Kafkaesque: Nightmarish and Oppressive, or Just Simply Conscious?
What does it mean to be Kafkaesque?
I went through a soul-crushing depression. I reached a low point and attempted to climb out of it in order to achieve happiness and stability. Although it may seem unusual, Kafka and his works benefitted my mental health because I felt like I was talking to someone who truly understood me. Although the notions I acquired from his works may not have been primary motivators, I believe that understanding his message requires a certain amount of eccentricity inside oneself. You must possess an absurdist and nihilist tendency. I believe that experiencing tremendous, soul-crushing depression together with screaming, pounding existential terror is a requirement for appreciating his genius. If you’re normally cheerful, you might find it strange yet dull.
I believe he was a genius in that he identified the emergence of the modern world’s absurdity and the existential meaninglessness of life. He is, in my opinion, a link between the great centuries continental thinkers and the postmodern writers. His brilliance rests in capturing the mood and atmosphere of life, not in creating great literature about it. In his personal life, he dealt with a lot of pain and troubles, which showed through in his writings. He felt trapped in reality, unable to live his life as he wished. As a result, many of his stories feature characters who are stuck, desperate, and despairing.
The world is a strange, unjust place where people are oblivious to everything that is wrong around them: people being dominated and suppressed by family, friends, and society, injustice, and selfish apathy. This madness is depicted in Kafka’s stories. In his stories, he manages to throw his readers into complete despair, which is simply a reflection of how he felt about his own life. Kafka used this lovely literary technique to show how people are unconcerned about what is happening in the world. He utilized surrealism in his stories, which is typically unpleasant and distressing. His characters, on the other hand, accept it as usual.
The world has many opinions.
Why was Kafka this way? Why were his works written this way? I don’t know. Why do I enjoy him? I don’t know. I imagine myself as the one-eyed man in the land of the blind. It’s amazing to be a brilliant person who can “see” things that others can’t. You want to share your joy with others, but you can’t since everyone else either doesn’t understand or doesn’t care. So having no one to share your views with becomes irritating and eventually depressing and suffocating. The bliss of ignorance. When you understand how serious the problems are and how eager some people are to disregard them, you become even more miserable. Wisdom is a root canal without an anesthetic, and ignorance is bliss. Clarity’s curse is quite real. The world has many opinions.
They act as if it’s perfectly usual for humans to transform into something else permanently. They even make lifestyle adjustments as a result. And the reader is left asking, “How can they act normally?” during this time. This style is even referred to as “Kafkaesque.” Kafka used his stories to express himself, much like a painting or a piece of music. You should study the writings of someone who was deeply troubled by his own life. To learn how people can become stuck in their life, or how they might become absolutely helpless in the hands of others. It makes us realize how fragile we are. The elegance of Kafkaesque literature. Every story leaves you with a number of ideas.
What criteria do you use to determine literary genius? Is it a wonderful style, a unique way of expressing yourself? Or does it have something to do with what the author writes about: incisive and insightful observations about the human condition? Is brilliance reserved for a writer who is eclectic in their thinking and covers a wide range of issues in a variety of genres, or for a prolific writer who produces a large number of works over the course of a successful career? Both versatility and productivity could be used to define genius. Is genius reserved for your generation’s most successful author or for the one who captures the spirit of his time? Is genius an honorific we bestow on a writer who has had a profound and long-lasting influence on our thoughts and feelings?
[ … “A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us.” “I am a cage, in search of a bird.” “Don’t bend; don’t water it down; don’t try to make it logical; don’t edit your own soul according to the fashion. Rather, follow your most intense obsessions mercilessly.” “Many a book is like a key to unknown chambers within the castle of one’s own self.”
Youth is happy because it has the capacity to see beauty. Anyone who keeps the ability to see beauty never grows old.
Why do I enjoy Kafka? Maybe it is cerebral vs. instinctual. I do not seek remedy or anesthetics to my circadian aches. I seek consciousness from oblivion, answers. I think, “Why is this?” “What do I feel?” What do I feel? What do I feel? What do I feel? What do I feel? What do I feel? What do I feel? Kafka answers.
There is a recurring theme in Kafka’s words and all those and those that are Kafkaesque. Only those who have experienced some nihilistic, existentialist, absurdist, experiential, fatalist, defeatist, pessimistic, soul-crushing despair can truly recognize the genius in his works, which we define genius as one who has left a long-lasting influence on our thoughts and feelings.
Kafka despised society. He saw society as a simple centrifugal that spun everyone into one tremendous gelatinous mass devoid of any character, weapons for dehumanizing individuals.
The world has too many opinions, and I wilt to it like impressionable ooze.
Kafka was a literary genius. Those who may enjoy literary prestige, innovation, or showy recognition may disagree. Happy people may disagree. But Kafka was a literary genius.