Existentialism Through Paul Jean-Sartre’s Nausea And Franz Kafka’s The Trial

Intro:

Existentialism is the tradition of philosophical inquiry which is derived from the experience of the human subject – not merely the thinking subject. This movement revolves around contemplating and revel in the absurdity of the world, the contingency of existence, the nightmare of intersubjectivity as well as political oppression. Through Paul Jean-Sartre’s Nausea and Franz Kafka’s The Trial, existentialism is explored and expressed as the determining factor of the individual’s perception of their position in life.

Paragraph 1:

Sartre’s Nausea recounts the story of a man’s struggle to find meaning in a world in which most opportunities offered by the universe, gives him a paralysing sense of sickness. He writes, “Objects should not touch because they are not alive. You use them, put them back in place, you live among them: they are useful, nothing more. But they touch me, it is unbearable. I am afraid of being in contact with them as though they were living beasts.” Sartre’s intention with this specific quote is to allow the audience to delve into his perspective of there being a balance to the position of everything, showcasing that every element has a purpose.

‘Nausea’ has since become common when existentialism is brought up

Describes the sudden realisation that things are not as one had previously perceived them to be and that there is great weight in the matter of existence.

Paragraph 2:

Similarly, Kafka relays his thoughts on existentialism through Joseph. K, a man who has been put on trial without being given any information about what he has done. This creates an effect of the reader experiencing Joseph K.’s changing perspective throughout the story. An extract from Kafka’s work exhibits the true underlying themes of existentialism, the contingency of existence and political oppression.“One must lie low, no matter how much it went against the grain, and try to understand that this great organization remained, so to speak, in a state of delicate balance, and that if someone took it upon himself to alter the dispositions of things around him, he ran the risk of losing his footing and falling to destruction, while the organization would simply right itself by some compensating reaction in another part of its machinery – since everything interlocked – and remain unchanged, unless, indeed, which was very probable, it became still more rigid, more vigilant, severer, and more ruthless.”

(Kafka)

The protagonist is an anti-hero who lives in inauthenticity, is guilty

He eventually abdicated and convinced himself that he is guilty

Although Joseph K had the chance to escape his trial, he represents the modern man, depicting how he has grown a preference for being killed, abandoning any desire to live. He allowed himself to be dominated by society, succumbing to political oppression.

Even though both texts display the thinking subject and human existence, the establishment of the main themes and attitudes of existentialism is expressed through both texts in different manners. Sartre explains the balance of the elements by conveying how the actions of the protagonist affect the elements around him including himself.

Conclusion:

Together these two novels are literary works that confirm that styles, attributes, values, and attitudes of existentialism as the outcomes of their work display the effects on a man who questions his existence. These two literary works depict the true sense of human freedom, going against traditional philosophy, displaying the authors’ beliefs on their own individual understanding