Wow, stunned silence. That was incredible, Eunice. But I don't see where the contradiction is (perhaps I am too dull-witted?). Anyhow, allow me to elucidate. If the machine symbolizes society as a whole and the existence of a malfunctioning gear were to destroy the entire machine (which I don't believe is true... Didn't the machine simply begin to fall apart without a set explanation?), then it would follow that what Kafka is suggesting is not comformity to make the machine work (for the machine itself has an evil purpose and thus, should not work as far as the ethical standpoint would dictate) but that the machine should not even exist in the first place. If the machine were to enforce comformity - and the machine is evil, isn't Kafka saying that conformity is evil? Wouldn't it follow that the example of one squeaky well is not that that wheel should work but that the wheel shouldn't work. As a result, the machine must fall apart - and anarchy would ensue (and no societal conformity would exist).
Heh, that probably makes no sense whatsoever, but when I was thinking about it, it made sense in my mind... I hate it when that happens...

posted by Bryan Lee   [10:49 PM]

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

XML