M2D1 Kafka and Justice: Justice in Franz’s Kafka’s In the Penal Colony

Instructions M2D1: Kafka and Justice Read: - Franz’s Kafka’s “In the Penal Colony” - View a short 14 minute film adaptation of Franz’s Kafka’s “In the Penal Colony” https://www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=StwAGxbPxlU - Review an interpretation of the story by a professional scholar. This is an existentialist reading of the story, entitled "Fear and Trembling in the Penal Colony". Now: write a paper of 250 words or more, analyze and describe the concept of justice in Kafka’s story “In the Penal Colony.” Now: read the two post listed below and provide feedback for each. Post #1 By: Matthew C. Justice. That term is extremely common in the United States. We tend to hold it up as an ideal. Do we really want justice though? Who determines what is just? In Franz Kafkas “The Penal Colony”, who is showing justice? Is it the Officer or the Traveler who wants true justice? In order to understand the concept of justice used in this short story, we must have a better understanding of what justice is. The Merriam-Webster definition of justice is, “the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments.” Then what is just? One definition is “acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good” (Merriam-Webster, 2017). Based off of these definitions we can make the claim that justice is administering judgement based on a code of morality. Now we are left with another question; whose morality? In the story, the Condemned Man is sentenced to death for what many would claim is a minor disobedience. The Officer has been given the authority to sentence the man for his “crime.” The Condemned Man’s punishment is to have his crime cut into his body until he dies. Not only that, but the process is drawn out in order to make him suffer longer. When the Traveler asks is if the Condemned Man is aware of his sentence and if he has been able to defend himself, he is told that this is not the case. The Officer explains that this form of punishment is authorized by the Commandant, even if it is an old method that many of the people are not happy with (Kafkas, 2015). So in short, the Officer’s punishment is within the Penal Colonies laws, even if it is very harsh punishment. So is the Officer just? The Traveler was not happy that the Condemned Man was not given the opportunity to defend his side of the case, but the law did not require it. In order to have justice you must have some form of law or rules. A standard in order to establish what is right and wrong. The Penal Colony had that standard. The Officer followed that standard so he is being just, and yet something does not sit right. Who decides what the laws are and therefore what is just? The Penal Colony leaves us questioning ourselves. Even though we usually claim to want justice, do we always want it? If justice is meting out rewards or punishments in accordance with the law, then whose law do we want followed? In this story the Officer followed the laws and punishments, but the Traveler felt that he was not being just. Everything boils down to one question. What is the ultimate standard for right and wrong, and is it actually just? Post #2 By: Ronnie R. In Kafka’s story, In the Penal Colony, the concept of justice seems to be based on the idea that there’s no need for due process as it will only create confusion and delay the inevitable punishment. We see this when the Traveler asks the Officer if the condemned knows that he has been sentenced, what the sentence will be, and whether he has had a chance to defend himself to which the officer replied with no, “He experiences it on his body” (Kafka, 1941, para 8). The fact that the condemned didn’t have a chance to defend himself and that the Officer seems confused and at times irritated at the Travelers questions shows how justice is perceived by the Officer. The Officer’s views on justice seemed to be shared by most of the colony at one point but seems to have fallen out of favor since the old commandant, who is now deceased, was replaced by a new commandant. This change shows how difficult it is for some people to accept change even when they can see how much others oppose it through lack of public interest in attendance during executions and efforts in maintaining the apparatus. Justice in the eyes of the Officer is the enforcement of laws through punishment delivered by the apparatus which is certain death. He sees due process as a waste of time since he already knows the facts as described to him by the captain who tells the Officer the condemned fell asleep on duty. If the Officer where to investigate he would be lied to by the condemned which would lead to a lengthy process and ultimately the same verdict of the servant being punished. This explanation also shows the reader that the idea of justice in the Colony is based on maintaining law and order which appears to be following orders of those in power or facing the apparatus. In all, it ends pretty interestingly when the Officer subjects himself to the apparatus, which he sets to inscribe “Be Just” on his body, showing that nobody is above the law and everyone is subject to the same type of justice in the colony (Kafka, 1941).