This is a very odd story.
It is one of many novels that Kafka never finished, although the ending
does seem conclusive. It is written in a dream-like style and most
commentators think it is a reflection of Kafka's experience under the
Austro-Hungarian regime. As a trained lawyer, Kafka would have had a
great awareness of the arbitrary and secretive nature of law under a
totalitarian government.While it is easy to interpret the story under the guise of the not-so-hyperbolic picture of the futility of life under these circumstances, I wander if Kafka didn't have more in mind. To me, I find this a compelling allegory and critique of moralism. Maybe I am stretching too far, but some of his language along with the ubiquitousness of the "legal authority," the apparent "freedom" after his arrest and the surety of his condemnation all make me think of moralistic religion. Who knows, maybe his is not trying to be so clever as that. Either way, in Kafka's story the law brings death and no defense could be made in his favor. If it is a look a moralism, or in Kafka's mind perhaps all religion, it is obvious that he never discovered the one aid in the "legal system" on which he could cast himself. In the end he was led to his fate alone and even rushed toward it because resistance was futile. He never met the one who died "like a dog" and endured the "shame" so that he would not have to.
