basement with basement
Franz Kafka's novel of the castle is an allegory of the castle. Sokolov V.D.

Franz Kafka's novel of the castle is an allegory of the castle. Sokolov V.D.

Villagers

Headman's family

· The village headman is a friendly, "smooth-shaven fat man."

Mizzi - the headman's wife, "a quiet woman, more like a shadow."

Innkeeper family (tavern "At the bridge")

Hans - innkeeper, owner of the inn "At the bridge", a former groom.

Gardena - innkeeper (tavern "At the bridge"), Klamm's former lover.

Barnabas/Barnabas family

· Barnabas / Barnabas - a messenger.

Olga is the elder sister of Barnabas.

Amalia is the younger sister of Barnabas.

· father and mother

Other residents

Artur is K's new assistant.

Jeremiah - new assistant to K.

Frida - the bride of K., a barmaid in the tavern "Master's Compound", Klamm's mistress.

· The teacher is small, narrow-shouldered, holds himself straight, but does not make a funny impression. The little teacher had a very imposing appearance.

Gizza - teacher

· Lazeman - tanner.

· Otto Brunsvik - shoemaker, son-in-law of Lazemann.

Hans - fourth grade student, son of Otto Brunswick

· Gerstaker - a driver, "a short, lame man with a haggard, red, watery face."

· Schwarzer - the son of a junior castellan, who neglected the right to live in the Castle because of unrequited love for the village teacher. The young man had "the face of an actor, narrow eyes and thick eyebrows".

· Innkeeper (tavern "Master's Compound")

Residents of Count Westwest's Castle

· Klamm - head of the X office.

· Erlanger - one of the first secretaries of Klamm.

Mom - secretary of Klamm and Wallabene in the Village

Galater - an official who sent Jeremiah and Arthur to K.; "a very immobile man."

Fritz - junior castellan.

· Sordini - official, Italian, known in the Village as an unusually active person.

· Sortini - an official whose proposal was vehemently rejected by Amalia.

Burgel - the secretary of a certain Friedrich; "small, handsome gentleman."

Castle”, analysis of the novel by Franz Kafka

Franz Kafka's The Castle, written in 1922, is one of the most significant and enigmatic philosophical novels of the 20th century. In it, the writer raises an important theological problem of a person's path to God. Combining the literary features of modernism and existentialism, The Castle is a work that is largely metaphorical and even fantastic. The realities of life are present in it insofar as: the artistic space of the novel is limited by the Village and the Castle towering above it, artistic time changes irrationally and without explanation.

The location of the "Castle" cannot be inscribed in specific geographical realities, since it absorbs the whole world: the Castle in it is a prototype of the heavenly world, the Village is the earthly one. Throughout the novel, various characters emphasize that there is not much difference between the Village and the Castle, and this clearly shows one of the main provisions of the Christian dogma about the fusion and inseparability of earthly and heavenly life.

The duration of the "Castle" has no historical points of support. All that is known about him is that it is now winter and it will most likely last for an eternity, since the arrival of spring (according to Pepi, who temporarily replaces the barmaid Frida) is short-lived and often accompanied by snowfall. Winter in the novel is the author's perception of human life, immersed in cold, fatigue and constant snow obstacles.

The composition of the novel does not lend itself to any analysis due to the incompleteness and special plot development of The Castle. There are no sharp ups and downs in this work. The main character - K. - comes to the Village (is born) and stays there forever in order to find the way to the Castle (to God). The novel, like all human life, does not have a classical plot, development and climax. Rather, it is divided into semantic parts, representing different stages in the life of the protagonist.

In the beginning, K. pretends to be a surveyor and is surprised to learn that he is the surveyor. From the Castle, K. receives two assistants - Arthur and Jeremiah. In the novel, these characters are partly reminiscent of angels (guardian and "destroyer"), partly - children. K.'s immediate superior is Klamm, an important official from the Castle. Who is Klamm? What does he look like? What does it represent? What does he do? Nobody knows. Even Klamm's messenger - Barnabas - and he never directly saw this character. It is not surprising that K., like all the inhabitants of the Village, is irresistibly attracted to Klamm. The protagonist understands that it is he who will help him find his way to the Castle. In a sense, Klamm is God for the village population, except for the fact that a certain Count Westwest, who is mentioned only once - at the very beginning of the novel, is declared the head of the Castle.

As in any major work, The Castle has its own inserted story - the story of Olga, Barnabas's sister, about the misfortune that happened to her family. The story of the girl can be called the informational culmination of the novel, explaining to the reader the true relationship between the villagers and the castle officials. The first, as it should be for ordinary people, idolize the second, who are heavenly creatures (which ones: good or evil - everyone can decide for himself). It is customary in the Village to please the officials from the Castle, to fulfill all their whims. When Amalia (the younger sister of Barnabas and Olga) refuses to come to the hotel for a date with Sortini, the news instantly spreads around the district, and the girl's family finds herself in complete isolation - they stop working and communicating with them. The attempts of the father of the family to ask for forgiveness (begging) for his family end in a serious illness. Olga, who spends her nights with servants of officials, cannot even make herself remembered in the Castle. And only Barnabas, burning with sincere zeal to get to serve in the Castle, gets to the very first chancelleries (churches), where he sees petitioners (people), officials (clergy) and sometimes even Klamm (God) himself.

Franz Kafka. What associations does it evoke in you? I have unpleasant 🙂 Not the best books I've ever read. Fortunately, my acquaintance with Kafka began with the short story "Transformation", then for some reason I read "" and now I am completely disappointed in the author after the book "Castle". For the lazy, my video review is here:

I read the book in electronic form, I think it will not be difficult for you to download Kafka for free. If you haven't found it, here's a link to Litres:

Summary of the novel "Castle" from Wikipedia:

The protagonist of the novel, called only by the initial K., comes to the Village ruled by the Castle. To the son of the caretaker of the Castle, who is trying to put K. out of the hotel, he says that he was hired by the castle authorities as a land surveyor and his assistants will soon arrive. However, it turns out that entering the Castle without a special permit, which K. does not have, is prohibited, and certain Arthur and Jeremiah who arrived, who call themselves assistants, are completely unknown to K.

With the help of the messenger Barnabas and his sister Olga, K. gets to the hotel for the gentlemen from the Castle. There he seeks the favor of Frida, the barmaid and mistress of a high-ranking official Klamm. Frida leaves the place of the barmaid and becomes the bride of K.

K. visits the village headman. He says that after receiving an order from the office of the Castle to prepare for the arrival of K., he immediately sent an answer that the Village did not need a land surveyor, but, apparently, there was a mistake and his letter ended up in the wrong department, because of which the office did not learn that there was no need for a surveyor. Thus, K. cannot work in his specialty, and the headman offers him to take the place of a school watchman. K. is forced to agree.

K. tries to talk to Klamm and waits for a long time at the hotel, but he manages to leave unnoticed by K. Klamm's secretary invites K. to undergo interrogation, but K. refuses. Meanwhile, K. is fired from his place as a school watchman with a scandal, but he does not agree with the dismissal and remains, having fired both of his assistants. Barnabas' sister Olga tells K. the story of her family (her father lost his job and lost his reputation after her sister Amalia rejected an obscene proposal from one of the officials).

Frida is jealous of K. for Olga, she decides to return to work at the hotel and takes Jeremiah with her. Meanwhile, K. calls to his secretary Klamm Erlanger. He advises K. to facilitate the return of Frieda to the position of barmaid, because Klamm is used to her.

Pepi, who temporarily replaced Frida in the buffet, offers K. to live in the maid's room, with her and her two friends. The stableman Gerstaker offers K. a job in the stable, clearly hoping to get something from Erlanger with his help. Gerstaker brings K. to his house. This is where the manuscript ends.

The history of the creation of Kafka's novel "The Castle:

Kafka began work on the novel on January 22, 1922, the day he arrived at the resort of Spindleruv Mlyn. The first chapters of the novel were written in the first person and later redirected by the author. Kafka told his friend Max Brod that the hero of the novel K. will remain in the Village until his death, and, being dying, will receive a message from the Castle that he had previously been in the Village illegally, but now he is finally given permission to live and work in it. On September 11, 1922, Kafka in a letter to Brod announced that he was stopping work on the novel and was not going to return to it.

Despite the fact that Kafka bequeathed to destroy all his manuscripts, Brod did not, and in 1926 The Castle was first published by the publisher Kurt Wolf from Munich.

It seems that they were not burned in vain after all ... Oh well. Let's not gloat. Still, Kafka is considered a classic of world literature, and who am I here to talk about something? Yes, I do not pretend to be a critic, I just describe my feelings about the books I read. Kafka is not mine...

Reviews about the book “Castle”

Advantages:
Ambiguous characteristics of the characters, the ups and downs of the plot.
Flaws:
Not too easy to read.
I read several works by the writer Franz Kafka - these are the novels “The Metamorphosis”, “The Process” - Review: The Book “The Process” - Franz Kafka - A rather confusing, but most interesting work., “Nora” - Review: The Book “Nora” - Franz Kafka - A story that largely reflects the perception of life and the world around the author. and "Castle".
It happens that the works of one or another author differ so much from each other in style, lexical set, etc., that it is sometimes difficult to imagine that the work was written by the same author. But Kafka, in my opinion, is not the case at all. As for the novel “Transformation” and “Nora”, here one can still philosophize and argue about its similarity with other works of the writer, however, regarding “The Trial” and “The Castle”, I can say that despite the completely different plots of these two works of Kafka, It seemed to me that these works are very, very similar.
Firstly (in my opinion, this is the most important), and in both works the idea that the hero is not understood by others runs like a red thread. Whether they do not understand him intentionally and pretend, or not on purpose, in general, it does not matter. The fact remains that both the hero of The Trial, Joseph K., and the hero of The Castle (by the way, Kafka also called him K., without any clarification) are a black sheep among the people around them. By the way, if you think about the initials of both one and the second hero. then one might think that perhaps Kafka somehow correlated them with his personality - after all, the initials of the heroes coincide with the name of Kafka himself. After all, if you study the biography of the writer a little more, it becomes clear that he was somehow a stranger in the society around him.

Secondly, if you read the works carefully, you can see similar vocabulary with which the writer describes the action of novels, characterizes one or another hero. In no way do I want to belittle Kafka's merits as a writer. on the contrary, his unique style is felt in both works.

And finally, both works are unfinished. And by the way, fans of this writer know that Kafka himself was against the publication of The Castle, which, by the way, he did not finish. However, the novel was published anyway. Somehow this story reminded me of Nabokov's Laura and Her Original, because VV Nabokov was also against the publication of his work.
Returning to the "Castle", I can say that even if the rules of this site would allow revealing the plots of the works, then in this case it would still not give anything, because the "Castle", however, like the rest of the works of Franz Kafka, cannot be simply described plot. You could say that the plot is that one surveyor arrived at one place, the castle for work. Well, the rest cannot be conveyed in words, the work must be read, it must not only be read, but felt. The incomprehensibility of the hero by people around him, the ambiguity of various situations, the ambiguity of the actions of the heroes of the work, etc. - all this requires not just reading, and not even thoughtful reading, but I would even say study.

Much becomes clear when you realize that the main direction of all the writer's activity is modernism and the literature of the absurd.

Speaking about my experience of reading "The Castle", I can say that it was read somewhat harder than "Transformation" and "Process" and "Nora". If other works of the author were read, one might say in one breath, then with the “Castle” the situation was somewhat different. I can’t say that the author’s thoughts or the lexical set were more complicated, but the situation is actually quite interesting. For several days I read literally 5-10 pages, I didn’t have enough for more. And then somehow in 1 day I finished reading the work to the end. Magic of Kafka, not otherwise :)
Even if you do not have the time or desire to read Kafka, but you still decide to read it, your work will be rewarded. After all, you must admit, it would be nice to casually drop in some company that you read Kafka :) It seems to me that it even sounds somehow special!
Good luck with your reading of Kafka and not only, as well as the opportunity to find time to read books in general!

Artistic analysis of the novel from goldlit.ru

Franz Kafka's The Castle, written in 1922, is one of the most significant and enigmatic philosophical novels of the 20th century. In it, the writer raises an important theological problem of a person's path to God. Combining the literary features of modernism and existentialism, The Castle is a work that is largely metaphorical and even fantastic. The realities of life are present in it insofar as: the artistic space of the novel is limited by the Village and the Castle towering above it, artistic time changes irrationally and without explanation.

The location of the "Castle" cannot be inscribed in specific geographical realities, since it absorbs the whole world: the Castle in it is a prototype of the heavenly world, the Village is the earthly one. Throughout the novel, various characters emphasize that there is not much difference between the Village and the Castle, and this clearly shows one of the main provisions of the Christian dogma about the fusion and inseparability of earthly and heavenly life.

The duration of the "Castle" has no historical points of support. All that is known about him is that it is now winter and it will most likely last for an eternity, since the arrival of spring (according to Pepi, who temporarily replaces the barmaid Frida) is short-lived and often accompanied by snowfall. Winter in the novel is the author's perception of human life, immersed in cold, fatigue and constant snow obstacles.

The composition of the novel does not lend itself to any analysis due to the incompleteness and special plot development of The Castle. There are no sharp ups and downs in this work. The main character - K. - comes to the Village (is born) and stays there forever in order to find the way to the Castle (to God). The novel, like all human life, does not have a classical plot, development and climax. Rather, it is divided into semantic parts, representing different stages in the life of the protagonist.

In the beginning, K. pretends to be a surveyor and is surprised to learn that he is the surveyor. From the Castle, K. receives two assistants - Arthur and Jeremiah. In the novel, these characters are partly reminiscent of angels (guardian and "destroyer"), partly - children. K.'s immediate superior is Klamm, an important official from the Castle. Who is Klamm? What does he look like? What does it represent? What does he do? Nobody knows. Even Klamm's messenger - Barnabas - and he never directly saw this character. It is not surprising that K., like all the inhabitants of the Village, is irresistibly attracted to Klamm. The protagonist understands that it is he who will help him find his way to the Castle. In a sense, Klamm is God for the village population, except for the fact that a certain Count Westwest, who is mentioned only once - at the very beginning of the novel, is declared the head of the Castle.

As in any major work, The Castle has its own inserted story - the story of Olga, Barnabas's sister, about the misfortune that happened to her family. The story of the girl can be called the informational culmination of the novel, explaining to the reader the true relationship between the villagers and the castle officials. The first, as it should be for ordinary people, idolize the second, who are heavenly creatures (which ones: good or evil - everyone can decide for himself). It is customary in the Village to please the officials from the Castle, to fulfill all their whims. When Amalia (the younger sister of Barnabas and Olga) refuses to come to the hotel for a date with Sortini, the news instantly spreads around the district, and the girl's family finds herself in complete isolation - they stop working and communicating with them. The attempts of the father of the family to ask for forgiveness (begging) for his family end in a serious illness. Olga, who spends her nights with servants of officials, cannot even make herself remembered in the Castle. And only Barnabas, burning with sincere zeal to get to serve in the Castle, gets to the very first chancelleries (churches), where he sees petitioners (people), officials (clergy) and sometimes even Klamm (God) himself.

The love storyline in the novel is connected with the relationship between K. and Frida. The protagonist pays attention to her, having learned that she is Klamm's mistress. He is attracted to Frida for two reasons: she is good both as a means to achieve the goal (a personal meeting with Klamm), and as the personification of Klamm and the Castle. What drives Frida herself, who left a good position (life) and an influential lover (God) for the sake of a poor surveyor, is difficult to understand. One can only assume that the girl wanted to challenge society in order to become even more visible and beloved by Klamm upon returning to him (after atonement for sins).

You are not from the Castle, you are not from the Village. You are nothing.
Franz Kafka, The Castle

Franz Kafka's unfinished novel The Castle, recognized as one of the main books of the 20th century, remains a mystery to this day. Since its publication in 1926, a variety of interpretations have succeeded each other: from considering the conflict of the novel in a social key (the struggle of the individual against the bureaucratic apparatus that has set the teeth on edge) to psychoanalytic interpretations of the plot, which, according to a number of researchers, reflects Kafka's complex relationship with his father, brides and the surrounding world.

On a separate shelf is the novel by the existentialists, who saw in Kafka the forerunner, who for the first time spoke about the tragedy of being and the existential loneliness of man. To say that one of the interpretations is correct is to reduce the vast novel to a particularity. Thus, the French writer and philosopher Roger Garaudy wrote about Kafka's novels:

At the most, it can hint at a lack, an absence of something, and Kafka's parables, like some of Mallarme's or Reverdy's poems, are allegories about the absence of something.<…>. There is no possession, there is only being, being that requires the last breath, suffocation. His response to the assertion that it may have owned, but did not exist, was only a tremor and a beating of the heart.<…>. Incompleteness is his law.

All this is, in general, understandable. But there is another view of the novel, which considers the complex relationship of the hero K. with the Castle as a projection of the relationship of man with God. It is this interpretation that he considers in his amazing book Lessons in Reading. The Scribe's Kama Sutra » Literary critic, essayist and deep critic Alexander Genis. Why do we suggest reading it? Genis is convinced that the question of God is somehow present in every literary work, even if God himself is not in it. It is through this prism that he looks at Kafka's "Castle", helping us to look at the brilliant novel (and all literature) from a completely different angle. And it's interesting, I must tell you. So go ahead.

But if you can't write about God, you can read it. We can read it into every text and subtract it from any<…>. Such a tactic cannot be hindered even by the absence of God.

So, Franz Kafka, "The Castle" and the problem of God.

Talking about god

While reviewing Mr. Fitzpatrick's Thoughts on God, Chesterton remarked that it would be much more interesting to read God's Thoughts on Fitzpatrick.

It is difficult to argue with this, because there is nothing to write about God. After all, about Him, that one, with a capital letter, in essence, nothing is known: He is on the other side of being. Because God is eternal, He has no biography. Because He is everywhere, He has no home. Since He is one, He has no family (we will keep silent about the Son for now). Since God is obviously larger than our ideas about Him (not to mention experience), everything we know about the divine is human.

But if you can't write about God, you can read it. We can read it into every text and subtract it from any - as Salinger's heroes did:

They sometimes look for the creator in the most inconceivable and inappropriate places. For example, in radio advertising, in newspapers, in a damaged taxi meter. In a word, literally anywhere, but as if always with complete success.

Such a tactic cannot be hindered even by the absence of God. If there is no Him for the author, then we want to know why we will not rest until the book explains to us the gaping in the most interesting place. After all, literature, and indeed a person, has no more exciting occupation than to get out of himself and get to know the unknowable. Even without knowing anything about the otherworldly, we definitely use it. Like an ax under a ship's compass, it changes the route and abolishes maps. It is not surprising that, striving for inaccessible, and perhaps non-existent knowledge, we hope to find in books what we have not coped with in life.

In vain, of course. Everything that is possible has already been told to us, but those who know for sure always inspire doubts. It would seem that the easiest way to read about God is where it is supposed to be, but I have never been able to do it. At the university, I did the worst in scientific atheism, but only because the program did not have the Law of God. God, like sex, avoids a direct word, but each page, including the erotic one (“Song of Songs”), wins if it always speaks of Him in equivocal terms.

How Kafka did it. He created the canon of the agnostic, on which I have been building my doubts since the fifth grade. I remember the day my father returned with the loot, a plump black tome of stories and The Trial. In 1965, getting Kafka was more difficult than getting a ticket abroad. Although we didn't yet know they were the same thing, the aura of mystery and the halo of prohibition was awesome, and I gasped as my father swung his signature on page 17, which he explained was meant for a library stamp. Since then, he may not have revealed Kafka, but he certainly did not part with him. This fetish of the old - book - time was inherited to me, and now the volume stands next to the others.

Buying Kafka now is not a trick, the trick is always to figure it out. However, judging by how many books have been written about him, it is not so difficult. Like any parable, Kafka's text is fruitful for interpretation. One thing is said, another is meant. Difficulties begin with the fact that we do not quite understand not only the second, but also the first. As soon as we are convinced of the correctness of our interpretation, the author twists out of it.

Under Soviet rule, it was easier for the reader: “We were born,” as Bakhchanyan said, “to make Kafka come true.” I knew this aphorism long before I became friends with its author. Then everyone thought that Kafka wrote about us. It was the well-known world of a soulless office that demanded to follow the rules known only to it.

On the eve of the death of the USSR, I arrived in Moscow. Two Americans stood in line at the customs officer - a novice and an experienced one. The first one came too close to the window and was yelled at.

“Why,” he asked, “not draw a line on the floor so that you know where you can stand and where you can’t?”

“As long as this feature is in the head of officials,” said the second, “it is in their power to decide who is guilty and who is not.

Kafka put it this way: It is extremely painful when you are governed by laws that you do not know.

What we (and certainly I) did not understand was that Kafka did not consider the situation correctable, or even wrong. He did not rebel against the world, he wanted to understand what he was trying to tell him - life, death, illness, war and love: In the struggle of man with the world, you must be on the side of the world.. At first, in this duel, Kafka assigned himself the role of a second, but then he took the side of the enemy.

Only by accepting his choice are we ready to begin reading a book that tells as much about God as we can bear.

Lock, - Oden said, our Divine Comedy.

K. goes to the Village to be hired by the Duke of Westwest, who lives in the Castle. But, although he was hired, he never managed to start it. Everything else is the intrigues of K., who is trying to get closer to the Castle and ingratiate himself with him. In the process, he gets acquainted with the inhabitants of the Village and the employees of the Castle, to get into which neither the first nor the second helped him.

In the retelling, more noticeable than in the novel, is the absurdity of the enterprise. Describing the vicissitudes extremely accurately and in detail, Kafka omits the main thing - motives. We do not know why K. needs the Castle, nor why the Castle needs K. Their relationship is an initial given that cannot be disputed, so we are left to find out the details: who is K. and what is the Castle?

K. is a surveyor. Like Adam, he does not own the earth; like Faust, he measures it. A scientist and official, K. is above the villagers, their labors, worries and superstitions. K. is educated, intelligent, understanding, selfish, self-centered and pragmatic. He is overwhelmed by a career, people for him are pawns in the game, and K. goes to the goal - albeit unclear - without disdaining deceit, temptation, betrayal. K. is vain, arrogant and suspicious, he is like us, but he never likes himself an intellectual.

Worse, we see the Castle through his eyes and know as much as he knows. And this is clearly not enough. You are appallingly ignorant of our affairs here,- they tell him in the Village, because K. describes the Castle in the only system of concepts available to him. Having adopted Christianity, European pagans could not recognize God as anyone other than a king. Therefore, they even painted Christ in royal robes on the cross. K. is the hero of our time, therefore he depicts the highest power as a bureaucratic apparatus.

No wonder the Castle is disgusting. But if he is hostile to man, why does no one but K. complain? And why does he want it so much? Unlike K., the Village does not ask the Castle questions. She knows what is not given to him, and this knowledge cannot be transferred. You can only come to him yourself. But if there are many roads from the Castle to the Village, then there is not a single one to the Castle: The more closely K. peered into it, the less he saw, and the deeper everything sank into darkness.

The castle is, of course, Heaven. More precisely, like in Dante, the whole zone of the supernatural, otherworldly, metaphysical. Since we can understand the unearthly only by analogy with the human, Kafka supplies the highest power with a hierarchy. Kafka wrote it out with that scrupulous thoroughness that so amused his friends when the author read chapters of the novel to them. Their laughter did not offend Kafka at all.

“His eyes were smiling,” recalled Felix Welch, a close friend of the writer, “humor permeated his speech. He was felt in all his remarks, in all judgments.

We are not accustomed to considering Kafka's books funny, but other readers, such as Thomas Mann, have read them that way. In a certain sense, the "Castle" is truly divine comedy full of satire and self-irony. Kafka laughs at himself, at us, at K., who is able to describe the higher reality only through the lower and familiar.

The service ladder in the "Castle" begins with obedient lay people, among whom the righteous-rescuers from the fire department stand out. Then come the officials' servants, whom we call priests. Dividing life between the Castle and the Village, they behave differently upstairs than downstairs, because the laws of the Castle in the Village no longer apply. Above the servants is an endless succession of angel officials, among whom there are many fallen ones - too often they limp, as befits demons.

The pyramid is crowned by God, but Kafka mentions Him only on the first page of the novel. I don't see the Earl of Westwest again. And, as the most radical – Nietzschean – interpretation of the novel says, it is clear why: God is dead. Therefore, the Castle, as K. first saw it, did not make itself felt by the slightest glimmer of light. That's why flocks of crows circled over the tower. Therefore the Castle none of the visitors like, and the locals live poorly, sadly, in the snow.

The death of God, however, did not stop the activity of his apparatus. The castle is like the city of St. Petersburg in the middle of the Leningrad region: the former government has died, but this news has not yet reached the provinces from the capital. And yes, it's hard to accept. God cannot die. He can turn away, withdraw, be silent, limiting himself, as the Enlightenment persuaded Him, to creation, and leave its consequences to the mercy of our difficult fate. We do not know why this happened, but Kafka knows and explains the trouble.

The causes of the disaster are revealed by an inserted, from K.'s point of view, but central to the history of the Village episode with Amalia. She rejected the Castle's claim to her honor and insulted the messenger who brought her the good news. Refusing to be connected with the Castle, Amalia rejected the share of the Virgin Mary, did not accept her martyr's fate, did not submit to the highest plan of the Castle about the Village, and thus stopped the divine history, depriving her of a key event. Amalia's terrible punishment was the silence of the Castle and the revenge of the villagers who were left without grace.

K., preoccupied with his trade with the Castle, cannot appreciate the tragedy of the world, which missed the chance of salvation. But Kafka, acutely sensing the depth of our fall, considered it a retribution for an unsacrifice.

Probably we - he said - suicidal thoughts that are born in the head of God.

Is it possible to learn more about God from Kafka than we knew before we read it?

Certainly! But not because Kafka multiplies theological hypotheses, changes established interpretations, renews the theological language and gives actual names and nicknames to the eternal. The main thing in Kafka is the provocation of truth. He questions her, hoping to wrest as much truth from the world as it can reveal to him.

You stroke the world - he said to the young writer, instead of grabbing it.

Completely pointless book. I do not understand many of the oohs-ahs - the rest of the readers. Yes, it seems that you are not reading a book, but seeing someone else's dream, but the author's ridicule of the entire bureaucratic system of power is understandable, and stunted humor slips in places. But, forgive me of course, the book is deadly boring, even taking into account the above listed advantages. A flimsy plot, cumbersome dialogues - by the end of which, you forget the beginning, and the final chord of the action ... Oops, but he's gone! The manuscript is poorly finished. Of course, fans of this writer, in unison, let's yell that it is not necessary here. Perhaps it's for the best, otherwise the book stretched on for God knows how long, and the number of people who read it - NOT fans of Kafka, would be reduced by half.

Rating: 1

In short, this is a different book.

Starting to read, you need to understand that everything written there happens as if in a foggy dream, and the further, the more the text sinks into a deep failure of semi-delusion. Maybe the near death and illness of the author, the medications taken, who knows, had an effect. The style is sustained and sustained to the last line. No need to look for reality, no need to take it literally, no need to delve into the dialogues, everything that is there is embedded in the interline (which is typical of Kafka's style). The castle draws in like a swamp drowning in a quagmire, it seems that you are trying to get out, but you understand that it is useless. And most importantly, after reading, it pulls back to this enveloping and clouding state of the brain.

The fact that there is no end ... so after all, dreams tend to be interrupted unexpectedly. When did you see your dream to its logical end!? So with this, everything is even correct, it was not necessary in a different way.

You can try for a long time to understand what the author meant, how many autobiographical plots are included in the text, how many veiled thoughts about religion are here ... all this has a place to be. The author certainly felt his approach to the gates of heaven, hence his thinking "out loud".

So I consider the most reliable comparison of the Castle with the inaccessible paradise promised for earthly suffering. Officials with angels and demons, ghostly invisible intermediaries between this and this worlds. Villagers with God-fearing people blind to reality. They live their lives, playing their roles dutifully, because it is necessary, it never occurs to anyone to think, but who actually needs it.

The castle, this is something that everyone aspires to know nothing about it for sure, like here he is, stretch out his hand, but if there is something inside or is it just a wall erected by the people themselves, shrouded in myths and intimidating tales, entwined with mystery and a forgotten history and how and with whom it all began, but in fact there is nothing inside. Is there a Count (God) whom no one has ever seen, no one has told him what he does and what he does. Does the Count exist with his heavenly office at all. Everyone considers the Count and the Castle to be great and holy a priori, just like that, because otherwise it’s a sin and thinking otherwise you will be punished, but no one knows how. The gray mass of the intimidated, narrow-minded village people does not understand the attempts of K. (Kafka) to find out the meaning of the established rules, to talk with the officials, to get into the Castle alive, to see the office and get to the bottom of the meaning. Maybe because it doesn't exist...

Pysy. If you liked the book, be sure to watch "Giorgino" with Mylene Farmer, an excellent film, although not based on a book, it is inspired a lot and there is a similarity in sensations.

Score: 10

No other book in my life has ever made me feel like this. Depression after the "Castle" lasted 3 months.

I saw in this work the bureaucratization not so much of society as of the world order in general. You will get everything you wanted, but when you no longer need it. And the Forces that govern this world cannot be reached. Because they are too far from a person, and a person, an insect, is indifferent to them. Maybe he was in that state then, I don't remember. But that's exactly what I felt. Complete hopelessness, hopeless darkness, resistance is useless.

I love Kafka madly, but I don't want to re-read it. Once was enough.

I discovered a work similar in spirit and structure - "Invitation to the Execution" by Nabokov. Also deep feelings wrapped in surrealism. The bottom line: just achieved something, and it is taken away from you, everything develops from bad to worse, and nothing good shines for you.

Score: 10

The castle is an image of an impregnable, exalted stronghold above the rest of the world. For those who live in the lands adjacent to the castle, this foggy fortress is the center of the universe, a place where people who are powerful by definition, regardless of their position in it, live. Of course, the difference between a high official and an assistant castellan is obvious, and yet each of them is powerful only because he has the right to be in the territory forbidden to mere mortals. To a stranger from foreign lands, this state of affairs seems incomprehensible and absurd, but a stranger for and for the villagers is no one, and for the office of the castle - in general, a mistake. Kafka exaggerates the image of the castle, allowing the reader to plunge into an alien world, unlike the real one, but nevertheless being its reflection. Village - office - castle. It seems that quite a bit, but at the same time, a metaphorical image of the relationship between the people and the authorities is born. Bringing reality to the absurd in order to show the wrong side - this is Kafka's method, which works more than perfectly.

First of all, the reader will be struck by the original style. Kafka is a writer who develops a topic through dialogues, lengthy discussions and arguments. From this, the book may seem boring to people who are used to reading about the actions of the characters, because there are almost none here, and if there are, then this is just an excuse to start a pretty dialogue of about ten or twenty pages. Moreover, Kafka often repeats and writes about the same thing in several formulations, which sometimes pleases, but sometimes annoys, but invariably makes you remember what exactly was discussed and not forget about the problems that worry the characters for a long time. All together it turns into a kind of poetry, where one thought follows another, alternating and turning into something new.

Heroes of Kafka are definitely successful. They have something to say, and this "say" takes up the lion's share of the novel. And in each dialogue, K., the main character, struggles with the established system. The book takes place in verbal duels, revealing new details and explaining oddities. Kafka is not as absurd as it seems at first glance, maybe he builds an unusual world for us, but nevertheless, all relationships, whether it's Frida's windy love, or Barnabas' dog devotion, or an unacceptable attitude from the villagers, or simplicity and stupidity assistants, all this will receive logical explanations and will not remain just an assumption. Special mention also deserves Klamm, the man who was discussed throughout the story, who was the subject of every dispute, and whom no one ever saw, except for one silhouette in the keyhole, and even then it is not certain that it was him. .

The struggle leads the hero into a vicious circle, one success is replaced by disappointment, and the next attempt may not be an attempt at all. It is useless to talk about the plot, you can only enjoy it and follow these endless attempts and dialogues, the eternal struggle for a place in the sun and the choice of method, everyone has to build on their own, weave a complex intrigue, gathering attention around themselves, go through the gap without retreating a single step. step or just sit and wait for someone to pay attention to you. Until the end. Unfortunately the ending is tragic, but it's not about the heroes. Kafka died of tuberculosis in 1924, without finishing any of his three novels, and let him guess the outcome of the struggle of the protagonist of The Castle, let the climax pass, and the writer told Max Brod about further events, after all, no one will say better the poet himself!

Bottom line: a work for an amateur, if you are not scared off by dialogues from monologues for several pages and some lengthiness, then reading will turn into a pleasure that is hard to refuse.

Score: 9

"The Castle" is a novel by Franz Kafka, which tells about a hero named K., who, for unspecified reasons, wants to enter a castle on a mountain, near a village, with settlers who are very unusual in terms of behavior and views.

It should be noted right away that it is not known how the novel will end, since Kafka cut him off in mid-sentence, but, focusing on the other works of the writer, it can be assumed that K. would never have reached the castle. It would be entirely in the spirit of the author to bring disappointment or death to the protagonist, although, in fairness, it should be noted that the hero here is a very bright personality, with a strong character and an ironically haughty look at others, which distinguishes him from other characters in other works of the great prazhets. And although this is not the strongest argument, but still such exclusivity, perhaps, could serve as a pretext for a non-standard ending. And who knows if this discrepancy was the reason for the brokenness of the novel - what if, with its originality, it simply did not fit into the formula typical for the rest of the work.

To give an idea of what happens in the novel, a few words about the plot. The protagonist wanders around the village, trying to find a reason to look into the settlement towering on the mountain, called the rest of the "castle". Some semi-legendary people live in this attractive place for K.. On the one hand, this is just a government, on the other, something more, overgrown with rumors, fueled by human reverence. This topic is well outlined, although it is not central, as, for example, in the “Autumn of the Patriarch” by G.G. Marquez. People of a primitive warehouse, of course, see in the "Castle" only a bunch of "power - society", but Kafka almost always has a deeper one, and here we are not talking about metaphorizing objective phenomena, but about expressing the author's vision of reality. In other words, from the point of view of the layman, the characters of the work do not have names. The government of the village here is not a religion, not a state, not rulers and not officials. And at the same time, they are a conglomeration of all this - plus something more, intangible for those who are blind to the author's worldview.

What does the author illustrate, and what happens in the novel? K. goes into houses, communicates with people, establishes contacts and finds out details about those who live on the top of the mountain. Here the author reflects various spheres of society, ridiculing both bureaucracy and groveling before the authorities, and much more. But much more interesting for the reader are the settlers themselves, whose reactions, actions and words are so unlike the usual for the normal course of events. In The Castle, everything is so unusually exaggerated and hyperbolized that it turns out not just a semblance of a dream or delirium, but a whole independent world with other laws, but laws that are not spontaneous, but flow according to their own cause-and-effect mechanisms. And here is the unique charm of this novel. Getting involved in the life of this extraordinary society, the reader spends time with interest, which distinguishes this work from the same monotonous "Process".

The plot has amazing twists and turns. They are unpredictable, and their absurdity is explained in terms of logic over time. It turns out everything is very thought out, worked out and interconnected. The novel now and then turns inside out, swapping black and white, completely destroying any attempts to predict the development of events and the motives of the characters. This reflects Kafka's amazing manner of seeing in the ordinary - exceptional, and not just one thing, but an unexpected layering. Metaphorically, it can be represented as follows: a chest with a treasure is suddenly discovered under a pile of garbage, but all the gold turns out to be fake, however, as it soon turns out, the chest itself is of particular value, but it will not be possible to sell it, because ... etc. etc., the novel again and again will wrap up seemingly exhausted situations with new facets, striving with their diversity to some kind of almost perfectly spherical form.

Not to mention the dialogues. This is a separate advantage of the "Castle". Despite their verbosity, the replicas of the characters sound charmingly convincing and realistic.

In this regard, one can only regret that this novel remained unfinished, because the manner and style of expression found in it are a really advantageous way for Kafka to create large works.

Score: 9

The absurdity in the "Castle" rests, for the most part, on the attitude of people and on their understanding, in fact, of the Castle and the officials who live in it. The first pages are presented to us as something completely unnatural, but as you read, you become imbued with the worldview of the villagers, and everything becomes almost logical. But not to such an extent as to say: yes, this could well happen. But in the world - it is improbable. What about in the human soul?

Kafka is certainly one of the elephants on which the multi-layered planet of modernism rests. But, as for me, he is more accessible than, for example, Joyce, more interesting, specific and, as far as this fashionable word fits this review, atmospheric. His work is like some kind of exotic - extremely rare, but, although a little alien, nevertheless, intriguing and, somewhere in the depths - even close. And in modernism it is the only way - the alien may well turn out to be close. No one will ever get an unambiguous understanding.

K.'s actions, his adventures, events can be perceived from different points of view. He has an interesting character, although we often expect completely different behavior from him. And, more importantly, we can observe a subtle psychological game - within the world created by Kafka, its own psychology also operates, on the basis of which the familiar one, ours, is perceived. But psychology is a superficial element!

Actually, the novel (unfortunately, not finished) made a tremendous impression on me. There are many smart words about him, but is it worth it? I don’t know - as for me, Kafka is only worth reading, and if you analyze it, then not directly, with your mind, but somehow subconsciously, first of all, just enjoying reading.

Score: 9

An amazing novel - a kaleidoscope of horror, absurdity, comedy (black comedy), satire. The novel is both difficult and easy, at the same time, in its reading. The novel is difficult with curls of its absurdity, weaves of intrigue and nuances, little riddles and dead-end exits from them. But at the same time, it is easy, because all situations are familiar to an ordinary citizen of any country who is faced with a clear and direct contact with the bureaucratic apparatus of the state.

The novel is civil, and reflects all the irony of the everyday affairs of a citizen, toiling in the ups and downs and labyrinths of corridors and offices. Smile and sadness, grief and annoyance - makes the reader experience all the "opportunities" of the hero's misadventures. So in the end, the novel is amazing, and it needs to be read in order to understand and see the whole world with clear eyes, and not through the prism of rose-colored glasses.

Score: 10

Have you been abandoned in an unfamiliar corner of the earth without repaying the promise? Did the bureaucratic system eat you up, did it bite your bones, did the fibers of your meat remain on its teeth - when there was nothing left for you but the hope of protection? Kafka described too accurately what will happen to a little man when the system designed to protect him suddenly does not even deserve a glance. The moment when she doesn't look back at him is when she's blank. Endless bureaus, piles of papers, apathy - not carelessness - in relation to human life; the influence of this cold, arrogant apparatus on the life of society, views, ambitions - all this can be faced by any person now, not only K., who was not the first to try this path, and he will not be the last to fall.

Yes, K. is the only creature that the reader will have to believe, because only those who arrive from the outside can see where the non-ideal mechanism, due to its flaws, holes, entails human delusion, and then faith in the inviolability of power, obedience to its silence.

Kafka knew where to cut. He knew that with the years of his assertion, his reflection of the relationship between man and power would arise in life, that he pointed to this - perhaps an intermediate, but - result. He probably saw it already then - working in insurance companies, as a small employee with a doctorate in law. He felt the approach of the outcome, when the government, its system will become higher than the human dignity that it is designed to protect.

"Castle" - this is a novel that is difficult to relate to in any way. It is hard to read, and at times it seems that you never bother him, that there is no rational grain in the actions, and you follow the text, it is difficult to wander further and further into the water, moving away from the shore - it is harder to walk, the stronghold is not visible in front, but you already feel the cold, which is not so easy to get rid of, it will remain with you, even if you leave everything halfway. Put the book aside and you still feel it, intentness and absurdity do not disappear, these images dance around you, they still hate you because you are different, everyone is surprised at your stupidity, absurdity.

And I must say that you will have to look for answers without resorting to the author's explanations. If you want to get them immediately after reading the last pages - better leave it. To the general surrealism, one must certainly add the fact that the novel is not finished, most likely by a whole third. "Castle" was supposed to be a large-scale canvas. It is enough to look at how much storylines remained behind the scenes, how many unrealized opportunities the phrase "This is where the manuscript ends" left. Kafka should not be blamed for this, he does not scold you, he does not try to confuse you, he did not ask you to burn the manuscript out of a good life. Do not be deceived, Franz only knew that he simply would not have time to complete his oppressive picture of a man against the backdrop of an overwhelming mechanism of power.

Score: 10

I continue my dosed acquaintance with the work of Kafka. I had previously read "The Trial" - and it seemed quite burdensome, completely uninteresting. With the "Castle" things were better for me.

For all the severity of the story, through multi-page monologues and long chapters in a couple of paragraphs of which you just had to wade through, it was addictive and did not want to let go. There is something attractive about all this. But what? Trying to judge sensibly, I understand that there are no original ideas, no intriguing plot, no bright characters in the usual sense in this novel. It attracts the absurdity of what is happening, the grotesque, sometimes the reader's misunderstanding of what is happening at all. And the atmosphere of some kind of insecurity, depression, tightness. It's like the walls are pressing on you.

I don’t want to talk about how skillfully the author showed the bureaucratic system in its extreme manifestation. And before comprehending something more, I, probably, have not grown up and can only speculate. Therefore, for me, Kafka's work is attractive primarily on a subconscious level.

Score: 7

I finished reading Kafka's "Castle" to the words "This is where the manuscript ends." Unexpected setup. But now I can rightly use the phrase "Kafkaesque motives" to denote the highest degree of bureaucratization of society. Claims to the text, in addition to the fact that the novel is not finished and even all the main plots are not indicated, are the following:

It is not clear why K. was so eager to enter the castle. Frida told him “Let's leave here and live a normal life somewhere else” - but no, the stubborn K. continues to peck at closed doors and look for ways to communicate with officials. Rave. Thus, the main motive of GG is not clear.

It is difficult to read, not even because of the turbidity, but because of the rare division of the monolith into paragraphs. But in general, of course, if you live in a low blue house, squeezed between others of the same kind (only of different colors) on the Golden Lane in Prague, something else will happen to you - in general, the tightness of life inevitably spilled over into the tightness of the text.

In general, the theme of the little man in the fight against bureaucrats immediately reminded me of the school curriculum in literature and our classics. There was no desire to read.

Score: 6

Difficult to read and understand. By and large, this is something like a hologram; whether there is any meaning in the novel, whether there is none - it all depends on what angle to consider. In my opinion, the novel shows, albeit slightly painful, ugly, but because of this even more truthful relationship “man-power”. Moreover, this power is so stupid (both in the literal sense and in its construction) that you are amazed. At the same time, she is omnipotent. The castle is that power - one cannot get into it, one cannot become a part of it, and therefore everyone who belongs to it, even formally, acquires seemingly inhuman properties and some kind of Volond power over the minds. People from the village literally worship people from the Castle and any of their even unspoken desires is a pretext for them to act. And this connection takes on the most perverse forms and consequences (as Frida from an old, ugly maid turns into a beauty in the eyes of the hero, since Klamm slept with her). And those who dared to resist (like Amalia of Barnabas) do not even have pity for those. And the authorities are so divided with ordinary people that even the sight of ordinary people is unbearable even for some castle secretary. In the Castle itself, a hellish bureaucratic mess is going on, from which a normal person will go crazy. And in this paperwork, destinies are decided (like the case of a land surveyor - a small piece of paper, perhaps the one that was torn by the bellboys in the hotel in order to finish work early) and the servants of the masters become the main ones, in fact, solving all matters as they please. Complete bureaucratic chaos. And the struggle of the protagonist... What is he fighting for? Want to change something? No, all his struggle is in order to get into the castle himself, thereby gaining power over ordinary people. And all this taken together is overflowing with delirium, painful and impossible, but the worst thing is that all this actually exists - here, now - exists and will exist, probably forever. And those who do not believe - damn it! Turn on the TV and watch carefully!

Reading a novel is not so much difficult as boring. But here I am aware that this may be due to the fact that I read the novel after watching the film of the same name, and I knew and remembered all the plot moves. And so there is some kind of intrigue (who is this K? It’s not a land surveyor for sure), but because of the huge paragraphs and frequent repetitions, it would seem that one and the same thought cannot be restrained from yawning. In general, because of this, I don’t know, but the whole novel resembles some kind of half-dream. Perhaps this is the author's idea, and everything is specially shown in such a half-sleep state, as if the dormant brain analyzes everything seen and gives out the truth in the form of a grotesque dream. The last few chapters become completely unbearable to read, everything is too long (a conversation with Burgel and a conversation with Pepi). And the romance ends... O.K., April 24, 2017

Another, reverse, facet of the same nightmare that was in Alice in Wonderland. A normal person who has fallen into a world in which the laws of physics, logic and society do not apply. Only if there the space around the heroine changed unpredictably, then here it predictably does not change. A straight path that turns into a vicious circle; you scream, but no sound is heard; you run, but you cannot move; to any logical thought, they sympathetically pat you on the head and say that you are a little fool and do not understand anything.

And I cannot, do not want and have no right to talk about deep philosophical implications. Because the form itself - a nightmare - frightened me so much that I was the least likely to think about interpretation. The only desire was to wake up sooner.

There is no doubt that in the end K. will get the coveted piece of paper confirming his authority. But only by this time he will fully adapt to life in the village and in the courtyard of the Castle, lose his personality and become a different person. It has already begun to change along the way.

Score: 10

My daughter introduced me to an interesting analysis of Kafka's work by a Jewish literary critic. I myself have never considered Kafka's writings in this aspect. “Trial” is an allusion to the Last Judgment, “America” is our life in the real world, “Castle” is the wanderings of our souls in the world after death, “In a penal colony” is one of the circles of Hell, a traveler jumps into a boat to sail away from him along some Dante's river. It is very typical for Jewish criticism in general to correlate well-known stories with parables and Old Testament traditions. (In an Israeli literary magazine, I read that the story of Robinson is a paraphrase of the legend about Jonah in the belly of a whale. 1 - Robinson violated the taboo, disobeyed his father, for which he was punished by isolation on the island, 2 - having been in the belly of a whale, Jonah returned to Robinson left the island and ended up in his homeland. My mother noted that he sailed with the aim of engaging in the slave trade, and was punished precisely for this.) Be that as it may, for any plot, Jewish criticism offers a midrash - an interpretation that allows one to deduce from the text halakha, the law that corresponds to the spirit of the Old Testament. Thomas Mann wrote about the metaphysical search for God, allegorically represented in Kafka's work, but it seems to me that it is rather problematic to link Franz's work with the Jewish religious tradition. It is known that the service and education of the writer were secular, he wrote in German, spoke Czech, and practically did not know the language of his people. He became interested in traditional Jewish culture shortly before his death. Man is a set of complexes, Kafka is interesting in that he realizes these complexes and voices them. Therefore, I am impressed by the analysis of his works, which is close to psychoanalysis, and not to the search for echoes of Talmudic images and plots in the literature of the 20th century.

Rating: no

I read it three times.

The first time - in high school, in ancient Soviet times. It was fashionable then to read such books, it was prestigious. At that time, I didn’t understand anything, there was a slight regret about “... either everyone is lying about the book, or I’m stupid, however ...”. But - in hindsight already, on mature reflection - I can say for sure: to read such books (and Kafka in general) when the soul doesn’t ask for anything and doesn’t really expect anything - it’s pointless and stupid, it’s a pure waste of time.

The second time - at the end of the last century, at the suggestion of one of the then political loudmouths: "... everything that happens in our country, with all of us, is pure Kafkaism ...". Then I realized that the screamers were right. Understood and felt. But ... somehow detached, without much mental anguish, at the level of a certain fact or statement. I well remember my surprise at a certain “artificiality” of the situation: “... why are they rushing around with this Kafka ..., well - absurdism, well - the philosophy of fear, well - yes, original, probably, maybe even beautiful in terms of an intellectual certain, but ... yell something like that - what?

The third time - right after "Snail on the slope". Because - even while reading this "Snail ..." I realized that there is a certain resonance, that the motives are painfully consonant, that the motives are almost identical. And only THEN - when the soul fell ill not with the acute pain of rebellion or indifference, but with a severe itch of empathy, understanding and belonging - only then it became clear WHAT this book is ABOUT. It is for altered states of consciousness, which are already a fact. It cannot be a means for these changes. And understanding is possible only after the fact, like a reflection in a mirror, when the very process of “peeping into the mirror” is so interesting that it gives the most intellectual pleasure. Outside of these frameworks, the book is about nothing.

Score: 8

Franz Kafka is one of the outstanding German-speaking writers of the 20th century. The Castle is the book that made him world famous. Like many of the writer's works, the novel is saturated with absurdism, anxiety and fear of the outside world. Let's talk about this non-trivial creation in more detail.

About the work

Kafka began writing The Castle in 1922, but that same year he decided to stop working on it. The work remained unfinished, in this form it was published in 1926.

In a letter to his friend Max Brod, Kafka wrote that he had deliberately given up writing the book and no longer intended to continue it. In addition, he asked a friend to destroy all draft notes after his death. But Brod did not fulfill his friend's last wish and kept the manuscript.

Franz Kafka, "The Castle": a summary. Welcome to the absurd!

The protagonist is a young man about thirty years old named K. On a late winter evening, he arrives in the Village and stops at an inn. K. goes to bed, but in the middle of the night he is awakened by Schwarzer, the son of the caretaker of the Castle. The boy says that no one without the permission of the count can not live in his possessions, which include the Village. The hero explains that he is a surveyor and arrived here at the invitation of the count. Schwartz calls the Castle, where they confirm the guest's words, and also promise to keep him at bay.

Leaves his hero Kafka in absolute loneliness. "The Castle" (the content of which is presented here) plunges the reader into an absurd reality that cannot be resisted.

In the morning K. decides to go to the Castle. But the main road does not lead to the goal, but turns to the side. The hero has to go back. “Assistants” are already waiting for him, who are completely unaware of the work of land surveyors. They report that the Castle can only be entered with permission. K. begins to call and demand that he be given permission. But the voice on the phone replies that he is denied this forever.

Guest from the Castle

In his works, Kafka conveys his worldview. "Castle" (a brief summary is proof of this) is riddled with gloom and hopelessness. Man is given the most insignificant place in it, he is powerless and defenseless.

The messenger Barnabas appears, distinguished from other local residents by openness and sincerity, and conveys a message from the Castle to K. It says that K. was hired, and the headman of the Village is appointed as his chief. The hero decides to go to work and stay away from officials. Over time, he will be able to become “his own” among the peasants and earn the favor of the count.

Barnabas and his sister Olga help K. to get into the hotel, where the gentlemen who come to the Village from the Castle stay. It is forbidden for strangers to sleep here, and the place for K. is only in the buffet. This time, the inn was visited by the official Klamm, whom everyone in the Village has heard of, but no one has ever seen him.

Gives as assistants to his hero the same disenfranchised allies, like himself, Franz Kafka. "Castle" (a brief summary will help to get a general impression of the work) describes the clash of powerless, but reasonable people, with representatives of the authorities, whose actions are completely meaningless.

An important person in the hotel is the barmaid Frida. This is a very sad and nondescript girl with a "pathetic little body." But in her eyes, K. read superiority and the ability to settle any difficult issues. Frida shows K. Klamm through a hidden peephole. The official turns out to be a clumsy fat gentleman with sagging cheeks. The girl is the mistress of this man, therefore she has a great influence in the Village. K. admires Frida's willpower and invites her to become his mistress. The barmaid agrees, they spend the night together. In the morning, Klamm calls Frieda demandingly, but she replies that she is busy as a surveyor.

Surveyor not needed

Even love is given a corrupt and absurd character by Kafka (The Castle). The summary illustrates this perfectly. The next night, K. spends at the inn with Frida, almost in the same bed, along with assistants who cannot be got rid of. The hero decides to marry Frieda, but first he wants the girl to let him talk to Klamm. But the barmaid and the innkeeper tell K. that this is impossible. Klamm, a man from the Castle, will not talk to a simple surveyor who is an empty place. The hostess is very sorry that Fritz preferred the "blind mole" to the "eagle".

Gardena tells K. that about 20 years ago, Klamm called her to him several times. Since then, the Hostess has been keeping the handkerchief and bonnet given to him, as well as a photo of the courier who invited her to the first meeting. With the knowledge of Klamm Garden, she got married, and for the first years she talked with her husband only about the official. K. for the first time meets such a close interweaving of personal and official life.

The hero learns from the elder that the news of the surveyor's arrival was received by him many years ago. At the same time, the headman sent to the Castle and informed that no one in the Village needed a land surveyor. Probably, the answer got to another department, but we can’t talk about this mistake, since there are no mistakes in the office. Later, the control authority admitted the oversight, and one of the officials fell ill. And shortly before the arrival of K. finally came the order to refuse to hire a surveyor. The appearance of the hero brought to naught the many years of work of officials. But the document cannot be found.

Elusive Klamm

While serving as an official himself, he saw the absurdity of Kafka's bureaucracy. The castle (the summary presented here describes it in some detail) becomes the image of a merciless and senseless clerical authority.

Frieda forces K. to take a job as a school watchman, although the teacher tells him that the Village needs the watchman just as much as the land surveyor. The hero and Frieda have nowhere to live, and they temporarily settle in a classroom.

K. goes to the hotel to meet Klamm. Pepi, Frida's successor, tells you where the official can be found. The hero waits for him for a long time in the yard in the cold, but Klamm manages to slip past him. The official's secretary demands that K. undergo an "interrogation", on the basis of which a protocol will be drawn up. But due to the fact that Klamm himself never reads such papers, K. refuses and runs away.

Barnabas gives the heroes a message from Klamm, in which the official approves of his surveying work. K. decides that this is a mistake and wants to explain everything. But Barnabas is convinced that Klamm will not even hear about it.

K. sees how his bride has changed during the days of marriage. Intimacy with the official gave Frida "crazy charm", but now she is fading. The girl suffers and is afraid that K. may give her to Klamm if he demands. In addition, she is jealous of the hero for Barnabas' sister Olga.

Olga's story

Kafka clearly shares his heroes. “Castle” (a brief summary partly allows this to be conveyed) is a work where two worlds are clearly drawn. This is the world of officials and ordinary people. So are the characters. Heroes from ordinary people have feelings, characters, they are alive and full-blooded. And those who are connected with the office lose their human features, there is something hinged and unreal in their appearance.

Olga undoubtedly belongs to the first group. And Kafka even introduces the reader to the story of her life. About three years ago, at a village festival, her younger sister Amalia was seen by the official Sortini. The next morning, a letter came from him with an order for the girl to come to the hotel. Amalia tore the message angrily. But never before in the Village has anyone dared to alienate an official. This transgression became a curse on their entire family. Nobody came to his father, the best shoemaker, with orders. In desperation, he began to run after the officials and beg for their forgiveness, but no one listened to him. The atmosphere of alienation grew, and as a result, the parents became disabled.

People feared the Castle. If the family managed to hush up the matter, they went out to fellow villagers and said that everything was settled. Then the family was immediately taken back. But family members suffered and did not leave home, so they were excluded from society. Only Barnabas, as the most "innocent", is allowed to communicate. It is important for the family that the boy officially works in the Castle. But there are no documents about this. Barnabas himself is not sure of this, therefore he performs his service poorly. Olga, in order to get information about her brother, is forced to sleep with servants of officials.

Meeting with officials

Frida, tired of being unsettled and exhausted by uncertainty about K.'s loyalty, decides to return to the cafeteria. With her, she calls Jeremiah, the hero's assistant, with whom she hopes to start a family.

Erlanger, Klamm's secretary, agrees to receive K. in his hotel room at night. There is a whole queue in front of his number. Everyone is happy to be here, as the secretary deigned to spend his personal time to receive them. Many officials receive petitioners during meals or in bed. In the corridor, our hero accidentally meets Frieda and makes attempts to return her. But the girl accuses K. of cheating with the girls from the "shameful family", and then runs away to Jeremiah.

After talking with Frida, the hero cannot find Erlanger's number and enters the first one he comes across. The official Byurgel lives there, who was delighted with the arrival of the guest. K., exhausted and tired, collapses on the official's bed and falls asleep while the owner of the room talks about official procedures. But soon Erlangre summons him. The secretary reports that Klamm cannot work normally when it is not Frida who serves him the beer. If K. can get the girl back to work in the buffet, it will greatly help him in his career.

Ending

The novel "Castle" ends. Kafka did not finish it, so it is impossible to say how, according to the author's idea, it should have ended, one can only describe the moment at which the story ended.

The hostess, having learned that K. was received by two officials at once, allows him to stay overnight in the beer hall. Pepi laments that she did not like Klamm. The hero thanks the Hostess for the overnight stay. The woman begins to talk about her outfits, recalls that K. somehow made a remark to her, which hurt her very much. The hero keeps up the conversation, revealing knowledge of fashion and good taste. The hostess shows interest and admits that K. can be her wardrobe advisers. She promises to call him whenever they bring new outfits.

Soon the groom Gerstaker offers the hero a job at the stable. He hopes that through K. he will be able to woo Erlanger himself. Gerstaker invites the hero to spend the night at his home. The groom's mother, reading a book, gives K. her hand and invites her to sit next to her.

Quotes

In the very center of the story, cut off your work Kafka (“The Castle”). The quotes below will help you get an idea of the style and language of the novel:

"Administrative decisions are as timid as young girls."
“The amount of work does not determine the degree of importance of the case.”
"He played with his dreams, his dreams played with him."
"Man acts more boldly in his ignorance."

Analysis

This novel is considered by critics to be the most enigmatic of all Kafka's writings. The "Castle" (we will now consider the analysis) presumably touches on the theme of a person's path to God. But since the work has not been completed, there is no way to be sure of this. The only thing that can be said for sure is the presence of bureaucratic satire. As for genre specifics, it is rather an allegorical and metaphorical text than a fantastic one.

It is impossible to understand exactly where events are unfolding. There is nothing that could indicate at least a country. Therefore, it is generally accepted that the images of the Village and the Castle are also allegorical. The depicted world exists according to its own absurd laws. Kafka was a kind, "painfully experiencing his inability to establish beneficial contact with the outside world." This gloomy feeling is reflected in all the works of the writer, we see him in The Castle.

The hero finds himself in a world in which he has no place, but he is forced to somehow adapt to the chaotic reality.

Franz Kafka, "Castle": reviews

Today the writer is very popular, especially among young readers. Therefore, it is not worth talking about the relevance of his works - since interest does not fade away, it means that the subject remains in demand. As for the "Castle", the book is very highly rated by readers. Many focus their attention precisely on ridiculing bureaucratic orders, which in our society sometimes reach the same absurd proportions as in the times of the writer. It is not surprising that this side of clerical life was so well described by Kafka, who worked in this area for a long time. "Castle", reviews of which are mostly positive, nevertheless leaves readers with a gloomy aftertaste and a sense of hopelessness. Some misinterpret the novel, perceiving it as an "ode to bureaucracy", and not a satire on the power of officials. The latter is not surprising, since the novel is rather difficult to interpret. And incompleteness only complicates understanding.

Summing up

He raises the idea of the meaninglessness and absurdity of being in his novel Kafka ("The Castle"). A summary of the chapters further convinces us of this. By the way, this topic was very relevant for the literature of the 20th century. Many European writers turned to her, but only Kafka was so depressingly gloomy. The monologues and actions of his characters are often meaningless and illogical, and the chaos that is happening around creates an oppressive feeling of the futility of being. Nevertheless, Kafka's work is very popular among readers, and interest in him does not fade at all. And do not forget that the writer made a significant contribution to the development of such a well-known trend as existentialism.