Scan barcode
peebee's review against another edition
2.0
There's something I've noticed about pre 1900 European adolescent protagonists (Karl, anyone in Dickens, Jude The Obscure) that I just fucking loathe.
Partly it's the total lack of agency, any random sketchbag who floats across their transom holds them completely in thrall. Delamarche and Robinson start out by making Karl sell his own clothes (he's has a prepaid train ticket to San Fran to look for work and has a pocket full of money, but instead he takes their advice to sell the clothes off his back so he'll have something to live on while he hoboes it to Upstate New York), treat him like shit, make him pay for everything, rob him, threaten him with a beating, and when they turn up next he takes such good care of stinking drunk Robinson (who only came to hit him up for a loan - Karl hates them, remember) he predictably loses his job, falls back in with them, and pretty much resigns himself to being their slave before the completed chapters run out. Even Kafka has the sense to have Karl think to himself several times all he has to do at any time is just walk away without a word of explanation, but he never does, no matter how bad it gets. I guess he does have that dramatic scene where he tries to knock down the door and gets the shit beat out of him for his trouble, rather than, I dunno, waiting until they send him out on an errand as was made explicitly clear they would and just going. Kafka gets a slight pass because his whole thing is the world is confusing and out to get you and there's nothing you can do, although The Trial makes that case way more convincingly.
Partly it's the lunatic family politics. Again, it's Kafka, so you can't really pick stuff apart, but they all have scenes where the protagonist goes against his guardian's "wishes" and the supposed loving, supposed adult throws an infantile tantrum that sets up a significant part of the conflict for the rest of the book. Karl accepts his uncle's friend's emphatic invitation to his home over his uncle's mildly expressed reservation about how late and inconvenient it is, and is thus disowned and banished by letter delivered by third party. De Tocqueville had a whole section about how Americans don't feel the need to be petty tyrants over their families, so maybe that's just a Kafkaesque exaggeration of how things actually were/are for Euros, but I can't stand it, it just rings false.
Partly it's the weird flimsiness of all the characters. No matter what the social standing, everyone acts like a Fancy Lad from Cabin Boy. Karl's always being just completely overwhelmed by stress, overwork, or just mild inconvenience and practically fainting dead away. Then there's the ridiculously poor decision making. I have only a poor grasp of the social import of dressing properly back then, but even I know how bad an idea it is to abandon your only suit jacket and walk around in just a button-down shirt like some sort of fucking bum. I also know it's bad to abandon it when doing so involves running away from a man who's just falsely accused you of stealing and is searching it, and you don't have any of your possessions with you to run with, because he's treating you more coarsely than you think you deserve. Which leads to the disgustingly hierarchical way everyone in Europe (and probably America then to some extent) thought of people. Karl asks explicitly for the cheapest room in the shitty boardinghouse after getting banished, and is just so mad they put him in the servant's quarters. It's not like he doesn't have a pile of money, and could just ask for a better room. He's better people, so he shouldn't have to ask.
But what it mostly is is that all of Kafka's books are constructed entirely from (and the others to a greater or lesser extent use as main plot points) "tragical farce". A bunch of dumb misunderstandings and bad decisions lead inexorably to the destruction of the protagonist, despite his being completely able to stop, explain, insist on his rights, or come clean at any point. I have friends who like farce, and that's fine, and maybe I'm too hard headed and pragmatic, but I think it's the just tiresome and lame. It works when you're dealing with a big faceless incomprehensible bureaucracy, because that's what bureaucracy is. Not so much when you're dealing with a variety of individuals, with personal connections to the protagonist.
Partly it's the total lack of agency, any random sketchbag who floats across their transom holds them completely in thrall. Delamarche and Robinson start out by making Karl sell his own clothes (he's has a prepaid train ticket to San Fran to look for work and has a pocket full of money, but instead he takes their advice to sell the clothes off his back so he'll have something to live on while he hoboes it to Upstate New York), treat him like shit, make him pay for everything, rob him, threaten him with a beating, and when they turn up next he takes such good care of stinking drunk Robinson (who only came to hit him up for a loan - Karl hates them, remember) he predictably loses his job, falls back in with them, and pretty much resigns himself to being their slave before the completed chapters run out. Even Kafka has the sense to have Karl think to himself several times all he has to do at any time is just walk away without a word of explanation, but he never does, no matter how bad it gets. I guess he does have that dramatic scene where he tries to knock down the door and gets the shit beat out of him for his trouble, rather than, I dunno, waiting until they send him out on an errand as was made explicitly clear they would and just going. Kafka gets a slight pass because his whole thing is the world is confusing and out to get you and there's nothing you can do, although The Trial makes that case way more convincingly.
Partly it's the lunatic family politics. Again, it's Kafka, so you can't really pick stuff apart, but they all have scenes where the protagonist goes against his guardian's "wishes" and the supposed loving, supposed adult throws an infantile tantrum that sets up a significant part of the conflict for the rest of the book. Karl accepts his uncle's friend's emphatic invitation to his home over his uncle's mildly expressed reservation about how late and inconvenient it is, and is thus disowned and banished by letter delivered by third party. De Tocqueville had a whole section about how Americans don't feel the need to be petty tyrants over their families, so maybe that's just a Kafkaesque exaggeration of how things actually were/are for Euros, but I can't stand it, it just rings false.
Partly it's the weird flimsiness of all the characters. No matter what the social standing, everyone acts like a Fancy Lad from Cabin Boy. Karl's always being just completely overwhelmed by stress, overwork, or just mild inconvenience and practically fainting dead away. Then there's the ridiculously poor decision making. I have only a poor grasp of the social import of dressing properly back then, but even I know how bad an idea it is to abandon your only suit jacket and walk around in just a button-down shirt like some sort of fucking bum. I also know it's bad to abandon it when doing so involves running away from a man who's just falsely accused you of stealing and is searching it, and you don't have any of your possessions with you to run with, because he's treating you more coarsely than you think you deserve. Which leads to the disgustingly hierarchical way everyone in Europe (and probably America then to some extent) thought of people. Karl asks explicitly for the cheapest room in the shitty boardinghouse after getting banished, and is just so mad they put him in the servant's quarters. It's not like he doesn't have a pile of money, and could just ask for a better room. He's better people, so he shouldn't have to ask.
But what it mostly is is that all of Kafka's books are constructed entirely from (and the others to a greater or lesser extent use as main plot points) "tragical farce". A bunch of dumb misunderstandings and bad decisions lead inexorably to the destruction of the protagonist, despite his being completely able to stop, explain, insist on his rights, or come clean at any point. I have friends who like farce, and that's fine, and maybe I'm too hard headed and pragmatic, but I think it's the just tiresome and lame. It works when you're dealing with a big faceless incomprehensible bureaucracy, because that's what bureaucracy is. Not so much when you're dealing with a variety of individuals, with personal connections to the protagonist.
wuthrinheights's review against another edition
adventurous
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
This book alternatively could've been titled "A Series of Unfortunate Events" for Karl Rossman simply did not get to catch a break. From getting shipped off by his parents to the US, to every single place he was placed into and everyone he met, has failed and mistreated him. It was simply exhausting and pitying (despite being called his funniest novel). If anything, this book reminded me of that line written by Emily Dickinson when she said "God gave a loaf to every bird, but just a crumb to me."
Kafka's writing tends to give off that surreal, dreamy feeling. Reading this felt like I was an onlooker with cotton in my ears and smoke in my eyes. Like I was watching everything unfold but it was muffled. The one thing about his style that slightly turned me off was how he almost never separated his work into paragraphs; it was something I had to get used to. Anyway, Albert Camus was right when he said "The whole art of Kafka consists in forcing the reader to reread" because I definitely must read this again someday to understand it fuller.
Kafka's writing tends to give off that surreal, dreamy feeling. Reading this felt like I was an onlooker with cotton in my ears and smoke in my eyes. Like I was watching everything unfold but it was muffled. The one thing about his style that slightly turned me off was how he almost never separated his work into paragraphs; it was something I had to get used to. Anyway, Albert Camus was right when he said "The whole art of Kafka consists in forcing the reader to reread" because I definitely must read this again someday to understand it fuller.
sxren's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
Found the hopelessness of job hunting and world of work v relatable BUT this was such a struggle to read and incredibly boring sorry kafka this one wasn't for me xoxoxox
minkkmuse's review against another edition
funny
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
the horrors, trials, and absurdity of the (im)migration experience
amsiepamsie's review against another edition
adventurous
lighthearted
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
Content Warnings
Moderate: Alcoholism
Minor: Rape
worstarchitect's review against another edition
Better than the trial. Karl is definitely one of the more interesting protagonists in Kafka's work, very sensitive but also relentless like all the others. As always for Kafka the best thing about this novel is the way characters communicate with one another. Stoker scene so good.
alexander_smirzitz's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
camstipated's review against another edition
slow-paced
3.25
Very dull and slow, but the end is such a Hellish and interesting domestic situation that the setup might be considered worthwhile
_sal_'s review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Kafka himself called this his American Story, which it very much is. He was undoubtedly drawn by the American dream despite never having visited the US himself. The Man Who Disappeared its original title is apt for what happens to Karl at the end of the novel he finally cuts his ties with everything and everyone who ever held him back and was visibly or (readily) happier at the end. This as Kafka said is his lighter novel compared to his other works and I agree with this. We do not see the darkness from other novels and the setting calls for rather humorous escapades that honestly read a lot to me like a Steinbeck or Arthurian story.
“So then you’re free?’
‘Yes, I’m free,’ said Karl, and nothing seemed more worthless than his freedom.”
“So then you’re free?’
‘Yes, I’m free,’ said Karl, and nothing seemed more worthless than his freedom.”