Marxist and Psychological Criticism within "Before the Law" by Franz Kafka

The “Marxist Criticism” critical approach provided in Literary Criticism and Theory written by Gardener seemed the most useful for interpreting Before the Law by Franz Kafka. Gardener states that this approach reflects, “… human interactions are economically driven and that the basic human model of human progress is based in a struggle for power between different social classes.” (3) Gardener then provides an example of this interaction being presented in narratives as a dynamic between “powerful oppressors” and “powerless victims”. This example can be applied to interpreting Kafka’s story.  The “powerful oppressor” is presented as the gatekeeper whereas the “powerless victim” is presented by the country man. The gatekeeper has a position of authority because he grants access for the countryman to pass the gate of the law. There seems to be an economic separation between the gatekeeper and the country man due to the fact that the gatekeeper has a fur coat. Although the mention of the gatekeeper wearing a fur coat serves as an economic separation between both characters the inequalities experienced by the countryman must be examined. 

           Distinct inequalities are presented within Before the Law due to the role and power of the gatekeeper. With only a single  interaction between the gatekeeper and the countryman, it is important to analyze the function of  the “gatekeeper”. The gatekeeper is meant to protect the gate of the law until the countryman has been granted access and allowed to pass through the gate. However, the gatekeeper belongs to a community of gatekeepers which appears to have an influence his actions. When the countryman first attempts to pass the gates without permission the gatekeeper says, “If it tempts you so much, try it in spite of my prohibition. But take note: I am powerful. And I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other. I can’t endure even one glimpse of the third.” (1) This reflects “vulgar Marxism”because the gatekeeper belongs to a community of gatekeepers that ensures the alienation of individuals such as the countryman. The separation of power between the gatekeeper and countryman yields trouble for the countryman when he says, the man from the country has not expected such difficulties; the law should always be accessible for everyone, he thinks, but as he now looks more closely at the gatekeeper… he decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside.” (1) This power dynamic exist because the countryman submits himself to the gatekeeper and the laws while the gatekeeper exercises his authority. The gatekeeper seems to embody an entity that has no other purpose other than permitting or prohibiting access to the law, making him inhumane. The notion of the gatekeeper being inhumane may correspond to the superstructure of gatekeepers that he belongs to. The gatekeeper may have wanted to show his humanity but his authoritative position may have prohibited him from doing so. 

Another critical approach in understanding the story may be “psychological theories”. This approach poses that, “Psychological critics often interpret literature as a psychological might interpret a dream or wish.” (174) While Kafka’s story does have dream like qualities, I believe the symbols within the story provide particular nuances that do not  contribute to purpose of the story. For example, the gatekeeper may reflect present government attitudes and laws while the country man may represent an average citizen confronting the government. This approach is useful in understanding the narrative, however, it does not provide sufficient information on either character to conduct a deep psychological analysis. Gardner writes that the psychological approach analyzes, “ …the unstated motives and unconscious states of mind of characters, authors, or readers.” (174) As such, there is not enough interaction and character development between the gatekeeper and countryman to dissect their unconscious and potential motives. The gatekeeper serves to tell the countryman that he cannot enter while the countryman submits himself to the authority of the gatekeeper. If either the countryman or gatekeeper challenged their political position there would be enough information for a psychological analysis. 

The Marxist theory provides a sound theoretical approach for interpreting Before the Law because the power dynamic between the gatekeeper and country man enables the progression of the narrative as well as reflecting political and social struggles that extend outside of the story. The psychological analysis is not as accurate in understanding the story due to the lack of character development and  insight.