"Before the Law"

In my group we mainly focused on the three concepts of Marxist criticism, Cultural studies, and Psychological theories. We believed that the Marxist criticism theory came from the scenes where the man gave all of his valuables and possessions over to the gatekeeper (or the state) while the state itself never gave anything back over to the man himself (the people). The concept of how the story pertained to the law and man also gave a more political sense to the plot, making the Marxist approach a sensible option to consider.





We also considered Cultural studies, assuming that the the gatekeeper of the Law was Russian due to the styling of his black “Tartar’s beard,” which one of our group members had looked up and discovered was a Russian style mustache. This not only related the story to Cultural studies but also links it the Marxist approach by giving the sense that the story is related to the state of Russia and the idea of communism that would eventually come from within the nation. The fur coat of the gatekeeper also gives the sense that he’s from somewhere like Russia further implicating the story’s relation to the state.





The Psychological theory was also one of our main focuses because the concept of the Law actually being a single physical thing or place is quite abnormal and the fact that the man seemed to have an obsessive need to enter also contributed to our thinking. Because of all the unusual aspects of the situation and setting we assumed that everything that was happening was simply happening inside the man’s head. How else could you explain the seemingly immortal gatekeeper or the man’s survival until old age despite never stating that he had any food or water to consume when trying to convince the gatekeeper to let him in. The man’s abnormal thinking might have also been the result of him being insane as he “asks the fleas to help him persuade the gatekeeper.” In the end, it was mostly the obsessive need to enter the Law that gave the Psychological theory basis since that was the most unusual part of the man’s abnormal thinking.





Personally, I only used the Marxist criticism when I first read the piece because of the relationship between the gatekeeper and the man. Within their relationship the gatekeeper is seen as the one who has all the power while the man has absolutely nothing that can be used against him. The gatekeeper is already assigned the role of the oppressor while the man is assigned that of the victim. I also took into account how the man gives up all his valuables to the gatekeeper without hesitation but the gatekeeper never seems to acknowledge the man’s wealth, giving nothing back to the man. This also seems to promote a socialist relationship and as the man (the people) gives everything he has in order to try to change and affect the gatekeeper (the state), but the gatekeeper is completely unaffected by the man yet still has dominion over the man and affects him greatly. The gatekeeper also takes the valuables under the pretense that he does not want the man to feel as if he has “failed to do anything.” I also observed the aspects of the story that my group also noted, leading me to believe that the story was written about Russia, strengthening my belief that the Marxist approach was the correct approach.





I believed that the Marxist critical approach was the most useful of all the other approaches that we considered because it seemed to fit the story the most and seemed a good basis for how the story was unfolding. Despite there being a certain number of oddities that would not necessarily be associated with Marxism, the idea of Marxism was strongly intertwined with the relationship between the two characters and how the man was always trying to get into the Law but was never granted access despite his years of effort. Other theories such as the Psychological theories can also make sense when observing the man’s obsessive need to enter the Law or the fact that the reader might need to consider that all the events occurring could be all happening inside the man’s head, but I believe that the story contained too many elements referring to the socio-economic foundation of Marxism in order for it to be anything else. Despite the wealth of the man, the state was always the most powerful. The man never even attempted to enter on his own, but, instead, decided to wait until the gatekeeper changed and granted him access, which never happened.