ehto?
I completely agree with you, Eunice. But I think that Kafka, by showing all the bad consequences of conformity, is really saying "Don't conform. Comformity is BAAAD! Societies that force conformity (perhaps communism?) are BAAAAD!" Really, to me, the presence of the explorer is to offer the outside perspective of all things that are happening. While it is true that the machine be aware of the squeaky wheel's presence and thus tries to fix it, neither the prespective of the machine nor the wheel will be able to understand the consquences of their actions. The machine will only think that it is Good (in the Kantian sense of Duty) that the presence of the squeaky wheel has been... nullified; whereas, the wheel will only be able to think of the injustice of the machine's actions/duty - but never be able to see the consequences of "squeaking" besides his own demise. In this interpretation, it is only possible to understand what is happening by standing outside of the system (in the chemistry sense of the word - for Natashia) and observing it. Then the explorer's presence is that of the scientist - to observe.
On the other hand, (I like to look at as many perspectives as possible... maybe only then can we understand the thing in itself?) would it be possible that individual wheels are able to understand the machine's duties? Could each individual of our society say what purpose our society exists today and why they have molded themselves to function within our society? In this interpretation, it would explain why the prisoner does not understand what is happening to him. A misfitted gear must be punished - but even that gear, however outside of the system it may be, does not understand the function of the machine. Could it be then that ignorance is also a weapon (just as it is in the Penopticon)? That is to say, the prisoner's ignorance is only enlightened as he dies. If he is representative of a misfitting gear (my justification for this interpretation is that his misfitting in society causes that aspect of punishment to break down just as the machine did... for the machine's destruction is not completely contingent upon the squeaky gear; but rather, the presence of the squeaky gear merely presupposes the machine's destruction), then no gear/individual truly knows the function of the machine/society. Wouldn't ignorance then be a barrier so that the individual is unable to change society's evil function, for the individual is not aware of it? Perhaps Kafka is making the statement that ignorance is a weapon of comformity...
argh... I stink; I need to take a shower...

posted by Bryan Lee   [6:36 PM]

[ website ] :: [ contact ] :: [ home ]

XML