Marxist vs Psychological Reading of "Before the Law"

“Before the Law”, by Franz Kafka, can be read using various lenses, with each providing a unique perspective and reading of the short story. One such approach is through Marxist criticism, which highlights socioeconomic and class elements. Through this explication, the story becomes one about a poor country man who seeks to rise through the social system but is hindered by a gatekeeper of higher class and authority. At first, the country man believes that the “law should always be accessible to everyone”, but after he speaks with the gatekeeper and realizes how frightening the system actually is, he “decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission” to go beyond the first gate (Kafka 1). The gatekeeper impedes the man from entering the gates through his physical appearance and intimidation, which is representative of the power struggle between social classes. The man from the country also “spends everything… to win over the gatekeeper” but is still unable to gain access to the first gate (Kafka 1). This evokes the economic factor of Marxism; though the man gives all that he owns, it is never enough to allow him the ability to rise above his social status. Using the Marxist lens, the reader is able to understand Kafka’s story of a power struggle within a hierarchy, with the lower class never being able to gain access to rights or privileges because of socioeconomic barriers. 

Another reading of the text can be made through the psychological theory lens. This perspective deals with the examination of the internal desires and motivations of characters and their relationship with the world around them. This allows “Before the Law” to be read as a narrative depicting the deterioration of a man’s mind due to forces seemingly beyond his control, some which may be entirely figurative instead of literal. In this reading, the law which the protagonist is seeking to obtain transforms into an ambiguous figurative symbol. It is unclear what exactly the man desires, but this larger struggle becomes lackluster compared to the challenge directly in front of him: the first gate and gatekeeper. He is overwhelmed by this initial obstacle, and despite being presented with the chance to progress, he succumbs to his fear of the unknown and a potentially greater threat to his mental state. The man makes many attempts to gain access to the law, but all are futile, so he remains outside the gate, slowly degrading into a confused old man. He “becomes childish and… asks the fleas to help him persuade the gatekeeper” in his muddled frame of mind (Kafka 1). He becomes single-minded, focusing solely on the gatekeeper for many years when he could have tried other tactics to obtain entrance to the law. In his final moments, the protagonist objectively examines his experiences and is able to procure a question asking why no one else has been to the gate. The gatekeeper responds by shouting, “’Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you’”; he then proceeds to close the gates because the man is dying (Kafka 1). The psychological theory allows the reader to grapple with this ambivalent ending and attempt to decipher what the law truly represents, which in turn aids in the understanding of why the protagonist so desperately sought access to it. 

Both of these views of “Before the Law” offer valid perspectives and an increased understanding of the text; however, the psychological theory presents a more true viewpoint of the story. Because of the ambiguous nature of the narrative, the examination of the protagonist’s mental state is extremely relevant to the plot and the way the audience may read the story. The Marxist lens makes certain elements be understood too literally, such as the meaning of the “law”, the hierarchal relationship between the two characters, and the wealth which the man gives to the gatekeeper in pursuit of entry. A more figurative reading of the text transforms it into a work which becomes more prevalent in society; the psychological theory aids in this symbolic interpretation. The law which the protagonist pursues becomes a debatable term which could represent a number of things, such as an external struggle to achieve justice or a more internal grapple with achievements and the value of a life. The relationship between the two characters becomes more one-sided, as the gatekeeper could be a figment of the country man’s imagination, a fabricated antagonist meant to allow the man to justify his own inability to progress. The wealth which the man has brought and attempts to trade for access to whatever is beyond the gate may not be of actual monetary value, but instead could consist of life experiences, which would explain why the man cannot progress; he spends a majority of his time waiting instead of reaping the benefits of a life spent exploring. A psychological outlook on this text allows it to adapt to the reader’s own preferences and experiences, which makes it more ambiguous and relatable.