Emrich's Critical Essay example essay topic

Wilhelm Emrich has presented an unimaginative and misleading critical essay of Franz Kafka's The Metamorphosis. Emrich's failure to make any daring insights provides much protection against any real opposition, but also serves to evince his occasional blunders all the more. The apparent focus of Emrich's essay is the beetle. Emrichcomments on various scenes involving Gregor the bug, but never sticks his neck out or attempts to express any views that may spark any controversy.

However, the essay is not entirely without merit. For example, Emrich confirms that determining an exact physical description of the bug is unnecessary. The critic also points out just how steeped in denial Gregor actually is. Both of the preceding critiques are valid and helpful to a reader. Buti n addition to Emrich's tenable arguments, he also conveys a few ideas that are wholly without credence.

An example of such a specious critique is Emrich's insistence that the story is a dream. Holistically though, Emrich's critical essay is accurate but lacking of any insight. Emrich makes it quite clear that determining the exact size and physicality of Gregor is an impossible and pointless task. Emrich writes, It would be meaningless to interpret Samsa the beetle as a real beetle (127).

The reason it is so necessary for Emrich to point this out is the fact that Kafka seems so intent on proving just the opposite. In the very first paragraph Kafka describes his bug as having a vaulted brown belly... to whose dome the [bed] cover, about to slide off completely, could barely cling (1) But just twelve pages later Kafka has Gregor sliding off a polished chest of drawers and then clinging toa chair with his little (13) legs. So the reader's first description of the bug is one that portrays the bug as being larger than a bed. However, not even twenty pages go by before the bug is described as being smaller than both a dresser and a chair.

Kafka mentions other details of the bug's appearance, but such details are trivial. Emrich is well aware that Kafka could have chosen any grotesque beast for his tale, for the beast's only purpose is to exemplify the split between Gregor's self-perception and the reality he faces- the cleavage between imagining and being. (131) Another valid point Emrich makes (no matter how void of creativity it may be), is how this story's hero is living in consummate denial. Gregor never fully accepts histransformation until just before his death.

Emrich's statement that Samsa can look upon the... metamorphosis only as a negative phenomenon that disturbs his daily work routine (119) could not be more accurate. When Gregor initially discovers histransformation his first thoughts include his job, his itchy stomach, and the train schedule. He even maintains the presence of mind to wonder, Could it be possible that the alarm [clock] hadn t gone off (4) A curious fact is how, at this point in the story, Gregor never admits that he has become a monster. Instead he reacts the same way he would react to a minor inconvenience. Kafka even explains that Gregor intended to open the door... [and] be at the station by eight o clock (12) Only a man drowning in denial could possibly consider going on with his day even after he had become a giant beetle.

Emrich's essay is well-supported, but it does contain one frequently occurring curiosity. Time and time again, Emrich bases his arguments on the so-called fact that Gregor is in a dream. Earlier I labeled this argument specious because while there is noevidence to negate it, there also exists none to confirm it. Emrich states that In this story the metamorphosis takes place, likewise, in a dream (119). Such an observation may appear obvious to Emrich, but that does not excuse the critic from presenting any examples to substantiate his claim.

Far too much emphasis is placed on Emrich's claim that The Metamorphosis is the story of a dream for Emrich to neglect ever supporting his conviction. Wilhelm Emrich's critique of Franz Kafka's The Metamorphosis displays noevidence of any deep understanding of the work. Emrich is consistently accurate, but rarely insightful. No one could dispute his claims that Gregor is living in denial, or thatthe physicality of the bug is of little importance, but who couldn t reach such a conclusion on their own Emrich also displayed a bit of sophistry when he attempted to pass off the idea that The Metamorphosis is the story of a dream. No where in his essay does he offer any details to support his claim. What the reader is left with is a timid essay containing vague and general observations.

36 a.