Talk:The Metamorphosis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Novels
Literature Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Love that self-loathing

Perhaps the most interesting thing I take from the story is an indulgence in self-loathing, for which, of course, Kafka is well-known. I think that one of the reasons, if not the only one, Kafka did not want the creature shown, is because he wanted the reader to envision Gregor as both an insect and a man - while his physical description renders him insectile, his thoughts are conveyed in a very human-like manner.

Yes, I do think the criticism of bureaucracy and the suffering of the middle-class and familial struggles all come through as well - even though Kafka is indulging in self-hatred, we sympathize more with Gregor than the other characters, who are made out to treat Gregor fairly monstrously (the real metamorphosis may be that the other characters turn into monsters, while the monstrous vermin remains fairly human, despite all the suffering his physical condition causes him).

That's just what I take from it. I do like what some other interpretations say, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Putrescent stench (talk • contribs) 19:54, September 30, 2004 (UTC)

I would not evaluate the behavior of Gregor's family as "monstrous". They are just human.(No user) 23:25, 19 August 2006

I saw it as a commentary of the mindset of the European population after the First World War. The Western civilization that they were so confident about was shattered, and they were left with disgust. In real life, this feeling was then followed by WWII. In the book (which was written in the inter-war period), it is followed by optimism after Gregor's death. Is this a correct (or at least plausible) way of looking at the story? I'm curious... Peaceman 03:47, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. It was written in 1912! i hate that you can edit this page people could type anything so this synopsis could be untruthful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.233.58.100 (talk) 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Exile 19:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Have a Nice Life, Little Sister

I remember that the last line of this work describes Gregor's younger sister after his death, who at the end of a train ride "got up and stretched her young body." This may seem icky, but I totally read that physical description as a kind of semi-incestuous sexual reference, as though Gregor's sister's youth is something he always coveted, and now that he is dead her youth is something that Kafka sardonically describes in the story's last line to indicate that she is still alive and beautiful, while Gregor is dead and hideous.

Tortured sexuality, thy name is Kafka!

Arkhamite 14:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Look of the bug

One of Franz Kafka's main wishes about this story was that the look of the bug was never to be described or drawn so that the reader could decide for himself what the insect looked like. - Iammaxus

I've always prefered "As Gregor Samsa woke from restless sleep, he found himself transformed in his bed into a monstrous vermin", but to each his own. Cockroach is >right< out.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "vermin". -67.163.21.39 20:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

This may just be me, but I've always wanted to see a version that says, "As Gregor Samsa woke from a restless sleep, he found himself transformed in his bed into a monstrous critter." Much more colloquial sounding, and funny- more like Ungeziefer.

[edit] Nabokov and dung beetles

I seem to recall Nabokov -- who was of course no stranger to entomology -- saying (in Lectures on Literature, I think) that Gregor is definitely a beetle -- I want to say a dung beetle. Must be nice to be so positive about flights of other people's fantasy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.141.118.67 (talk • contribs) 06:09, October 16, 2003 (UTC)

Nabokov wrote a lot about the text, it can be seen here, http://victorian.fortunecity.com/vermeer/287/nabokov_s_metamorphosis.htm
That's awesome! I love the annotated page and wish I could see more. And I would definitely defer to Nabokov's expertise--in entomology and in literature--as to the literal nature of Samsa's transformation.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 16:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gregor is Definitely an Arthropod

I don't have the book on hand, but I seem to recall that Kafka describes some trouble that Gregor has with the bedclothes and his difficulties in getting out of bed, and at that point Kafka states that Gregor's new physiognomy includes a hard shell, that this shell is segmented, and that he has many legs. In that case, if Gregor is an animal that has a segmented hard shell and legs, he is definitely an arthropod, which means he could be an insect, spider, or even a crab.

Although lol if Gregor were a crab or a spider, he might have gone after his father and pinched or bitten him when he threw that apple at Gregor! I don't think we should assume anything from the cleaning lady's statement; she probably means "dung beetle" as a perjorative and not an actual taxonomic term, as cleaning ladies generally do not like or know much about insects.

I just ordered a new translation of this work because of the whole "Ungeziefer" issue that I learned about on this article. Thanks Wikipedians.

Arkhamite 14:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it would make sense if he was an insect (as most commonly accepted), but can't be a crab at all because of how he can walk up on the walls. Also, there is nothing else in the book that gives any lead towards Gregor possibly being a spider. So it's probably safe to assume he's a bug of some sort. 168.187.66.184 13:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Could It Be a Centipede?

Am I the only one who gets the impression that Gregor turns into a centipede of some sort? Maybe looking a wee bit like those mutlipedal creatures in that Escher illustration with the surreal stairs. First of all, the number of his legs are never specified and second of all, and this could be strictly PoV here, but I think it's easier to imagine a huge centipede than a huge, say, cockroach or dung beetle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.135.39 (talk) 13:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Satirical interpretation

My outright interpretation of the story is that it shows that Gregor was ultimately an unimportant person in the lives of those around him. While his transformation is initially inconvenient for everyone, the truth is they all somewhat resented him. He put great concern into his work but once his employer saw that he was done for, his employer disappeared from his life. His family was very concerned over his duties, but once they were presented with the fact that he could never serve in his original capacity again, they cast him aside and put their lives together, realizing that their dependency on him was an illusory convenience.

I believe it's a satire of the middle class worker; who spends his life to please sadists for money so he can in turn support an unnecessary lifestyle, who grows apart from the people he is supporting because he spends so much time working.

Is this interpretation really not the common one? It seems so obvious. :D Mbac 20:46, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Actually, that's what I was thinking when I began reading it. At the end, however, the most important theme I could find was that the more the family treated Gregor as a bug, the more his mindset changed to one of a bug. --Dyss 23:58, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I tend to look at it as being about (the superficiality of) human relations and its relationship with the individual mind, similar to what Dyss said. It can be looked at in many different ways, which a testament to Kafka's brillance...but, the theme of dehumanization (or more generally, the fundamental nature of human) is obviously the overriding one, and I think we're all just looking at different aspects of that dehumanization. --Tothebarricades.tk 00:13, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I think it's more about how a depressed person percives themsevf as inconveniencing and worthless to everyone around them. Kafka's constant depression is I think very important in understanding the theme's of his work. Klonimus 06:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
The family saw him as a walking meal ticket. He worked all hours, he got up at 4am whilst the family were still in bed, and his father later enjoyed a leisurely breakfast. Yet when he was in trouble and needed help, he got none from anyone except his sister.

Possibly a common experience for those who go from being breadwinner to disablement, unemployment or senility.

Exile 19:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A vermin??

Vermin is a plural noun. You can't say 'a vermin'.

Further, I see nothing particularly 'scientific-sounding' about 'insect'. It's just about as general as the the original German word.

The best translation, surely, is 'bug' which covers most people's reaction to the little creatures. Add to that the adjective of your choice - horrible, monstrous, whatever.

Instead of trying too hard to trapnslate from one language to another, just feel the meaning and get close enough. People are mainly intelligent and will get the idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.58.54 (talk • contribs) 12:55, July 3, 2005 (UTC)

The problem is not the literal meaning, but the emotions that go along with it. "Vermin" implies disgust, while "insect" can be anything, like a butterfly or something. The singular of 'vermin' is 'vermin', so 'a vermin' is fine. AySz88^-^ 01:28, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree. This is not a manual where you just translate the meaning of a text, this is literature as an artform. You have to try to capture emotions and linguistic art as well. 'Insect' is too scientific. Kafka could have used 'Insekt' if that were his desire. But he used 'Ungeziefer' which is pejorative. "Monstrous vermin" might sound unwieldy in English, as mentioned in the article, but "ungeheures Ungeziefer" sounds unwieldy in German too. It's supposed to, because it's Kafka! --hanszarkow 01:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Completely wrong, vermin is plural only and can't be used as singular. Subsequent

descriptions show that Gregor has turned into a kind of beetle, and insect is at least a valid English word. Insects and beetles do have a negative image - basically, would YOU like to wake up tomorrow and find you'd changed into an insect? The following link proves that vermin can be used singularly. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vermin

Exile 19:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

"Vermin" seems perfectly acceptable as a singular noun. Where did you hear that it is to be used in a strictly plural fashion? Personally, I don't feel that the distinction, in this text, between "insect" and "vermin" is very strong, though the former does seem to evoke a more explicit, defined image. Also, to my ear, at least, "vermin" does sound more innately reprehensible, revolting, than does "insect." When I read the book (i.e., whenever I read it), I always envisioned Gregor Samsa as a big, weird "roach-like" thing; I don't feel that it is particularly significant whether he is to be imagined with or without "hidden wings" (it really has no literary connotation).

(Commando303)

Singular is right here. Go read your OED; for vermin we can see a sense "{dag}b. A single animal or insect of this kind." --Gwern (contribs) 21:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Guys whenever I see "vermin" I think more about weasels and muskrats and raccoons and things like that, not bugs. --Rebent 19:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Retransformation of Gregor Samsa

Anyone know where I can read or buy this book? -Hoekenheef 21:44, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/offer-listing/0553213695//002-3311933-9190423?condition=collectible lists one version that includes it, though it is $18.50. I have the exact same version and 18.50 is a ridiculous price. It's a 100 page paperback. It is written in 1916, but I only have the english translation. If it falls under the public domain, I could transcribe it to wikisource, but I believe a translation has its own copyright. If anyone can clear the copyright up for me, and it is legal, I'll put it on wikisource. --Dyss 02:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Who influenced him?

[edit] Samsa in Slavic

Few people are aware of this but the name "Samsa" or "sam sum" (сам съм) means in Slavic languages "alone I am"

[edit] Short story or novella?

How long is this narrative? Is it really long enough to be considered a novella? I've always thought of it as a short story.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 07:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Orig. German Fischer Buecherei version is more than 50 p. There're multiple character developments, so I'd guess it's a novella.BubbleDine (talk) 15:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spaceball reference

In another Mel Brooks movie, Spaceballs, Dark Helmet passes a reference to Kafka when their spaceship is transforming into a gigantic maid.

Just because it involves a maid doesn't mean it's a Kafka reference. Is there something I'm missing? 163.118.215.31 23:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I believe the exact line, when Dark Helmet give the order to transform the ship, is "Prepare for the metamorphosis, Kafka" Liamdaly620 01:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kafka's reaction

In Rudy Rucker's afterword to White Light, one reads:

"A final influence was Franz Kafka. Kafka's friend Max Brod said that when Kafka read "The Metamorphosis" to him, Kafka laughed so hard that he fell out of his chair. Franz on his back, all eight- or is it six? - legs kicking." (pg 268 1997)

Is this worth adding in? Is it true? Did Brod really say that? --Gwern (contribs) 21:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Translation (?)

Just wondering if Ian Johnston made the translation. His wiki says he's a Doctor in Melbourne. Disambiguate the link to his page ?

[edit] The Fly?

I thought the quote from The Fly was a paraphrase of Chuang Tzu's dream of being a butterfly, where he wondered if he was a butterfly dreaming he was a man StrangeIdiot 22:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)StrangeIdiot

[edit] Where's Grete?

What happened to Gregor's sister? Didn't she have a section just a few days ago? Why did it get deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Garsha (talk • contribs) 01:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Are all the citation needed tags necessary?

How are we supposed to really provide a source that the story was alluded to in the various other works? 199.126.137.209 07:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] German Mistake

In the footnotes, the author of the entry states that "sich verwandelt" is a separable verb. This is not the case, it is rather a non-separable reflexive verb. "Sich" is in this case the reflexive of the subject, whereas "verwandelt" is the past participle of "verwandeln," a non-separable verb. Were "verwandeln" separable, it would conjugate as "Ich wandele mich ver," which is false, instead of the proper conjugation "Ich verwandele mich."

[edit] Dear father: from fra–– I mean Gregor

Kafka made many referances to his relationship with his father through Gregor's View of his father as well as in Kafka's Letter to His Father, he said "My writing was all about you," which shows directly the huge importance of the role of the father in The Metamorphosis. I highly suggest looking further into this as I am. Feel free to add on to this paragraph.

[edit] Animated Metamorphosis

There was an animated rendition of Metamorphosis. It was produced in a Central European East Bloc nation in the 1970s. Does anyone know of the producer/ director or the exact nation in which it was produced? Dogru144 01:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disgrace to the work

Sounds like the person who wrote the majority of this page read only the Sparknotes version of the novel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.107.83 (talk) 11:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Critical interpretation

This is considered a signifigant novel. And the importance extends beyond the explicit plot, and into the symbolism. This page could benefit from a section giving a properly cited critical interpretation of symbolism and philosophy represented in the work. The section on the translation issues is a good start, but at lot more could, and I believe should be added. The listed external links look like a good start. I might get to this in a few months if I remember, but I'd love it if someone beat me to it. -Verdatum (talk) 05:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "word games"

I don't know German, but I didn't think you could negate a word that doesn't exist. Thus I found this sentence very confusing: "It is very characteristic of Kafka to play word games (and could be why these direct terminologies are not used in the narration): the Un part of the word, grammatically speaking, is a negation that makes the word opposite to “clean” and “suited”, although there was no such word as Geziefer in 20th century German." Some explanation or deletion might help. TrickyApron (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the significance of three's in The Metamorphosis. Also, how is this a allegory to religion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshi37 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)