Table of Contents

Introductory remarks

Comparative Analysis

In summary

This is an introduction

Understanding relationships between characters and exploring important themes is key to any novel’s political context. It also helps the reader draw their own meanings from the text. Authors can also use them to examine the effects of different social situations on characters and the human condition. The Trial by Franz Kafka as well as Catch 22 and Josef Heller, are both novels that provide relevant discussion on the injustices found in totalitarian societies. More specifically, they discuss how states control and regulate individuals. This essay will compare and contrast the two novels’ accounts of injustices. The protagonists of both novels have to interact with powerful officials in order to defend themselves. This essay will compare and contrast the accounts of injustices, where the protagonists interact with powerful officials to protect themselves. It will also examine how these systems influence justice and indoctrinate people. Comparative analysisKafka’s description of the state, while it is based on the Czech Republic’s industrialisation, is vague, generic, and not specific to any geographical particularity. Because of its opaque inner workings, the monolithic authority inflicts paranoia on the people. The novel can be interpreted from many perspectives. This investigation will focus on the legalist and political perspectives, as well as sociological and sociological interpretations. This lens is similar to Catch 22 and offers similar views on the state. These perspectives mirror the way real-world institutions work. Josef, our protagonist, is exposed to injustice and oppression by this system. Josef was arrested by two officers in the early chapters of the novel. They also prosecuted him. As he attempts to get an official conviction, he gets more desperate. Catch 22 by Joseph Heller is a satirical story about incompetent bureaucracy during World War II. It features the protagonist, the 256th Squadron American Air Forces. He fears the close-to-fatal situations his comrades and he experience on brutal flight missions. The commanding officers also reward him for his inhumane qualities. “This lawyer is only a petty lawyer. However, the great lawyers I’ve heard of, but never actually seen, have a rank that is comparatively higher than those who are despised shysters. “

This creates conflicting circumstances, as you can see in K’s character. K’s urgent need to defend himself against the courts results in K hiring incompetent or “petty” lawyers to provide for the majority. K’s middle-class status prevents him access to lawyers with more prestige and “rank”, which could help alleviate his situation. K is enraged by the “corrupted and senseless” proceedings that form the backbone a judicial institution that focuses solely on prosecuting “criminals.” K is introduced to a businessman who has already hired five “petty legal representatives” and is currently negotiating with one more. He claims that he cannot neglect any “useful” information, which highlights how desperate the unjustly accused are. K gets the same sympathetic support throughout the scene as K. This scene highlights to the reader not only the inefficiency of hiring low-status lawyers but also how it doesn’t allow anyone to exceed the system’s goal to prosecute criminals. The reality is that the existing small-scale bureaucracy is self-perpetuating and keeps repeating itself. K approaches this court, and the court is not willing to change. K is unable to find a competent lawyer because the bureaucracy underpinning the court is incompetent. K feels that the court is against K and won’t allow him to appeal. K seeks assistance because the legal system can be difficult to understand. The legal system is so complex that lawyers are necessary to confront it. He is therefore unable appeal as the lower systems do not allow him to, almost as if lower bureaucrats are extensions of this system. Only wealthy and powerful lawyers can change the system. It is obvious that this man cannot change the system simply by his place within the rigid societal system. This is critical because it is not common for the main causes to be obvious. Also, it is clear that all those involved in the issue are rational-minded. This doesn’t mean that we should condemn the system for its evil, but instead, we need to focus on the system that prioritizes effectiveness and is therefore moral. This process is very similar to the hearings of Senator Joseph Raymond McCarthy in 1950s. This led to a national witch hunt for all Communist Party members. Catch 22 paragraph 1. Although Catch 22 is a comedy of World War 2 bureaucratic idiocy. The artistic intention of the book, however, is to expose the real-world tragedies that are the result of bureaucracies. The author constructs reality so that the reader is forced to consider how these characters survived in their society. Also, why the system failed them morally. Catch 22 characters consider their government to be nonsensical due to increased media coverage. Yossarian’s basic instinct to avoid death is a contrast to this larger social motive. K’s goal, to escape the state apparatus and get his job back, is quite different. He wants to return to normal living. Yossarian is also questioning why war was ever fought. The state offers no explanations or justifications for soldiers’ actions. Yossarian doesn’t have a coherent understanding of what happened. Hostile armed forces “shot at Yossarian with cannons each time he flew high into the air” in order to bomb them. The court-martial also saw the bureaucracy execute the entire army of soldiers without any incitement or consideration for their mindsets. Yossarian responds to Dunbar’s claim that there is “no patriotism”, and Yossarian says the same. Yossarian’s and his compatriots are completely unaware of the greater justifications for war. The absurd and obscure bureaucratic logic that led to most tragedies is what the reader sees. This speaks to more disillusionment with the state’s incompetence than fear of its power. However, those in authority continue to make obnoxious decisions that lead to people being killed. The Trial shows an opaque, irrational regime that is shrouded in secrecy and yet is equally brutally evil and as heinous. Both cases use the law to regulate and enforce certain behavior. It is used to determine what actions are right and not through a punitive system that serves a purpose. This system is meant to accomplish a primary goal of winning war. These issues are viewed from the perspective non-beneficiaries. Yossarian’s experience in the lowest rank of the army allows for critical insight into how the system distorts justice. K’s experiences as a convicted man explores the outrageous and unusual tactics that are used against him. Drawing a comparison between the two bureaucracies will help you to understand the areas of moral concern in them. Catch 22 shows how unbalanced power dynamics can result in unprincipled systems. K’s tragedy lies at its core in the fact that the court hierarchy is vast and has “faceless” leaders. This is why institutions can incite paranoia in others without any accountability. Chapter 2Is it worth paying a lot to attain a primary goal? The system works as an effective method because it constrains individuals to work for the government. Extreme measures are used to maximize the state’s advantage in particular situations. For example, the Trial confidentiality makes it easier for people to be convicted. However, the secretive nature of the trial makes it possible to conceal the court’s actions. K’s dignity has been eroded by the inefficient paperwork in the bureaucracy. Although it appears to be something noble, it actually restrains individuals and keeps them under control. “

The Trial has a very irrational justice system. Because the justice is not fair, it doesn’t make the harm that’s caused permanent. Additionally, officials in the framework are focused only on fulfilling their duty. Many people who are in power are blindly following the rules. This is because they believe that people are selected on the basis of their ability, experience, and expertise. But, in reality, it is based on political intelligence, which is assessed quantitatively. Catch 22 is a similar example. A man who signed more loyalty oaths to the state was more loyal. This is often inhumane, as the only thing that judges a person’s righteousness is their ability to calculate the value of quantitative data. However, this serves a single purpose and comes with significant moral considerations. Catch 22 is home to the absurdity that arises from the clash of two rational goals. Cathcart, for example, aspires to become a great military general. He misuses his power by increasing the number of required missions to return home. The squadrons strive for survival and self-worth. The system is essentially only bothered with the crunching of quantitative statistics, which don’t address social issues such as instigation to paranoia or suspicion. Hungry Joe gets disillusioned at Cathcart’s system when the “numbers required before returning to home” increase as soon as his command is restored. Hungry Joe then “rewrote his letters home,” showing the inconsistency of this system. This raises the question of “Is it worthwhile achieving a primary aim at the expense a loss unaccountable?”

In both cases, the oppressed become alienated because they are cheated. The absurd system forces them to accept the society for what it really is. The system’s members are rational and don’t mind moral ambiguity, even though they may be acting in a cruel way. The system is therefore moral because it doesn’t have to make immoral judgments but only makes judgements that are necessary for its purpose. In this sense, the state could be considered an entity because of its broad reach and ability to influence others. Kquestion & Face Officials is often confronted in the novel. It’s because everyone has a part to play, not just those that are trying to help him. A bureaucracy has been programmed to perform a simple task. It calculates loss by quantifying things like lives lost in war or criminals being prosecuted. But since it is possible to suffer from alienation, paranoia, fear creation, and loss of dignity, it is often difficult for them to do their job. Malevolent irresponsibility This is all too common when we consider Heller’s paradox that repeats irrational, largely based on the protection of the powerful and consolidating their power over the masses. The novel’s catch 22 is a metaphor for how bureaucratic rules are enforced. Orr would be insane not to fly more mission, but he could if that was what he desired. He was not allowed to fly them. However, if Orr wanted to, he could. Yossarian was deeply moved and let out an respectful whistle. “

Yossarian is unable to control his emotions in most situations where he feels overwhelmed. The fighter pilots place a lot of emphasis on rational thought, even though they feel they must submit to dangerous and life-threatening situations. K. admits to not knowing the law but insists he knows it. In Kafka’s fiction, K. speaks with officers and explains that they understand that to be innocent, one must have a coherent understanding of what is allowed. But, because K. is a character, we are able to sympathise with him and agree that the “crime” he “committed is not justifiable. This is part of the theme absurdity. To understand this, it is necessary to first define absurdity. The quality or state which is unreasonable or ridiculous is what the administrative decisions made in each novel are. Further, both the protagonists and most of the characters in the novel are victims or bureaucrats. The novel is told through the eyes and experiences of oppressed citizens. This not only ensures that the insights are honest, but it also means that the integrity of main characters is not predisposed for corruption and misuse of authority. The bureaucracy can be described as a single mono-let. Communication is made through notes and letters by members who think the same. Because the ranks are not chosen for their efficiency or competence, but rather because of how politically savvy they are, it is homogenous. Simultaneously, one can understand it’s motivations by how it serves a purpose. It is not an antagonist, so the enemy isn’t always the focus. It isn’t rational because it doesn’t care. However, it can’t be known if it is rational, as it lacks human characteristics (absent motives and incentives). It seems irrational, because K and state depend on each other. Our personal judgements of the courts are either rational or irrational. This leads to a question, as it’s not to say that K is directly to blame for K’s misfortunes. Cathcart is an ambitious army officer and is a prime example of someone who blindly follows the rules of bureaucratic hierarchy, and does everything necessary to accomplish a single goal. Cathcart’s perverse motivations in sending his soldiers to war willingly and enthusiastically portrays the bureaucratic mindset negatively. However, Cathcart is backed by logic and reason in his own head. In chapter 8, the colonels are seen having a talk with Yossarian regarding his dismissal. The colonels can’t send Yossarian home because he won’t fly any more missions. It would appear that he is being rewarded and it would go against his obligation to service. To the contrary, Korn, Cathcart and others would risk their careers as colonels by allowing Yossarian, who is a rebel, to remain part of the squadron. Yossarian is required to accept any offer or be tried and found guilty. Suspicion or alienation? In the trial, the only thing that creates suspicion is the inability to understand how the system operates. K receives a call from the state in the morning asking him to report to court. He is not given the number or the time. This gives him the idea that he must prove he is innocent in order for the case to be won. This is unfair because the state controls the rules. K is effectively investing his money in a pointless system by hiring a small lawyer. K may be wealthy as the wealthy businessman was, but he wasn’t allowed to access the “great lawyers,” a group of highly regarded lawyers who are not available to K. K soon realizes that any action he takes in defense of himself only leads him to deeper and more meaningless things in his life. K’s final moments are a triumphant one. K made the right decisions, remained rational, and refused to submit to the demands of bureaucracy. Catch 22’s final chapter tells the story of an important turning point in Yossarians’ life. He watches his friend die in a shrapnel accident. Yossarian gains self-worth from it. He concludes by stating that we are as stuck in the system as we would be in death if we continue to stay in it. He also states that all of “man [is] matter,” which is a statement that Snowden made, inferring that Snowden died before his spirit was lost. This mostly emphasizes that the human desire to be respected is an essential part of our autonomy. Power and size. One system is a fixed and unstoppable force, while the other seems endless and everywhere. This is due to the choices made by both protagonists. The Trial assumes that K has an unreachable authority. Kafka uses his efforts in soliciting information from state officials to illustrate the potential size and suppression state. Yossarian is only trying to survive the disasters of war. This makes his character less confrontational than K, who seeks legitimacy and truth, and restores normalism. Both texts show different aspects of bureaucracies. However, they provide a synthesised view of bureaucracies. Additionally, the power systems within bureaucracies can be self-sustaining and ruthless. This can be seen through interactions between the state, its characters, and also among the characters. Cathcart with the Court officials during The Trial. K has to work through the complicated court system because of its difficulty. Due to the complexity and inability of the courts system, the lower levels of the bureaucracy have been responsible for dealing the the court (the higher level bureaucracy), thereby making it self-sustaining. They are also so complex and irrational that no one can control them, creating confusion and suffering for people who don’t deserve it. This is modern power. Power isn’t visible or forceful anymore. Instead, it hides behind bureaucratic machinery. They represent aspects of bureaucracies like corruption of power, senselessness and distorted justice. These characters are important because we all have to be able to empathize.

gabrieldillon