Over time Franz Kafka has become widely regarded as a unique individual, writer and philosopher. The abstractness and obscurity of his writings always leave one wondering as to what he is really trying to say. Nowhere in Kafka’s writing is there a clear understanding of his primary idea, however each sentence is literal and each sentence signifies something. So unique are his writings that each sentence screams out for interpretation, but Kafka does not allow this to happen. Through the concepts of symbol versus allegory, estrangement, the prison of objectivity and inexhaustible, as well as comparison with Sigmund Freud, brought forward by Theodor W. Adorno, and ideas developed by Max Brod and Walter Benjamin it is evident that Kafka’s writings are not left open to interpretation and must be read for what they are, this is justified through looking at his texts ‘the metamorphosis’ and ‘the castle’.
The literalness of Kafka’s writing is made evident through his use of symbol versus allegory. Nowhere in Kafka’s writing is there a clear understanding of his primary idea, however each sentence is literal and each sentence signifies something. Theodor W. Adorno rightly describes this by stating. “The two moments are not merged, as the symbol would have it, but yawn apart and out of the abyss between them blinds the glaring light of fascination. Here too, in it’s striving not for symbol but for allegory, Kafka’s prose sides with the outcasts, the protest of his friends not withstanding” . This quote depicts Kafka’s writings as symbol, with a clear meaning, therefore literal, however at the same time they strive to be seen as an allegory, making them open to interpretation, something that Kafka does not allow them to do. The final part of the quote puts forward the idea that Kafka’s writings were unusual, often going against the social norm, thus making them unique. Walter Benjamin, a studier of Kafka’s writings clearly and rightfully defines Kafka’s writings as...