English Literature

A Hunger Artist, is a short abstract story written by Franz Kafka, who through a simple protagonist explains an individuals unworthiness and insignificance in a society full of selfishness. He paints up a world full of materialistic people, who for their own entertainment would even have others die in front of their eyes, but will not move a flinch as it is not themselves dying. The story displays numerous strong emotions, ranging from poverty, helplessness, and a corrupt, materialistic society, where themes of death and isolation dominate the world. Kafka through his story expresses a mans tale of depravity and search for his own life, his individuality. His poverty forces him to sell his art of starving to a manager who puts him in a cage, out to display for the public, who are initially amazed by this mans determination and astonishing skill, but soon become vary of his talents.

No matter he breaks his fast after forty days, the artists believes that he could amaze his spectators by creating an even better record, but due to the lack of peoples interest, he sells himself to the circus. Due to the lack of demand, he finds his cage next to other animals, where he is nothing but a weak, sad, and uninteresting creature. Even the artist looses interest in his life, runs out of the count of his fasting days, and even is disgusting by the mere idea of eating, as he believes he does not like it any more. His body with the incessant starving sequel gives up to a silent death, and the only thing people are able to notice is an empty cage, which is immediately, filled by a roaring panther, with the existence of any human or rather animal, which had ever occupied it completely forgotten (Trudeau, 1998).

Some critics believe that the protagonist displayed in the short story was actually a depiction of Kafka himself, describing his loneliness, anger towards the society and his alienation from the world via the story of a helpless, starving man, enslaved by choice. The author found himself a victim under the hands of the evil society, who misunderstood him and whereby he struggled to pick up roles and act them, when he actually disgusted them (Provan, 2009). Traces of relevance of Kafkas life and the protagonist run back into the authors life. He lived in a small confined house, and had to take up a job in the office, which he loathed, like the hunger artist living in a cage, and starves to stay on exhibition as a job. The way the artist felt unappreciated and had to sell him eventually at a cheaper rate to the circus, Kafka also felt that his scriptures did not interest people and remained unattended as he was misunderstood by the ignorant society (Rubinstein, pp. 13-19).

Whereas the starvation act pulled up the artist is also an aspect of Kafkas life, where he choose alleviation from food and turned into a vegetarian. Some believe that he suffered from an inferiority complex under his fathers presence who was a physically strong man, while Kafka always remained weak and feeble within his family, which further subdued his presence. The way Kafka in real life hid behind the justification of being a vegetarian, which allowed him to be physically weak, he makes his protagonist wear the same gauntlet. When the hunger artist eventually tired of proving his skill declares that he is fasting because he doesnt like food, is a mere replication of his own weak stance which he wore throughout his life.

A Hunger Artist, like most of other Kafkas works is strong blend of metaphors, with deep and hidden meanings, their ambiguity usually left upon the readers ability to interpret within his own circumstances. The main theme of the story is the form of art picked by the protagonist, which is a metaphor for his level of suffering. He enjoys his agony of starvation, through the sense of free will and self-denial, which is the only determinant factor keeping him alive. No matter his freedom is only confined to his cage but still he possesses the ability to manipulate his hunger, and pain, is able to push beyond humanly possible limits of starvation, as he can isolate his cage away from the consumerist cruel world (Trudeau, 1998).

Starvation to death depicts the aspects of poverty in the story as the artist himself is not profound of his skill, and at a stage of extreme desperation even admits to the fact that had he found food he had liked he wouldnt had ever chosen it as a profession. The world forced him to suffer and was not through his complete free will, which he had been in the past using to remain determined towards his cause had the world been more flexible to his character and abilities he would have selected a better way out of his miseries. There is no existence of his free will, but he is more likely to be treated as one of the zoo animals when he does not read the contract with the circus and allows himself to be placed next to the animals, which equates his art equal to that of a wild animal, untamed and a form of mere entertainment (Rubinstein, pp. 13-19).

The story holds its main criticism against the capitalist world, which fails to recognize the skills and ability of an artist, and caters them merely as possession of the harsh society. He wants the recognition of a suffering martyr rather than an entertainer whom people see and enjoy the display. What makes him different from other artists is that he does not choose a regular medium such as a manuscript or a painting to express his art, but rather picks up the scenario of a bizarre cage and depicting himself as a hungry, weak human in front of a cheering and large audience. This medium is not able to gain much recognition in the form of an actual human, but rather when the circus puts up photographs of his suffering out on sale, they gain more appreciation and sorrow from people, rather than the suffering man himself.

The basic role of an artist is to deliver an emotional side, a hidden feeling inside the viewer it is his work to inspire others and to make them think in his way however, the hunger artist found himself unable to deliver his art to his materialistic viewers. He was in a constant phase of suffering and agony, which grew worse with every passing day, but those who came around to see him, as they always took him for entertainment rather than a symbol, which would make them suffer in return, never understood his role as an artist. The protagonist by the end of the story felt this chain between his viewers and art break, which made him weak and annoyed for his inability to deliver, which became the main reason to his death (Provan, 2009).

He wants to prove to his audience that his suffering and pain is at a much higher level than what their normal abilities will allow, and he wants to prove himself superior in terms of intellect, intelligence, and emotions. He forces himself to live through this vicious cycle more when his audience looses their trust in him, and believes that he is lying about never eating this misunderstanding even further increases his misery. He forces to gain attention from people, trying to break world records of fasting, showing unbelievable form of determination and strength doing his best to prove his superiority, but still is unable to force his spectators to believe which intensifies his misery and level of dissatisfaction in his own abilities.

However, no matter the artist tries his best to deliver his suffering up to the audience, but remains unsuccessful until death, as the spectators are not used to seeing or understanding suffering at any level at all. The author portrays them as an emotionless, selfish crowd, who rather than sharing the mans remorse are actually entertained by it, or at other circumstances find him faking the pain, and feel superior waking past a weak fragile man, in a strong and healthy manner (Trudeau, 1998).
The irony which the author tries to depict through this portrayal is how the artist is the only one who is able to understand his art of suffering fully, and is even further dissatisfied and agonized by it while the audience which only looks at it as a form of entertainment is overjoyed by such a display. Thus, the suffering remains confined within his cage alone, while there is just happiness and fulfillment on the outside (Rubinstein, pp 13-19). The panther, which appears at the end of the story, is another metaphor, which is actually the opposite of the artist, it is a vicious animal with the ability to entertain others by even eating humans, while all his life the artist had tried to do the opposite but had remained unsuccessful. The panther no matter is just another animal, but it does not remain confined to the imprisonment of its cage, but has the power to show his freedom.

Another silent theme, which runs parallel along the story in a very subtle way, is the irony of the reality, which Kafka describes it as the comedy of life. How his character does not eat because he does not like food, is an expression of hilarity to the author, as to how humans to could satisfy their needs just through mental distraction and self-deception. Critics consider his writings as dark fables, by some hold impairing meanings silently spoken, completely left on the readers capacity to comprehend. The strongest and most impelling theme of the story is how it reaches out to its reader no matter in reality hunger artists do not exist but still holds the power to deliver its self, touching the emotional side of each reader. Regardless of the fact that the story was written back in 1922, and displayed a cruel and selfish society, seen by a sensitive man back then, but even a century old story doesnt wither off with time. It does not only depict a cruel, relentless world, clapping its hands in front of a display of power, but also a world with dead emotions, which in its race with time has forgotten the value of sharing suffering of others, changing from a community to a world of random individuals.