‘There are two motives for reading a book; one, that you enjoy it; the other, that you can boast about it.”
- Bertrand Russell
I definitely picked up Kafka to boast about it, what a dumb ass reason. I knew at my core that I would hate it. I knew it. Serves me right I guess.
This book is described as : "an existential tale, a parable, or a prophecy of the excesses of modern bureaucracy wedded to the madness of totalitarianism" What a load of pretentious bull shit. I CALL BULL SHIT. If you have to describe a book as " prophecy of the excesses of modern bureaucracy wedded to the madness of totalitarianism" to get people's attention then you're trying too hard.
What. Does. That. Even. Mean. and who even says that?!
Maybe I am not intelligent enough to see the mind blowing concepts Kafka introduced in this book but frankly I don't care. I'm confident in saying that as a novel this was a complete failure and, at least from what was displayed in this book, as a writer Kafka is neither good nor engaging.
Yea, I said it. Better believe it.
But why Lilyan? Why!? Why are you shitting on one of the major figures of 20th-century literature?
Because, you could have amazing ideas and never be a novelist. What's the use of writing your powerful ideas in novel form when you don't have the capacity to engage a reading audience or build characters?!
The Trial is a "novel" about Joseph K a banker who is suddenly arrested one day for an unknown charge. He is technically arrested but is allowed to roam free until the trial concludes. He spends the rest of the book meeting with bizarre characters that are all linked to the court in an attempt to exonerate himself. And that's it. That's the story. The main character, K, has the personality of a lamp shade. All the women in the novel are either whores by trade or linked to sex in one way or the other. The rest of the characters all blur together as tools to aid/hinder K.'s trial.
So what do we have here then? We have a book with pages containing writing that's completely void of characterization, plot progression or an engaging tone. Where are the "novel" elements then? How can you call Kafka a novelist? Perhaps a philosopher or a progressive thinker, an influential person, whatever you want to call him. But not a novelist.
- Bertrand Russell
I definitely picked up Kafka to boast about it, what a dumb ass reason. I knew at my core that I would hate it. I knew it. Serves me right I guess.
This book is described as : "an existential tale, a parable, or a prophecy of the excesses of modern bureaucracy wedded to the madness of totalitarianism" What a load of pretentious bull shit. I CALL BULL SHIT. If you have to describe a book as " prophecy of the excesses of modern bureaucracy wedded to the madness of totalitarianism" to get people's attention then you're trying too hard.
What. Does. That. Even. Mean. and who even says that?!
Maybe I am not intelligent enough to see the mind blowing concepts Kafka introduced in this book but frankly I don't care. I'm confident in saying that as a novel this was a complete failure and, at least from what was displayed in this book, as a writer Kafka is neither good nor engaging.
Yea, I said it. Better believe it.
But why Lilyan? Why!? Why are you shitting on one of the major figures of 20th-century literature?
Because, you could have amazing ideas and never be a novelist. What's the use of writing your powerful ideas in novel form when you don't have the capacity to engage a reading audience or build characters?!
The Trial is a "novel" about Joseph K a banker who is suddenly arrested one day for an unknown charge. He is technically arrested but is allowed to roam free until the trial concludes. He spends the rest of the book meeting with bizarre characters that are all linked to the court in an attempt to exonerate himself. And that's it. That's the story. The main character, K, has the personality of a lamp shade. All the women in the novel are either whores by trade or linked to sex in one way or the other. The rest of the characters all blur together as tools to aid/hinder K.'s trial.
So what do we have here then? We have a book with pages containing writing that's completely void of characterization, plot progression or an engaging tone. Where are the "novel" elements then? How can you call Kafka a novelist? Perhaps a philosopher or a progressive thinker, an influential person, whatever you want to call him. But not a novelist.
