrowmighthave:

OneofthesefavoriteplansofminewastoisolatetheCastleKeepfromits

surroundings,thatistosay,torestrictthethicknessofitswallstoaboutmy

ownheight,andleaveafreespaceofaboutthesamewidthallaroundthe

CastleKeep,exceptforanarrowfoundation,whichunfortunatelywouldbe

lefttobearupthewhole.113

Inthiswish,theburrowerlivesinaspacedirectlyoutsidetheCastleKeepbutneverenters

110KCS239111KCS239112Forexample,seeHenel,Boulby,andMaché113KCS346

39

it;allofthelaborthathasgoneintoit,allofitsuseasastorageplaceforfood,issacrificed

forthejoyofbeingableto“standguardoverit,andinthatwaytobesocompletely

compensatedforrenouncingtheactualsightofitthat,ifonehadtochoosebetweenstaying

allone’slifeintheCastleKeeporinthefreespaceoutsideit,onewouldchoosethelatter…”

InthiswaytheCastleKeepcouldbecomebothause‐objectandanothing,itsusefulness

foreverdeferredandmerelyreveledinasasortofabstractidea.114HeinrichHenelnotes

that“toliveallone’slifeinahollowaroundahollowisthenonplusultraoftheanimal’s

dreams,”115asituationinwhichhecancontemplatetheobject’sperfectionwithoutusingit

upandexposingittodanger.Thisisalwaysanimminentthreatduetotheburrower’s

uncontrollableanimalinstincts.Givingintohisravenousurgesmakefor“happybut

dangeroushours,”116atimewhenheisstrictlyananimallaboransandrisksthe

worldlinessofhiscreationsasstableobjects.“TheBurrow”isfullofthesekindsofinternal

antagonisms,thedesiretomakelastingobjectsandthedesiretoconsumethem,thedesire

toobserveandthedesiretodevour.Theburrowerknowsthatbyusinghisburrowasa

homeandstoragefacilityheissacrificingitsdurabilityasobjectanditsperfectibilityas

artwork.

Thisisaproblemthatdoesnotarisewhenthereareclearlydemarcatedspacesfor

activity.Theactivitiesofanimallaboransgoonintheprivacyofthehome,whilethework

ofhomofabercreatesadurableworldinwhichthepublicsphereismadepossible,and

necessarilymovestheindividualoutofthehome.AsArendtnotes,“withoutaworld

114KCS346115Henel233116KCS331

40

betweenmenandnature,thereiseternalmovement,butnoobjectivity.”117Onlybythe

creationofthisworldcanmenrelatetooneanother,andmoveoutoftheendlesscircleof

naturethroughthetransformationofnatureintolastingobjects.“TheBurrow”seemstobe

aperfectdescriptionofthistransformation,butthelackofanykindofpublicspheredenies

theburroweraplaceforgivingexpressiontoeachkindofdesiredistinctly.Thecircular,

consumptiveprocessthatgoesoninthehomeisconflatedwiththedurable,lastingprocess

oftheworld,aconflationthatultimatelycausestheburrowertoself‐destructinapsychotic

fitofanxiety.Aftertheintroductionofthe“whistling”noisethatdriveshimtodespair,the

burrowertriestoeat,butitisunsatisfying:“…Ispitoutmyfood,andwouldliketotrample

itunderfoot,andgobacktomytask,notcaringwhichItakeup.”118Thelaborprocessof

gatheringandeatingfoodhasbecomemixedupwithaworkprocessthatoriginallyaimed

tosolidifytheburrow’sdefensivecapabilities,butnowhasnorealendbesidesthereflexive

exhumationofexcesslaborpower.Theburrowercannotenjoyhisfoodbecausehishigher

needs–security,silence,beauty–nolongerhaveaspaceforexpression.

Againwemightdrawananalogytothemodernfactoryworker,orevenbroadenit

toincludeeverykindof“wage‐slave”trappedinacircularprocesswherebythefruitof

theirlabor(money)isusedtopurchasefoodtomaintainthelifeprocesssothattheworker

cangobacktohisjobthenextmorning.Everyactivityispredicatedonpreventingthe

destructionofthelifeprocess,andonthatalone.Theburrowerdidnotalwaysactunder

theseconditions;itisonlywhenthewhistlingbeginsthatheworks“justasiftheoverseer

117HC137.Wewilldiscusstheepistemologicalimplicationsof“objectivity”inthenextsection.118KCS351

41

hadappearedandImadeapretenseofworkingforhisbenefit.”119Previouslyhislaborhad

ostensiblybeen“free,”intheMarxistsensethatheundertookitofhisownaccordand

maintainedhisconnectiontotheendproductthroughouttheprocess.Yetthestory

remindsusagainandagainthatthiskindoflaborisnotreallyfree,itisasexternally

dictatedastheactivitiesofChinesewall‐builders.Heisalwayssubjecttoahostilenatural

worldthathehimselfhasimagined,andthussubjecttohisownoverwhelmingfear.His

activitiesarereactionsagainstthisself‐madethreatandoftenimpedehishappiness;

happinessisadangerthatlowershisguardandopenshimuptoattack.

Onemightsaythatthisisstillfreedom;afterall,itisonlytheburrower’sraging

delusionsthatpreventhimfrombeingahappyandwell‐adjustedindividual,andheis

perfectlyfreetoshedthesedelusionswheneverhegathersthewillpowertodoso.Thereis

alsothesense–andthisissupportedbytheburrowerhimself–thatifhehadjustworked

harderallpossiblecontingenciescouldhavebeenaccountedforandcompletesecurity

achieved.120Inshort,hecouldgiveupthedreamofperfectsecurityandappreciatehis

burrowforthegrandioseself‐glorifyingedificethatitis,orhecouldabandonthedreamof

everenjoyinghisburrow,andworkonitnonstopforhisentirelife.Itshouldbeobviousby

nowthatneitherpossibilityisopentotheburrower.Hisnatureashomofaberdemandsa

use‐valueforhiswork;conversely,hisconcurrentnatureasanimallaboransrequiresa

continuousconsumptionofeverythingheproduces.Inthemodern,socializedworldthe

specificspacesfortheseactivitieshavebeensubsumedbyeachother,andweareleftwith

theconfusionofmeansandendswhichattendsthemixingofworkandlabor:“insteadof

119KCS351120“Ihaverestedfartoooftenfrommylaborsallmylife”KCS356

42

thinkingonlyofmyowndefense–andhowperfunctorilyandvainlyIhavedoneeventhat

–Ishouldhavethoughtofthedefenseoftheburrow.”121

Thisattentiontotheobject–apparentlyforthebenefitofthesubject–isthethread

thatties“TheBurrow”and“TheGreatWallofChina”together.Andinbothcases,the

powerthattheseobjectsassertoverthosewhocreatethemisparadigmaticofthemodern

age.Itisthepowerofconformismandsocialization,exploredintheprevioussection,and

thepowerofaparticularkindofactivitywhichblendsworkandlaborintosomethingthat

alienatestheworkerfromhisproductandimbuesthehomofaberwiththecircular,

consumptiveconcernsoftheanimallaborans,anactivitywhichpervertsthe“worldliness”

necessaryforhumanrelationsintoonemoreutilitarianuse‐value.AsArendtsays,“…the

tragedyisthatinthemomenthomofaberseemstohavefoundfulfillmentintermsofhis

ownactivity,hebeginstodegradetheworldofthings,theendandendproductofhisown

mindandhands.”122Theprocess,then,themeansbywhichtoachieveanend,must

becometheenditselfforthewholestructuretofunction.Whetherornotithasany

meaningisbesidethepoint.Inthenextsectionwewillexplorehowthiscontinuous

processlendsitselftotheconceptofhistoricalnecessity,andturnshumansintopassive

subjectsinaninexorableprocess.

IV.)TheArchimedeanPoint

Arendtbeginsherlastchapter,“TheVitaActivaandtheModernAge,”withanepigram

fromKafka:

121KCS355122HC155

43

HefoundtheArchimedeanpoint,butheuseditagainsthimself;itseemshe

waspermittedtofinditonlyunderthiscondition.123

NamedafterancientGreekmathematicianArchimedes,theArchimedeanpointisa

particularvantage,locatedasufficientdistancefromanobjecttoallowforatotalviewof

theobjectanditssurroundings;theoretically,thisperspectivealoneallowstheobserverto

seetheobjectwithoutbiasorinterference,withcompleterationality.ForArendt,the

discoveryoftheArchimedeanpointwasfacilitatedbyGalileo’sinventionofthetelescope,

aneventwhichisunsurpassedinitsimportancetomodernity.“WhatGalileodidandwhat

nobodyhaddonebeforewastousethetelescopeinsuchawaythatthesecretsofthe

universeweredeliveredtohumancognition‘withthecertaintyofsense‐perception…’”124

Whiletheideaswhichthetelescopeprovedhadbeenaroundforhundreds,ifnot

thousandsofyears,itwastheirobservationandmeasurementthatprovedinstrumentalin

theend.Humanity’snewfoundcapabilitytoseeitsworldobjectivelydisplacedmankind

fromhisnaturalhomeandmovedhimoutintotheuniverse,asituationArendtterms

“earthalienation.”Butmoreimportantforourconsiderationis“worldalienation,”the

“sudden,inexplicableeclipseoftranscendence”125thatsimultaneouslyoccursinthmodern

age.Theresultofthisprocessisthatmenare“notthrownbackupontheworldbutupon

themselves.”126Innon‐Heidegarrianlanguage,thismeansthathumanityreducesitselfto

theCartesiancogito,denyingthe“real”existenceofthecommonworldandreplacingit

withindividualisticself‐care.TheArchimedeanpointisdrawninwardevenasthescopeof

123HC248124HC260125HC253126HC254

44

humanvisionexponentiallyexpandsitsrange.Weber,aswellasMarx,citeworldalienation

asthepredominantconditionofcapitalism,“thehallmarkofthemodernage”:“…an

enormous,strictlymundaneactivityispossiblewithoutanycarefororenjoymentofthe

worldwhatever,anactivitywhosedeepestmotivation,onthecontrary,isworryandcare

abouttheself.”127Aswe’vediscussedabove,itthisparadoxicalconvergenceoftheinward

andoutwardthatmakessocializationpossible.Humanity,turningtowardsitselfwhilethe

instrumentsithascreatedcontinuetoexpandthepossibilitiesofvision,seesitselfasa

meremicrocosminanenormousuniverse,ultimatelysubjecttothesamelawswhich

controlthemotionofthestars.Underthetenetsof“Cartesiandoubt”theonlytruththat

canbeclaimedobjectivelyisthetruthoftheself,namelythatitexists;everythingelseis

fleeting,transient,perhapsillusory,certainlylackingthepermanenceofastablehuman

world.

Kafka’saphorismwonderfullyshowstheprofoundambivalencewithwhichhe

viewedmodernity’sprogress.Theideaofanuncontrollableforceoutsidehumaninfluence

–hewas“permitted”tofindtheArchimedeanpoint,bywhatorwhomwedonotknow–

andtheself‐destructivemotivesofmodernmanarealwayspresentinKafka’sstories,from

JosephK.’sunbelievablypassiveexecutionforacrimeheisstillunawareof,tothemousein

“ALittleFable”whokeepsrunningthroughnarrowingcorridorsand,attheend,isfaced

withatraptothefrontandahungrycattotherear.Thisambivalenceisfurther

exemplifiedbytwomorebriefparables.Thefirstiscalled“TheTowerofBabel”;thelatter,

“ThePitofBabel”:

127HC254.Webercallsthiscondition“innerwordlyasceticism,”andexploresitsimpactontheriseofcapitalisminTheProtestantEthicandTheSpiritofCapitalism.

45

1.)IfithadbeenpossibletobuildtheTowerofBabelwithoutascendingit,

theworkwouldhavebeenpermitted.

2.)Whatareyoubuilding?–Iwanttodigasubterraneanpassage.Some

progressmustbemade.Mystationupthereismuchtoohigh.

WearediggingthepitofBabel.128

Thesetwoparablesofferaremarkableentranceintoourtwostories.Theycouldalmostbe

conceptualizedasprécis:“…theGreatWallalonewouldprovideforthefirsttimeinthe

historyofmankindasecurefoundationforanewTowerofBabel,”129thenarratorsays,

whilethesecondparablemightbeadialoguebetweentheburrowerandsomeimagined

interlocutor.TheTowerofBabel,then,providesakindofstructuralbondbetweenthetwo

buildingstories,linkingthemtoaconceptofmodernitythatispresagedbyanancient

tradition,sweptup,asitwere,bytheBenjaminian“angelofhistory”who“turnshisfaceto

thepast.”Thisconcept,quotedbyArendtfromBenjamin’s“ThesesonthePhilosophyof

History,”isworthcitinginfull:

Whereweseeachainofevents,heseesasinglecatastrophewhich

unremittinglypilesruinsonruinsandhurlsthemathisfeet.Hewisheshe

couldstay–toawakenthedeadandtojointogetherthefragments.Buta

windblowsfromParadise,getscaughtinhiswingsandissostrongthatthe

angelcannotclosethem.Thiswinddriveshimirresistiblyintothefutureto

whichheturnshisback,whilethepileofruinsbeforehimtowerstothe

128Kafka,ParablesandPardoxes35129KCS239

46

skies.Whatwecallprogressisthiswind.130

This,asArendtnotes,isthemostexactexpressionofKafka’sviewofprogressonecould

reasonablyhopefor.Wecanseethisreadilyin“TheGreatWallofChina.”Thestructure,

designedtofosteranationalorganizationwhichisundoubtedlyanadvancefromthe

barbariantribesofthenorth,mustrecallanoldBiblicallegendtogiveitselfmeaning,to

castanArchimedeanpointintothefuturefromwhichtheChinesemayachievetotal

harmonylikeGods.Inthemeantime(anditisalwaysthemeantimeinKafka),wehavethe

fracturedbitsofwall,soabsurdlyuselessbothasaprotectionandasafoundation.The

narratorknowsthis:“Howcouldthewall,whichdidnotformevenacircle,butonlyasort

ofquarter‐orhalf‐circle,providethefoundationforatower?Thatcouldobviouslybe

meantonlyinaspiritualsense.”131Sowhybuildthewall,heasks,andunwittinglyanswers

himself:“…formobilizingthepeople’senergiesforthestupendousnewwork?”Thewall

servestobindthepeopletoanabstractidealthatisforeverreceding,utilizingtheir

activities(workandlabor)toforceconformityandallegiancetoanobscureauthority.The

constructionprocessisnotpossiblewithoutsomesenseoftheArchimedeanpoint,foronly

onceapluralitycanbeconsideredasapopulation–fromabove–cantheywillinglyforego

theirnaturalattachmenttohomeandhearth,tothefamiliarthingswhichconstitutetheir

world.ThetheoryofthewallasfoundationfortheTowerofBabel–oneofmany“wild

ideasinpeople’sheadsatthattime”–isnecessarytogivesomesensetotheintentionally

futileaimsofsecurity.Withoutknowingtheoriginsofthecommands,emittedatsome

pointfromtheobscurehighcommand,atranscendentalunityisrequired,for“human

130KAR75131KCS239

47

nature,essentiallychangeable,unstableasthedust,canendurenorestraint;ifitbinds

itselfitsoonbeginstotearmadlyatitsbonds,untilitrendseverythingasunder,thewall,

thebonds,anditsveryself.”132TheChinesepeoplearestillverymuchinthralltothis

transcendentalpower,butwhereastheomnipotenceofatraditionalGodprovidedman

withasecurefoundationtobasehisexistenceon,thisnewpowerisuncertainand

ambiguous,leavingthecitizenwithnaughtbutauselesswallandafirmdesiretoonce

touchtheemperorandthentodie.Thustheprocessmustbecontinuous,always

progressingsoastoholdtheunstablebondsofhumannaturetogether.

Theburrowerissweptupbyasimilarprocess,butinsteadofbuildingupwards

towardsheaven,hedigsintothegroundandturnshisbackontherestoftheworld,

directingallhisconcernsbackinontheself.“Someprogressmustbemade,”theparable

reads,butprogresstowardswhat?Inwhichdirection?Ratherthanaprocesswhichleads

towardsunificationandconformity,theburrowerwishestoenclosehimselffromthe

world,tocementthecareoftheselfastheonlypossibleconcern.Itisasifhewishesto

destroytheworldsothatonlytheCartesiancogitoispermittedtoexist.Aswe’ve

discussed,theburrower’snatureassocialbeingmakesthisimpossible;theprocessis

doomedtofailurebyhisconstantneedforaffirmationandglorification,totheextentthat

hespendsmuchofhistimeimaginingenemiesorfriendswhoquicklybecomeenemies.

“Thesocialoriginoftheindividualultimatelyrevealsitselfasthepowertoannihilatehim.”

133Theinnocuousfellowburrower,encounteredlongbeforeinusefulcuriosity,hasbeen

transformedintoadestroyer:“…theburrowerhaschangedhisintentionanew,hehas

132KCS239133Adorno253

48

turnedback,heisreturningfromhisjourney,thinkinghehasgivenmeampletimeinthe

intervaltoprepareforhisreception.”134Thewhistlingisnotacoincidentaldevelopment,it

isthereturnofarepressedmemory,aspecterofthepastreassertingitselfinitsfull

destructivepower.“Everythingforgottenmingleswithwhathasbeenforgottenofthe

prehistoricworld,formscountless,uncertain,changingcompounds,yieldingaconstant

flowofnew,strangeproducts.”135Itisasiftheforwardmovementofhistorybringswithit

nothingbuttheperversionofthepast,asifthismovementconstitutesprogress.“My

stationupthereismuchtoohigh,”theparablegoes,soanewTowerofBabelmustbebuilt

underground,findingtheArchimedeanpointinthedepths;ratherthantheChinesedesire

tofindtranscendenceinthehighcommand’sdecrees,theburrowerhopestofinditin

himself.AsArendtnotes,thisis“anattempttoreduceallexperiences,withtheworldas

wellaswithotherhumanbeings,toexperiencesbetweenmanandhimself.”136The

burrower’sTowerofBabel,inconjunctionwiththeonetobebuiltupontheGreatWall,

illustratesthedualmotionsofmodernity,inwardtowardstheselfandoutwardtowards

theuniverse.

Theimportanceofprocess,illustratedhereinthebuildingprocess,isapparentin

Kafka’sownarticulationofprogress:“Tobelieveinprogressisnottobelievethatprogress

hasalreadytakenplace.Thatwouldbenobelief.”137ForKafka,progressisalways

deferred;likeBenjamin’sangelofhistory,hischaractersalwaysturntheirbackson

progress,andwitnessonlythe“pileofruins”toweringupbeforethem.Thisisnotachoice

134KCS357135Benjamin131136HC254137Benjamin130

49

somuchasitisanunrelentingforce,drivinghumanityforwardinacrashcoursetowards

ruination.Progressmightbefoundifmancouldturnawayfromthepastandlooktowards

hisownself‐createdfuture,butforKafka,asforBenjamin,thisisimpossible.Theprocess,

thestrivingforaprogresswhichwillneverbeachieved,leaveshimwithnothingbutthe

strivingitself,atrialthatisdoomedtoendinexecution,withonlytheshameofitlivingon.

138Theswampworld’sdarknessisinfiniteandimpenetrable.Kafkamadethisapparent

withhistestament,demandingthatBrodburnallofhisunpublishedpapersafterhisdeath.

Theinevitabilityoffailureisalsoconfirmedbytheunfinishednatureofmostofhismature

work:asBorgessays,“Kafkadidnotcompletehisnovelsbecauseitwasessentialthatthey

beincomplete.”139Itisessentialbecauseitistheprocess,andnottheproductthatmatters

formodernman,forfinishedproductsareimmediatelysubsumedbytheuse‐valuethey

possessandconsumed,fadingintothecontinuouslyrecycledcircleofconsumption.“The

shiftfromthe‘why’and‘what’tothe‘how’impliesthattheactualobjectsofknowledgecan

nolongerbethingsoreternalmotionsbutmustbeprocesses…”140

Kafkaunderstoodthis,andwhilehischaractersmaynotbeabletodigestthe

inevitabilityoffailureentirely,theyfeelitseffects.Arendtalsounderstandsthis,toa

degree:“…sosurelytheworld,fabricatedbymenandconstitutedaccordingtohumanand

notnaturallaws,willbecomeagainpartofnatureandwillfollowthelawofruinwhenman

decidestobecomehimselfpartofnature,ablindthoughaccuratetoolofnaturallaws,

renouncinghissupremefacultyofcreatinglawshimselfandevenprescribingthemto

138RecallthefamouslastwordsofTheTrial139Borges74

140HC296

50

nature.”141ArendtgoesastraywhenshereadsKafka’sworksasanarticulationofescape,

anexpressionofhope.142WhileKafka,andhischaracters,neverceasetostruggle,theyare

awareofthefutilityofthisbattle,andintheendtheyalwayssuccumbtotheprescribed

endpointofprogress–thatis,failure.HerewemightrecallCamus’essayintheMythof

Sisyphus,inwhichhedeclarestheworksofKafkatolackthetruequalityoftheabsurd,

preciselybecausetheycontainhope.Atthe“vehementproceedingsKafkainstitutesagainst

thewholeuniverse…Hisunbelievableverdictisthishideousandupsettingworldinwhich

theverymolesdaretohope.”143Thishopestemsfromthefactthatthey“embracetheGod

thatconsumesthem,”andthroughthisembrace“theabsurdisrecognized,accepted,and

manisresignedtoit,butfromthenonweknowthatithasceasedtobetheabsurd.”144For

Camus,followingthevastlyinfluentialreadingofKafkabyBrod,themotivationofthe

storiesisreligious,andwherethereisaGod–evenifitisadeusabsconditus,aGodwhohas

turnedhisbackonhumanity–thereishope.Thetrulyabsurdworkdeniestheexistenceof

Godandplacesmaninaworldwithnorecourse.

Camus’pointiswell‐taken,butKafka’sGod,Iwouldargue,isthoroughlygrounded

infragilehumanexperience,subjecttothesameirrevocableforcesasthepopulation.This

isnotraditionalGod,guidingmankindandjudginghimomnisciently.Recallthe“nature

Gods”theChineseworshipinthehome,ariteofprayerwhichisasscrutinizedbythehigh

commandasthewall‐building.Kafka’sGodoffersnohope:“ourworldisonlyabadmood

141KAR74142seetheintroduction,above143Camus138144Camus135

51

ofGod,abaddayofhis.”145ThisisathoroughlymodernGod,onewhohasabandonedhis

worldtothelawsofhistory,oratleastsubjectedhimselftothem.Thehighcommandand

thewhistlingentitybothtaketheformofthisinhumanlaw.Wemaywishtoknowthem,to

feelthemortobecertainoftheirmakeup,butwecanonlyreacttotheirresidues.“Ihave

reachedthestagewhereInolongerwishtohavecertainty,”146theburrowersaysaftera

longandarduousefforttodiscoverthesourceofthewhistling;heisnowcontenttoaccept

itforwhatitis,anincomprehensiblemystery,andtosubjecthimselftoitsinevitability.

Likewisethenarratorof“TheGreatWall”cutsoffhisinquiryatthepointwhereitmight

underminetheChinesepeople’ssenseofassurance,notdaringtopeerintothenothingness

attheheartofthehighcommand.Heapproachesthispointwhenheconsidersthe“existent

Emperor,amanlikeus,[who]liesmuchlikeusonacouchwhichisofgenerous

proportions,perhaps,andyetverypossiblymaybequitenarrowandshort.”147That“yet”

containsagalaxyofmeaning,thepromiseofadoubtwhichmighttearthewholestructure

downandrelievetheChineseoftheirpersistenthopefortheemperor’stouch,theirtrustin

anopaqueauthority,andreasserttheirowncollectiveagency.Butitisstilltoovague,too

distant:“Buthowshouldweknowanythingaboutthat–thousandsofmilesawayinthe

south–almostonthebordersoftheTibetanHighlands?Andbesides,anytidings,evenif

theydidreachus,wouldarrivefartoolate,wouldhavebecomeobsoletelongbeforethey

reachedus.”148ThevastlandscapeofChinadoesnotallowfortruth.Theburrower,with

hisArchimedeanpointprogressingendlesslyinward,cannotreceiveiteither.Theimage

145Benjamin116146KCS358147KCS243148KCS243

52

hereisthatofabeamoflight,racingtowardsanobjectacrossanexpandinguniversethat

recedesfromthebeamatanimpossiblyfastrate,whiletheinquisitivesubjectcannotsee

beyondthecosmicwallsthatenclosehim.

Thismetaphorisnotusedindiscriminately.Kafka’sworldisuncannilysimilartothe

onedescribedbyphysics,withouteverresortingtothesymboliclanguageofmathematics.

“Themodernastrophysicalworldview,”Arendtwrites,“anditschallengetotheadequacy

ofthesensestorevealreality,haveleftuswithauniverseofwhosequalitiesweknowno

morethanthewaytheyaffectourmeasuringinstruments,and–inthewordsofEddington

–‘theformerhaveasmuchresemblancetothelatterasatelephonenumberhastoa

subscriber.’”149BenjaminalsocitesapassagefromEddington’sTheNatureofthePhysical

World,anexcerptwhichheclaims“bearstheKafkastamp”moreclearlythananyin

literature:

Iamstandingonthethresholdabouttoenteraroom.Itisacomplicated

business.InthefirstplaceImustshoveagainstanatmospherewithaforceof

fourteenpoundsoneverysquareinchofmybody.Imustmakesureof

landingonaplanktravelingattwentymilesasecondaroundthesun–a

fractionofasecondtooearlyortoolate,theplankwouldbemilesaway.I

mustdothiswhilsthangingfromaroundplanetheadoutwardintospace,

andwithawindofaetherblowingatnooneknowshowmanymilesasecond

througheveryintersticeofmybody.Theplankhasnosolidityofsubstance.

Tosteponitislikesteppingonaswarmofflies.ShallInotslipthrough?No,

ifImaketheventureoneoftheflieshitsmeandgivesaboostupagain;Ifall

149HC261

53

againandamknockedupwardbyanotherfly;andsoon.Imayhopethatthe

netresultwillbethatIremainaboutsteady;butifunfortunatelyIshouldslip

throughthefloororbeboostedtooviolentlyuptotheceiling,theoccurrence

wouldbe,notaviolationofthelawsofNature,butararecoincidence.

Verily,itiseasierforacameltopassthroughtheeyeofaneedlethanfora

scientificmantopassthroughadoor.150

Kafka’smen(andhisanimals)arethesamescientificbeingsEddingtondescribes.For

them,themostquotidianandarbitrarytasksofdailylifetakeonadifficultyofOlympic

proportions.Inadifferentshortstory,Poseidonisassignedtheendless,tediousworkof

“administrationofallthewaters,”ataskhedoesnotlikebutmustfulfillbecauseitis“very

difficulttofindhimanotherjob.”151InKafka’sworld,thegreatGreekdeityhasbecomea

functionary.Soitgoesbothways;thequotidianiselevatedtotheGodlike,andtheGodlike

diminishedtothemundanelaboroftheclerk.Inamodernworldwheretruedescriptions

musttaketheformofcold,impersonalcalculations,andthesamerulesapplytotheboth

atomsinthestomachandatomsinastar,everythingisexperiencedasawell‐oiled

machineandthehumansubjectisamerecoginitsprecisemovements.TheChinese

people,educatedinmasonryandthatalone,mustviewtheirworldthroughthewall

becauseonlythroughthewallcanvariegatedhumanexperiencebecomereifiedand

comprehensible.“…thebuildingofthewallinparticular,withitsabundanceofhuman

material,providedamanofsensibilitywiththeopportunityoftraversingthesoulsof

150Benjamin142151KCS434

54

almostalltheprovinces…”152“Humanmaterial”;thiskindofformulationisonlypossiblein

themodernworld.Theburroweralso,convincedthatitisonlythroughnegligenceanda

poorwork‐ethicthatperfectsecurityhasnotbeenachieved,viewstheworldasamachine,

onewhichonlyneedsendlessfine‐tuningtofunctionflawlessly.Heoperateslike

Eddington’s“scientificman,”unabletoactduetotheoverwhelmingcomplexityofforces

stackedagainsthim.Ifhedoesmanagetoactitisbecausehemomentarilyloseshimself:

“Andthen,tooexhaustedtobeanylongercapableofthought,myheadhanging,mylegs

tremblingwithfatigue,halfasleep,feelingmywayratherthanwalking,Iapproachthe

entrance…”153Whetherpassingthroughadoororre‐enteringaburrow,actionreallyonly

requiresthoughtlessness,fortoconsiderthefullimplicationsofsuchamonumentaltaskis

impossible.Andathoughtlessactisnodifferentthantheactionofamachine.

Kafka’sscientificcharactersalsoexperiencethemoderndistortionofspaceand

time,inaverystrangeandrealway.In“ACommonConfusion”twocharacterstrytosetup

ameeting,butalwayspasseachotherintransit;onelegofthejourneytakestenminutes,

thenextdaythesamejourneytakestenhours,andthenextittakestenseconds.Attheend

ofitall,onthevergeoffinallymeeting,onecharactertwistshisankleandwrithesinpain

onthefloor,whiletheothertrompspasthim“inaviolentrage”and“vanish[es]forgood.”

154Arendtconsidersthisstory“themodelofconfusionitself,”155andifwe’rewillingtogeta

littleabstract,it’sthekindofconfusiononeencounterseverywhereinaworldgovernedby

152KCS247153KCS341154KCS429155KAR78

55

Einstein’slawsofrelativity.156ThemonumentalimpactofEinstein’sdiscovery(whichwas

onlyverifiedthankstothetelescope)onmodernityiswell‐documented.Everywherethe

implicationofrelativism,inphysicalaswellasmoralorepistemologicalspheres,hasmade

itselffelt.OneofKafka’smostsingularachievementswastotaketheseeffectsand

concretizethem,tomakethemfeltratherthanjustknown.AdornoclaimsKafka“studies

whatwouldhappeniftheresultsofpsychoanalysisweretoprovetruenotmerely

metaphoricallybutintheflesh;”157wecouldeasilyreplace“psychoanalysis”with“physics”

withoutlosingtheglimmeroftruth.Whilenormalmengothroughdoorways,buildhomes,

andfollowordersallthetime,Kafkashowsusjusthowunbelievablycomplex,and–oneis

temptedtosay–impossiblethesetasksreallyareinthemodernworld.Intheparable“An

ImperialMessage,”placedneartheendof“TheGreatWall,”theemperor’smessenger

travelswithamessage“toyou,thehumblesubject,theinsignificantshadowcoweringin

theremotestdistancebeforetheimperialsun.”158Yetnomatterhowfastheruns,how

easilythewayisclearedforhim,heisunabletoleavethe“chambersoftheinnermost

palace,”“nobodycouldfighthiswaythroughhereevenwithamessagefromadeadman.”

159Inastrophysicalterms,thevillagerwhodreamsofthemessageathiswindowisthe

edgeoftheuniverse,theultimatelimitofman’ssensorycapabilities,racingawayfromthe

spaceitenclosesfasterthanthespeedoflight.

Howcanonegainaccesstotruthinsuchaworld?Theuncomfortablefactofthe

matteristhat,inthemodernworld,truthisnolongerauniversalprospect.Arendtquotes

156Forafascinatingessayontherelationship(personalandintellectual)betweenKafkaandEinstein,seeFranzKuna,“RageforVerification.”157Adorno251158KCS244159KCS244

56

WernerHeisenberg,thescientistwhodiscoveredtheUncertaintyPrinciple:“Maninhis

huntfor‘objectivereality’suddenlydiscoveredthathealways‘confrontshimselfalone.’”

160Byfindingtheinherentlimitationsinman’sacquisitionofknowledge,Heisenberg

standswithEinsteinatthevanguardofthemodernage.161Theimpossibilityoftruly

objectiveinformationdoesnotdecreaseman’sdesireforit,hencethepersistentdreamof

findingtheArchimedeanpoint,ofovercomingthelimitationsandgainingcertainty.Arendt

andHeisenbergrecognizethatthisdesireinevitablyleadsbackintowardstheself,anditis

herethat“thehumanist’sconcernwithmanandthestatureofmanhascaughtupwiththe

scientist.”162Kafka,whowasnoscientist,163sawtheconvergenceandarticulateditwith

unsurpassedprecision.Theburrowerisjustoneofthecharacterswhorecognizesthe

limitsofwhathecanknow,buttheinsightcomestoolate.Besetbyhisworstfear,an

enemywhohasnodefinitelocationandseemstoemanatefromeverywhereatonce,he

finallyunderstandsthatcertaintybringsnocomfort;164priortothis,hiseveryactivityis

motivatedbythedesiretoknowandcontroleverything.“Butifmyhypothesisdoesnot

meetthecase,whatcantheexplanationbe?”165Thisisanexclusivelymodernquestion,as

Arendtknows:“scientistsformulatetheirhypothesestoarrangetheirexperimentsand

thenusetheseexperimentstoverifytheirhypotheses;duringthiswholeenterprise,they

160BPAF277161TheUncertaintyPrinciple,inverysimpleterms,states:“Increasingtheaccuracyofmeasurementofoneobservablequantityincreasestheuncertaintywithwhichanotherconjugatequantitymaybeknown.”AmericanHeritageDictionary162BPAF277163ThoughhedidattendmayscientificlecturesandspokewitheminentphysicistsduringBrod’sliterarymeetings.164“Ihavehadenoughofdiscoveries;Ileteverythingslide;IwouldbequitecontentifIcouldonlystilltheconflictgoingonwithinme.”KCS352165KCS345

57

obviouslydealwithahypotheticalnature.”166What’slostinthiscircularendeavorisany

senseofacommonworld,interwoventhrougheachperson’sconnectiontoman‐made

thingsandeveryotherhumanbeing.Theburrower’sinsistenceontestinghisreality

throughendlessexperimentsobviouslydoesnotrequirethepresenceofothers,because

his“truth”issituatedsomewherewithintheprivatecircleofthehypothesis‐reality

framework.FortheChinesewall‐builderstruthissomewhere“outthere,”atthetopofa

TowerofBabelwhichmanwillnotbepermittedtoascend,whiletheironlyconnectionto

theworlditself–theGreatWall–issensiblesolelyfromthisArchimedeanpoint.Again,the

lossofacommonworldismanifestinthiskindof“reality.”FortheChinesenolessthanthe

burrowerthesenseofrealitycomesfromwithin,fromanindividualsensewhichfailsto

extenditsperceptivecirclebeyondtheindividualmindandbody.

Forcommonsense,whichoncehadbeentheonebywhichallothersenses,

withtheirintimatelyprivatesensations,werefittedintothecommonworld,

justasvisionfittedmanintothevisibleworld,nowbecameaninnerfaculty

withoutanyworldrelationship.167

ToreturntoKafka’snotionofprogress(orlackthereof)inthemodernworld,we

mayfinallynotethatthisArchimedeanpoint,simultaneouslyextendingoutintothe

universeandbackintowardsthesubject,isusedagainstusbypreciselythiseliminationof

thecommon,publicworld.Arendtnotesthatthehistoricalgenesisofmodernity,the

FrenchRevolution,beganwiththepromiseofjustthiskindofworld.TheFrenchpublic

post‐1789hadbecome‘challengers,’hadtakentheinitiativeuponthemselvesand

166HC287167HC283

58

therefore,withoutknowingorevennoticingit,hadbeguntocreatethepublicspace

betweenthemselveswherefreedomcouldappear.”168Thisdream,however,quicklyand

emphaticallyfaded,andwhatwasleftwasaworldwithouttraditionormemory,stuckin

betweenapastcomposedofruinsandafuturethatseemedtofollowinhumanlaws.

Freedomhadlivedbrieflyandbrightly,butwithitsdisappearancetherewentthe

possibilityofmeaningfulaction.ArendtquotesTocqueville:“Sincethepasthasceasedto

throwitslightuponthefuture,themindofmanwandersinobscurity.”169

ArendtusesKafka’sparable“He”toexpanduponTocqueville:

Hehastwoantagonists:thefirstpresseshimfrombehind,fromtheorigin.

Thesecondblockstheroadahead.Hegivesbattletoboth.Tobesure,the

firstsupportshiminhisfightwiththesecond,forhewantstopushhim

forward,andinthesamewaythesecondsupportshiminhisfightwiththe

first,sincehedriveshimback.Butitisonlytheoreticallyso.Foritisnotonly

thetwoantagonistswhoarethere,buthehimselfaswell,andwhoreally

knowhisintentions?Hisdream,though,isthatsometimeinanunguarded

moment–andthiswouldrequireanightdarkerthananynighthaseverbeen

yet–hewilljumpoutofthefightinglineandbepromoted,onaccountofhis

experienceinfighting,tothepositionofumpireoverhisantagonistsintheir

fightwitheachother.170

Whatismostnotablehereisthedream,toremoveoneselffromthebattlingforcesof

historyandtoobservethemobjectively.ObviouslywhathedesiresistheArchimedean

168BPAF4169BPAF7170BPAF7

59

point.OnecouldimagineBenjamin’sangelofhistorywithasimilarwish,toonceclosehis

wingsandfeelthewindssubside.Butofcoursethis,likethedreamofperfectsecurityand

theemperor’smessage,isonlyadream.Theopposinghistoricalforceshavehimfirmly

ensconcedinabattlewhicheffectivelycancelsitselfout,holdingthesubjectinastateof

suspension.Everythingwehavediscusseduptothispoint–theconflationofpublicand

private,laborandwork,thedreamoftheArchimedeanpoint,operatesalonganinvisible

trajectorytowardsthisgoal.Theresultisahumanitycomposedofautomatons,going

throughtherequisiteprocessoflivingandthendyingofexhaustion,likeK.inTheCastleor

GregorSamsainTheMetamorphosis.ArendtseesalessoninKafka’sparable,an

exhortationtowardsthinking;onlythroughtheapplicationof“thinkingwhatwedo”can

wefinda“diagonalline”whichleadsusto“theplaceintimewhichissufficientlyremoved

frompastandfuturetooffer‘theumpire’apositionfromwhichtojudgetheforcesfighting

witheachotherwithanimpartialeye.”171

Inotherwords,thereisahope,andwhileitwillrequirethemoststrenuousthought

wecanmuster,itcanleadusoutoftheimpasse.WhileArendtdoesn’tclaimKafka’sshares

herconviction,Ibelieveshefailstounderstandhim.Benjamin,ontheotherhand,ismore

faithfultothetext.Oncehewascertainofeventualfailure,everythingworkedoutforhim

enrouteasinadream.”172Kafka,unlikeArendt,acceptsfailureandworksunderits

conditions,withtheprofoundunderstandingthatthisisreallytheonlywaytowork.Itis

notallmorbidpessimism,however,forsomewhereinthisendlessstrugglelittlespacesfor

happiness,humor,andserenityopenup.Butthehuman,andthehumancondition,seems

171BPAF12172Benjamin145

60

unalterablydoomed.TheimplicationsofKafka’sworldview,asbothArendtandBenjamin

knew,wouldsoonmakethemselvesfeltinreality:“Kafka’sworld,frequentlyofsuch

playfulnessandinterlacedwithangels,istheexactcomplementofhiserawhichis

preparingtodoawaywiththeinhabitantsofthisplanetonaconsiderablescale.”173

Benjamin,whodidnotlivetoseethefullhorrorsoftheHolocaust,isreferencingWorld

War1,butthe“progress”madefromformertolatterisendemicofmodernity.Thisiswhat

ArendtmeansbyclaimingKafkaasabuilderof“blueprints”:herecognizedthatcertain

conditionscouldleadonlytoendlessrepetition,aneternalrecurrencefromwhichno

escapeispossible.Intheofficeofthehighcommand“onemaybecertainthatallhuman

thoughtsanddesiresrevolvedinacircle,andallhumanaimsandfulfillmentsrevolvedina

countercircle.Andthroughthewindowthereflectedsplendorsofdivineworldsfellonthe

handsoftheleadersastheytracedtheirplans.”174Allthoughtisalreadystuckinthecircle,

alreadyassimilatedintotheimpenetrabledecreesofanetherealauthority.“…inabsolute

subjectivespaceandabsolutesubjectivetimethereisnoroomforanythingthatmight

disturbtheirintrinsicprinciple,thatofinexorableestrangement,”175Adornowrites.The

absoluteandtheinexorable;thesubjectiveandtheestranged.Theseseemingly

contradictorytermsareinsomewaystheoperativetermsofthemodernage,thewalls

overwhichthemodernhumancannotsee.TheArchimedeanpointoffersaladderrising

abovethefray,butonecanneverclimbitquicklyenough.Yethetriesandtriesagain,and

thistrialis,forKafka,thezero‐sumofmodernexistence.

173Benjamin143174KCS240175Adorno261

61

Bibliography

Adorno,TheodorW.Prisms.5th.Cambridge:MITPress,1990.Print.Arendt,Hannah.BetweenPastandFuture.9th.NewYork:PenguinBooks,1993.

Print.‐‐‐‐‐."FranzKafka:ARevaluation."PartisanReview.11.4(1944):n.page.Print.‐‐‐‐‐.TheHumanCondition.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1998.Print.Benjamin,Walter.Illuminations.NewYork:SchockenBooks,1968.111‐145.Print.Borges,JorgeLuis.Labyrinths.10th.NewYork:NewDirections,1964.Print.Boulby,Mark."Kafka'sEnd:AReassessmentoftheBurrow."GermanQuarterly.55.2

(1982):175‐185.Print.Camus,Albert.TheMythofSisyphus.NewYork:VintageInternational,1991.Print.Corngold,Stanley.LambentTraces:FranzKafka.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity

Press,2004.Print.

Danoff,Brian."Arendt,Kafka,andtheNatureofTotalitarianism."PerspectivesofPoliticalScience.29.4(2011):211‐219.Print.

Disch,Lisa."MoreTruthThanFact:StorytellingasCriticalUnderstandinginthe

WritingsofHannahArendt."PoliticalTheory.21.4(1993):665‐694.Web.18Mar.2013.

Dossa,Shiraz.ThePublicRealmandthePublicSelf:ThePoliticalTheoryofHannah

Arendt.Waterloo:WilfridLaurierUniversityPress,1989.Print.

Edwards,Ivana."TheEssenceof"Kafkaesque"."NewYorkTimes[NewYork]29121991.Web.18Mar.2013.

Henel,Heinrich."Kafka'sDerBau,orHowtoEscapefromaMaze."Trans.ArrayThe

DiscontinuousTradition.PeterF.Ganz.Oxford:ClarendonPress,1971.224‐246.Print.

Kafka,Franz.TheCompleteStories.NewYork:SchockenBooks,1971.Print.‐‐‐‐‐.Diaries.NewYork:SchockenBooks,1988.Print.‐‐‐‐‐.ParablesandParadoxes.9th.NewYork:SchockenBooks,1974.Print.

62

Kant,Immanuel."AnAnswertotheQuestion"WhatisEnlightenment?".".PhilosophyontheEServer,30091784.Web.18Mar2013.

Kuna,Franz."RageforVerification:KafkaandEinstein."Trans.ArrayOnKafka:Semi

CentenaryPerspectives.FranzKuna.London:ElekBooksLtd,1976.83‐111.Print.

Maché,Britta."TheNoiseintheBurrow:Kafka'sFinalDilemma."GermanQuarterly.55.4(1982):526‐540.Print.

Morse,J.Mitchell."Veblen,Kafka,Vico,andtheGreatWallofChina."YaleReview.

88.3(2000):101‐110.Web.18Mar.2013.

Penny,Laura."ParablesandPolitics:HowBenjaminandDeleuze&GuattariReadKafka."TheoryandEvent.12.3(2009):n.page.Web.18Mar.2013.

Politzer,Heinz.FranzKafka:ParableandParadox.NewYork:CornellUniversity

Press,1962.Print.

Sokel,Walter.TheMythofPowerandtheSelf.Detroit:WayneStateUniversityPress,2002.Print.

Thorlby,Anthony."Anti‐Mimesis:KafkaandWittgenstein."Trans.ArrayOnKafka:

SemiCentenaryPerspectives.FranzKuna.London:ElekBooksLtd,1976.59‐82.Print.

Wagenbach,Klaus.Kafka.London:HausPublishingLtd,2002.Print.Weigand,Hermann."FranzKafka's"TheBurrow":AnAnalyticalEssay."PMLA.87.2

(1972):152‐166.Web.18Mar.2013.