The Trial is an engrossing, disturbing, visionary, and confusing literary classic which was written by the literary figurehead Franz Kafka and was published in 1925. A book that can be interpreted in many ways, it can be viewed as a parable for the confusion and meaninglessness of existence, a story detailing the powerlessness of the individual before the law, and a cautionary tale which warns of totalitarianism.
The Trial immediately reveals the protagonist’s name to be Josef K. A respectable bank officer who has committed no crime, he was arrested on the morning of his thirtieth birthday. The Trial begins with a famed sentence: “Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having down anything wrong, he was arrested” (3). He knew something was wrong when he awoke, for his cook didn't appear as she usually did. Two strange-looking men then forcibly entered his room. One was described as “slender yet solidly built, and was wearing a fitted black jacket, which, like a traveler’s outfit, was provided with a variety of pleats, pockets, buckles, buttons and a belt, and thus appeared eminently practical, although its purpose remained obscure” (3-4). The guards then instructed K. to go back into his room, and they refused to give him the reason as to why he was arrested, only insisting that he must obey the instructions of the court. K. refuses to be told what to do, but he was barred from leaving the room, only earning more reprimands from the guards, who continue to instruct him to obey. K. then became increasingly irritated, demanding to talk to the boss of the guards. One of the guards then responds that the supervisor will see K. whenever he feels like it, and not the other way around. The guards had also eaten K.’s breakfast, but they offered, for a fee, to bring him “‘a small breakfast from the coffeehouse across the way’” (10). K. refused the offer, choosing to eat an apple that he left in his room the night before instead.
A cry “from the adjoining room startled him so that he rattled his teeth on the glass” (11). K. was notified that the inspector wanted to see him, and he was forced to get out of his pajamas and to change into formal clothing. The inspector was waiting for him in his neighbor’s room, and K. then tells the inspector that he believed the entire proceedings to be a joke (though a joke that has gone too far), and that he demands to know what is going on. He also made fun of the clothing they were wearing, as they had no uniforms which identified them with a certain organization. The inspector responded to K. by telling him that he and the guards are unimportant to K’s “‘affair, and in fact know almost nothing about it. We could be wearing the most proper of uniforms and your case would not be a whit more serious’” (14). The insanity of The Trial is seen explicitly when the inspector tells K. that he knows nothing of the proceedings: “‘You’ve been arrested, that’s true, but that’s all I know … think less about us … instead think more about yourself. And don’t make such a fuss about how innocent you feel; it disturbs the otherwise not unfavorable impression you make. And you should talk less in general; almost everything you’ve said up to now could have been inferred from your behavior, even if you’d said only a few words, and it wasn’t terribly favorable to you in any case’” (14). The inspector then offered K. some encouragement, as even though he was under arrest, he could go on with his daily life, since arrest doesn’t keep a person from carrying on with their usual routine: “‘you’ve misunderstood me; you’re under arrest, certainly, but that’s not meant to keep you from carrying on your profession. Nor are you to be hindered in the course of your ordinary life’” (17).
K., surprised ath the news, said that if that was the case, the inspector shouldn’t have a job to begin with. The inspector responds by stating that it is his duty, but K. corrects him, telling him that it was a stupid one, with no purpose or logical end. The inspector had invited three low-level clerks from the bank K. worked at to take him to work, and they proceeded to leave for the bank. As he returned home that night, he paid a visit to Frau Grubach, his landlady. Frau attempts to help K., telling him that she eavesdropped the guard’s conversation, learning that he was arrested not for some crime like thievery, but for something emotional: “‘It involves your happiness after all, and I really take that to heart, more than I should perhaps, since after all, I’m only your landlady. Well anyway, I heard a few things, but I can’t say that it was anything very bad … It seems like something scholarly that I don’t understand, but that I don’t need to understand either’” (23). K. then thanked Frau for her help and asked Frau whether Fraulein Burstner, his neighbor whose room was used by the inspector, was home. He is told that she isn’t at home, and he tells Frau that the only reason he wanted to see her was because he used her room in the morning when he was arrested by the guards. Frau tells him that he is too considerate and has no need to apologize, as Fraulein spends her time mostly outside the house - “‘she’s a fine and dear young woman, friendly, neat, punctual, and industrious … I’ve already seen her twice this month in other neighborhoods and each time with a different man. I find it very embarrassing’” (25).
When Fraulein arrived back home at 11:30 PM, K. heard her and asked if they could talk. He informed her that he used her room in the morning for urgent business. Fraulein tells him that she isn’t angry, but the clerks have mixed up all her photos. She then tells him that she will be a secretary for a law firm in the next month, and K. asks her whether she could help him with his case. Fraulein states that she would help him since she enjoys applying her knowledge, but tells K. that she needs to know the exact details of the case. K. then responds by stating that that was exactly the problem. It is made clear to K. that Frau could be of use to him, as “‘Frau Grubach, whose voice will count most, particularly since the captain is her nephew, practically worships me, and believes anything I say. She’s beholden to me in another way too, since she’s borrowed a large sum from me. I’ll accept any suggestion you offer as to why we were together, as long as it’s halfway reasonable, and I guarantee I’ll get Frau Grubach not only to accept it in public, but to truly and honestly believe it’” (32). Before K. left Fraulein’s room, he “rushed out, seized her, kissed her on the mouth, then all over her face, like a thirsty animal lapping greedily at a spring it has found at last. Then he kissed her on the neck, right at her throat, and left his lips there for a long time. A noise from the captain’s room caused him to look up” (33). K. proceeded to leave, and felt proud of how he handled the situation.
“K. was informed by telephone that a small inquiry into his affair would take place the following Sunday,” and “such inquiries would now be held on a regular basis, perhaps not every week, but with some frequency” (35). This was rather reasonable in the view of the court, as “it was in the general interest to bring his trial to a rapid conclusion; on the other, the inquiries must be thorough in every respect, yet never last too long, due to the strain involved” (35). That is, the court system functioned like a stomach or a machine, as many others, including K., had been arrested and their lives thrown into the gutter. K. was informed his inquiries would take place on Sundays, but when he approached the building which was supposed to house the trial, it was unclear in which room the inquiry was supposed to take place. When K. finally found the room, he was blamed for his “tardiness” and was told that he was lucky the jury would still listen to his case, as he was one hour and five minutes late. The court seemed to be at a loss when it came to the proceedings, for they misidentified K. as a house painter. When he corrected their mistake, the people on the right-hand side of the room erupted into laughter, causing the examining magistrate to be so enraged that he was “jumping up and threatening the gallery, while his ordinarily inconspicuous eyebrows contracted bushy black and large above his eyes” (44). The left side of the hall, however, remained silent, and though their numbers ranked less than those on the right, they seemed to be more important due to their calmness.
K. utilized the initial inquiry to speak truth to power, showing the stupidity and inconsistency of the court and the total injustice of the nature of the allegations and cases. That is, what happened to him was “‘of no particular consequence, since I don’t take it very seriously, but it is typical of the proceedings being brought against many people. I speak for them, not for myself’” (46-7). K. continued, saying that he isn’t an orator, but he does have the skill needed to show the problem of the court system: “‘days ago I was arrested; the arrest itself makes me laugh, but that’s another matter. I was assaulted in the morning in bed; perhaps they’d been ordered to arrest some house painter … but they chose me. The room next door had been taken over by two course guards … These guards were corrupt ruffians as well; they talked my ear off, they wanted bribes, they tried to talk me out of my undergarments and clothes under false pretenses, they wanted money, supposedly to bring me breakfast, after they’d shamelessly eaten my own breakfast before my very eyes … I was led into a third room to see the inspector. It was the room of a young woman for whom I have the highest respect, yet I was forced to look on while this room was defiled … by the presence of the guards and the inspector’” (47-8).
K. then stated that when he asked the inspector of his case, he got no response, clearly showing the court system needed reform. He then states what the court system really is: a corrupt institution that is so extensive no one is safe from denouncements and arbitrary arrests. In his own words, he says elegantly and powerfully that “‘there can be no doubt that behind all the pronouncements of this court … behind the arrest and today’s inquiry, there exists an extensive organization. An organization that not only engages corrupt guards, inane inspectors, and examining magistrates who are at best mediocre, but that supports as well a system of judges of all ranks, including the highest, with their inevitable innumerable entourage of assistants, scribes, gendarmes, and other aides, perhaps even hangmen, I won’t shy away from the word … It consists of arresting innocent people and introducing proceedings against them, which for the most part, as in my case, go nowhere. Given the senselessness of the whole affair, how could the bureaucracy avoid becoming entirely corrupt?’” (50). K., after his brilliant speech, was received by complete silence, making it possible that the court was either terrified of his rebellion or were simply too stupid to understand what he was saying. Regardless, K. left the building, but not before hearing the assembly coming to life upon his departure.
K. returned next Sunday for the court hearing, but was notified that there was no courtroom session by a woman whose husband was a court usher. She notifies him that after his speech, the court judged him negatively, and that she is being sexually harassed by a law student who will probably rise to a position of power in the future, but has to put up with it if she wants her husband to keep her job. K. then states that he can try to help her if she allows him to see the contents of the law books which the judges and magistrates read. She allows him to do so, and upon opening the book, he sees “A man and a woman were sitting naked on a divan; the obscene intention of the artist was obvious, but his ineptitude was so great that in the end there was nothing to be seen but a man and woman, emerging far too corporeally from the picture, sitting rigidly upright, and due to the poor perspective, turning toward each other quite awkwardly” (57). It is also worth mentioning that the “law” books were in poor condition and were covered in dust, and had titles such as The Torment Grete Suffered at the Hands of Her Husband Hans. K. remarks hilariously that the law court spent their time studying books that are in fact pornography, reflecting their absolute debauchery.
The law student the woman mentioned then showed up, and he was described as “short, with slightly crooked legs … a short, scraggly reddish beard he kept fingering. K. Looked at him with curiosity; he was the first student of the unknown system of jurisprudence he’d met on more or less human terms, a man who would presumably advance at some stage to higher official positions” (61). The student, after arguing with K. about decent behavior, decided to forego it entirely, grabbing her “with a strength one wouldn’t have expected,” and then “lifted her in one arm and ran to the door, his back bent, gazing up at her tenderly” (63). The court usher than appeared to K., telling him that he wished he could flog the student for his indecency and depravity, but couldn’t due to his low station. He then remarks that it is ironic that fate decreed that the most beautiful woman in the building would be his wife, and the most unconfident husband him. He offers K. a chance to look around the law offices, and K. accepts. As K. looked around the offices, he saw other defendants who took the case more seriously than he did, but he calmly accepted his own autonomy. He suddenly felt violently ill, suffering from what appears to be vertigo, and has to be carried out of the building. The moment he is outside, he feels better, and he blames the stuffy conditions of the building for causing his physical symptoms.
K. continued to work his job, but a few nights later, K. heard “the sound of groans behind a door” within the bank “that he had always assumed led to a mere junk room, though he had never seen it himself” (80). Surprised, he looked into the room, saw a flogger who was punishing the two guards who arrested him (named Franz and Willem). They tell K. that they were being punished when the court learned of their behavior. The guards try to appeal to K.’s emotions, telling him that they were paid relatively little, causing them to attempt to make money wherever they could. They also yell at the flogger, saying that they were loyal guards and would have been floggers themselves in due time if they weren’t exposed. The flogger retorts, saying that “‘their punishment is as just as it is inevitable’” (82). K. offered money to the flogger if he would stop whipping the two guards, but he refused, saying that K. would report him to the authorities, causing him to be flogged in turn. K. again begs the flogger to be reasonable, saying that the crimes of the guards didn't warrant punishment, but the flogger refuses to listen, refusing to be flexible, proceeding to flog the two guards. The next day, when K. opened the junk room once again, “What he saw, in place of the expected darkness, bewildered him completely. Everything was unchanged, just as he had found it the previous evening when he opened the door … the flogger with the rod, the guards, still completely clothed … the guards began to wail, crying out” (86-7).
K.’s uncle eventually came to visit him, and upon seeing him, was visibly distraught. He asked Josef how he could’ve done what he did, and that he was in big trouble now that he was under arrest. K. remained calm, and was glad to hear that his uncle knew a prominent lawyer, Herr Huld, who could help him win his case. When they went to Dr. Huld’s house, a servant girl, Leni, informed them that the lawyer was very ill due to heart disease. They are called in, and Dr. Huld addresses K.’s uncle as Albert, and tells him that his heart is “‘worse than it’s ever been. I have a hard time breathing, I can’t sleep at all, and I’m getting weaker every day’” (98). K.’s uncle then shows his distaste for Leni, but Dr. Huld defended her, saying that she did a good job when it came to taking care of him. K.’s uncle tells the lawyer that his nephew, K., is the Chief Financial Officer of the bank, and that he needed his help. The lawyer, upon seeing K., seemed to be well, “propping himself up on one elbow, which must have been something of a strain in itself, and repeatedly tugging at a strand in the middle of his beard” (100). The lawyer then said that he will do everything he can in his power for K., as the case was too interesting to turn down, even for the sake of his health: “‘I’ll certainly try everything I possibly can; if I’m not equal to the task someone else can be brought in as well. To be honest, the affair interests me far too much for me to give up being involved in some other way. If my heart can’t take it, it will at least offer a worthy occasion for it to fail entirely’” (100).
When K. left the room after hearing a dish breaking, he saw Leni. Leni took him into another room, and revealed that she wanted him to come to her, seeing that she was on the shy side. While they were talking, K. noticed a strange painting: “It showed a man in a judge’s robe; he was sitting on a throne, its golden highlights gleaming forth from the painting in several places. The strange thing was that this judge wasn’t sitting in calm dignity, but instead had his left arm braced against the back and arm of the chair, while his right arm was completely free, his hand alone clutching the arm of the chair, as if he were about to spring up any moment in a violent and perhaps wrathful outburst to say something decisive or even pass judgement” (105). Leni then told K. that the painting was of an examining magistrate when he was young. She also noted that he was “‘ridiculously vain,’” like all the other members of the “justice” system (106). Leni then asked K. if he had a significant other, and when he said that he did, and showed her a photograph of her (named Elsa), Leni began slandering her. Leni revealed that she had a physical defect - two of her fingers shared skin that climbed almost to the top knuckles. K. kissed them in astonishment, but Leni saw this as a flirtatious attempt, and said that he had indeed traded Elsa for her. K. eventually leaves, but not before gaining the keys to access the building whenever he wants.
When K. is outside, he sees his uncle, who was angry and disappointed, seeing how he went “‘off to hide with a dirty little creature who obviously happens to be the lawyer’s mistress, and stay away for hours,’” which has damaged his case substantially (109). He then stated that he had been waiting in the rain for hours, though it didn't seem that long to K.. K. soon made use of his lawyer, and the mental toll of being on trial began to take its effect on him, causing him to become increasingly obsessed with it. Due to the vague nature of the accusation, he “considered whether it might not be advisable to prepare a written defense and submit it to the court. In it he would offer a brief overview of his life, and for each event of any particular importance, explain why he had acted as he did, whether in his present judgement this course of action deserved approval or censure, and what reasons he could advance for the one or the other” (111-2). K. then stated that Dr. Huld told him that “the proceedings are not public, they can be made public that the proceedings are not public, they can be made public if the court considers it necessary, but the Law does not insist upon it. As a result, the court records, and above all the writ of indictment, are not available to the accused and the defense lawyers, so that in general it’s not known … what the first petition should be directed against” (113). Even worse, due to the vague nature, it is possible to take decisive action only later, and even then there is no guarantee, as lawyers are strictly barred from actions such as attending an interrogation/cross examination: “In general defense lawyers are not allowed to be present at the interrogations and so must question the defendant about an interrogation immediately upon its conclusion … and deduce from the defendant’s quite hazy accounts whatever might be of use to the defense” (115). The corruption of the court is then further exposed as Kafka writes that the thing which matters the most is the lawyer’s personal contacts - the more influence his friends and colleagues have, the better. Of course, K. “had no doubt already learned from his own experience that the lowest level of the court system is not entirely perfect … some employees … can be bribed, which in turn produces breaches,” but now he knew that “the majority of lawyers push their way in, bribing people and pumping them for information; in fact in earlier days there were even cases of stolen files” (115). Despite the prominence of some lawyers, cases which have a positive result are extremely rare, and most of the victims of the Law are defeated sooner or later. Even if the best lawyer is hired, there is no guarantee of a positive outcome.
Dr. Huld, fortunately, had extremely good contacts, as there were only “one or two lawyers” who could match him when it came to them (116). After a while, K. becomes frustrated with the lawyer, as his answers are all convoluted, but he is informed of a painter, Titorelli, who knows the system very well. While that was happening, his job performance was suffering considerably, as he spent a lot of his time in a daze, not to mention he put his trial above his job obligations. The vice-president of the bank seemed to loathe him especially, and K. promised to give him what he deserves once times improve. K. went to the house of Titorelli, which was located in a poor, filthy town: “the buildings were darker, the narrow streets filled with filth floating slowly about on the melting snow … a disgusting, steaming yellow fluid pulled forth, before which a rat fled into the nearby sewer” (140). Even more disturbingly, “a small child was lying face down on the ground, crying, but it could hardly be heard above the noise coming from a sheet-metal shop beyond the entranceway” (140). K. went past the child and ascended the steps to Titorelli’s apartment, and bumped into a few girls who had been corrupted by the terrible environment they were in - a hunchbacked girl was lascivious and aggressive: “Neither her youth nor her deformity had prevented her early corruption. She didn't even smile, but instead stared boldly and invitingly at K.” (141). She then pulled up her skirt (which was already short) and K. proceeded into the room of Titorelli. Titorelli informed him that he loathed the depraved girls, since they were a constant nuisance to him as they were noisy and frequently trespassed on his property.
Titorelli eventually gives K. the answers he wanted to know, though they were very unpleasant: once a person is accused of a crime by the Law, there is no end to their dilemma. There are only three possibilities for acquittal. There is, to begin, actual acquittal, which is the most ideal kind, but Titorelli states that he doesn’t know of a single person who has gotten that result. Then there is apparent acquittal, in which a person is judged to be temporarily innocent. While they are free in a sense, it is only temporary, as an actual acquittal (which, again, has never been given to the knowledge of the painter) can only be rewarded by the highest court, which is completely inaccessible to most people. When it comes to another difference between actual and apparent acquittal, an actual acquittal ends with the destruction of the files of the accused (to encourage the notion that the court and the Law are infallible and never accuse or condemn innocent people), while an apparent acquittal sees the survival of the documents. The documents are then put away or sent to another court, and when they are reviewed by a court higher or lower than the one before, the defendant is accused again of the crime and will be arrested. Of course, it can take a long time for this to happen, but it will happen sooner or later, and when it does, the entire trial will begin all over again. The third option is protraction, and as the name suggests, in this stratagem the accused must attempt to keep his case at the lowest stage possible, and will spend a large amount of their time bribing the judges and other officials to make sure the case doesn’t worsen. In Titorelli’s own words, “‘Compared with apparent acquittal, protraction offers the advantage that the defendant’s future is less uncertain; he’s spared the shock of sudden arrests, and he doesn’t have to worry, at what may be precisely the worst time in terms of other circumstances, about taking on the stress and strain connected with securing an apparent acquittal’” (160). K. can be inferred to have become even more disheartened upon hearing from Titorelli that “‘The trial must be kept constantly spinning within the tight circle to which it’s artificially restricted. Of course that involves certain inconveniences for the defendant, which on the other hand you mustn’t imagine as all that bad … interrogations are quite brief … with certain judges you can even set up a long-term schedule together in advance; in essence it’s merely a matter of reporting to your judge from time to time, since you’re a defendant’” (161). K., upon hearing this dismal set of news, realizes the futility of resistance, and as a courtesy, purchased some paintings from Titorelli before leaving the area.
K. decided that a life centered around the trial wouldn’t be worth living, and went to Dr. Huld’s house to tell him that he doesn’t need a lawyer anymore - he just wants the trial to be over with. At the lawyer’s house, he meets a merchant named Block who had been accused five years ago but through protraction has kept his life as of yet. To be specific, he has done this by doing everything he could to flatter the court, attending all the questionings, and even went so far as to hire multiple lawyers to defend and make petitions for him. He then tells K. of the “great lawyers,” lawyers who could supposedly sway the trial to a large extent. However, like the high court, it is impossible to contact them, seeing how “‘They do defend some people, but it’s not possible to arrange that on one’s own, they only defend those they wish to defend’” (179). K. then proceeded to dismiss Dr. Huld, but not before being warned that he had many clients like K. who expressed their frustration at the lack of progress involving the trial, but only because of negligence on the side of the court - it was sometimes better to be in chains than to be free.
Soon, K. was assigned to accompany “An Italian business associate of major importance to the bank” around the city (199). K., being relatively experienced in Italian, expected to have a good time with the businessman, and he went to the cathedral to see him. When he went into the cathedral, a priest called his name, and proceeded to tell him the story of Before the Law. I will refrain from summarizing it here because I wrote a summary for it in my summary of The Country Doctor, so if you are interested, feel free to read it there. Nonetheless, K.’s opinions regarding the stories are challenged by the priest’s interpretation, and the priest’s opinion can be boiled down to: “‘You don’t have to consider everything true, you just have to consider it necessary’” (223). K., rightfully, remarked that it was depressing, for “‘Lies are made into a universal system’” (223). The priest then turned out to be a prison chaplain, telling K. that “‘The court wants nothing from you. It receives you when you come and dismisses you when you go’” (224).
On the evening of K.’s thirty first birthday - 9:00 PM - “two gentlemen entered K.’s lodgings. In frock coats, pale and fat, with top hats that seemed immovable” (225). K. was already well dressed when they entered, and though he expected different visitors, he knew what these two people were sent for, and he didn't resist, allowing himself to be led to the place of his execution: “They held their shoulders right behind his, didn't crook their arms, but instead wrapped them about the whole length of his, seizing K.’s hands below with a well-trained, practiced, and irresistible grip. K. walked along stiffly between them; now they formed such a close unit that had one of them been struck down they would all have fallen. It was a unit of the sort seldom formed except by lifeless matter” (226). Although K. resisted to some degree, he eventually accepted his fate, and the guards even let him choose where he wanted to walk. They eventually were “out of the city, which in this direction bordered on open fields with almost no transition. A small stone quarry, abandoned and desolate, lay beside a building which was still quite urban” (229). The two guards released their hold on K. and brought him to a “loose block of stone” (230). K. was then forced to lie on it (the stone resembled a sacrificial altar - K. is being sacrificed to honor the Law), and one of the guards took from his frock coat “a long, thin, double-edged butcher knife,” and offered it for the other guard to use (230). The other guard declined, and K. used the last moment of his life to look at the top of a building near the quarry. There he saw a light turning on, “the casements of a window flew open, a human figure, faint and insubstantial at that distance and height, leaned far out abruptly, and stretched both arms out even further. Who was it?” (230). K. then reminisced on the past, thinking of the things which could have happened but didn't due to mere chance: “Logic is no doubt unshakeable, but it can’t withstand a person who wants to live. Where was the judge he’d never seen? Where was the high court he’d never reached?” (231). One of the guards then stabbed K. in the heart and turned it to ensure its lethality. And “With failing sight K. saw how the men drew near his face, leaning cheek-to-cheek to observe the verdict. ‘Like a dog!’ he said; it seemed as though the shame was to outlive him” (231).
Personal thoughts:
The Trial by Franz Kafka is an outstanding read precisely because of its confusing and vague nature. The proceedings of the court can be read in a variety of ways, but one of the most common is that of the abuse of power - the portrait of the aggressive and angry judge, the depravity of children and young people, the brutal murder of K. for no apparent reason, the bribery and flattery done by lawyers, and the “information” which the law books contained all point to a highly dysfunctional, totalitarian, and harmful system which will not hesitate to devour anyone, even a respectable person like K.. Frighteningly, this book seems to predict Stalinism and the madness of other totalitarian regimes, as they had show trials, bogus charges, and executions of supposed “counterrevolutionaries.” What makes The Trial one of my favorite reads is that it can technically happen in real life, as none of the events described are so bizarre as to never have happened. I enjoy how Kafka included the short story Before the Law in this book, for it clearly illustrates a key theme of the text. I highly recommend The Trial to anyone interested in surrealism, totalitarianism, human nature, the relationship the individual has with society, and the effects of power on those who wield it.
Read the book:
Get the book: