Our fellow, rather dejected, countryman stands before the gates of the Law. Upon being commanded to halt, he at once ceases to be an individual and becomes a subject. This occurs because he willfully complies. One must wonder what would've happened had the countryman disobeyed the gatekeeper. Would the second and third gatekeepers have let him through too? The gatekeeper said he couldn't pass, but in actuality, our hero could have moved on whenever he wished, thereby retaining his individuality and further pursuing his goals.
Also, I find it quite interesting that the countryman is seeking out the Law, while the Law is the very thing that is preventing him from getting to it! Is Kafka telling us to not seek out the Law? Because, if this man truly was seeking out the Law, he most certainly succeeded. Docile and obedient, he allowed his culture to rob him of everything he possessed. He was determined to obey the Law, even if it meant not 'obtaining' the Law.
The real key to this story is in the last cryptic line that the doorkeeper speaks. We learn that the gate of the Law existed only for this one Law up in his mind and allowed it to supercede his sense of self.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Who is to say there even ARE other gatekeepers? Within this tale, the countryman never doubts the category he has willfully (good catch) placed himself in- nor does he doubt the authority of the gatekeeper.
What does this perhaps suggest about our own notions of our selves?
Ooooo, that's a very interesting possibility.... an even more interesting question.
Timothy Leary said it best: Think for yourself, question authority.
Post a Comment