THE CIVICALLY ENGAGED READER
One of the three selections from the TCER anthology for our discussion group this week, is: Franz Kafka’s, Fellowship.
We generally start our meetings with a general discussion on the topics of the day, and then work our way through a set of questions provided by the editors of the anthology.
Following is the complete text of, Fellowship, and the questions provided by the anthology. I invite my visitors to comment on this work of Kafka, from any point of view, or in response to any of the provided questions. Feel free to comment on the work its self, or any of the comments, or ask your own question.
My hope here is to develop dialog among some engaged readers, with critical, incisive, witty, and discerning writing.
FELLOWSHIP
Franz Kafka
We are five friends; one day we came out of a house one after the other; first one came and placed himself beside the gate, then the second came, or rather he glided through the gate like a little ball of quicksilver, and placed himself near the first one, and then came the third, then the fourth, then the fifth. Finally we all stood in a row. People began to notice us; they pointed at us and said: those five just came out of that house. Since then we have been living together; it would be a peaceful life if it weren’t for a sixth one continually trying to interfere. He doesn’t do us any harm, but he annoys us, and that is harm enough; why does he intrude where he is not wanted? We don’t know him and don’t want him to join us. There was a time, of course, when the five of us did not know one another, either; and it could be said that we still don’t know one another, but what is possible and can be tolerated by the five of us is not possible and cannot be tolerated with this sixth one. In any case, we are five and don’t want to be six. And what is the point of this continual being together anyhow? It is also pointless for the five of us, but here we are together and will remain together; a new combination, however, we do not want, just because of our experiences. But how is one to make all this clear to the sixth one? Long explanations would almost amount to accepting him in our circle, so we prefer not to explain and not to accept him. No matter how he pouts his lips we push him away with our elbows, but however much we push him away, he comes back.
Editor’s questions:
1) Why does the narrator say that he and the other four were “friends”? What is the reason that they continue to associate with one another?
2) How is the sixth one annoying to the first five? Why don’t they want to be six?
3) Is there anything that the first five would need to know about the sixth for him to join them?
4) Why is the narrator skeptical about “long explanations”?
5) Why does the sixth keep coming back?
6) Why do you think Kafka titled this piece “Fellowship”?
7) Where does the fellowship originate, and what sustains it?
One of the three selections from the TCER anthology for our discussion group this week, is: Franz Kafka’s, Fellowship.
We generally start our meetings with a general discussion on the topics of the day, and then work our way through a set of questions provided by the editors of the anthology.
Following is the complete text of, Fellowship, and the questions provided by the anthology. I invite my visitors to comment on this work of Kafka, from any point of view, or in response to any of the provided questions. Feel free to comment on the work its self, or any of the comments, or ask your own question.
My hope here is to develop dialog among some engaged readers, with critical, incisive, witty, and discerning writing.
FELLOWSHIP
Franz Kafka
We are five friends; one day we came out of a house one after the other; first one came and placed himself beside the gate, then the second came, or rather he glided through the gate like a little ball of quicksilver, and placed himself near the first one, and then came the third, then the fourth, then the fifth. Finally we all stood in a row. People began to notice us; they pointed at us and said: those five just came out of that house. Since then we have been living together; it would be a peaceful life if it weren’t for a sixth one continually trying to interfere. He doesn’t do us any harm, but he annoys us, and that is harm enough; why does he intrude where he is not wanted? We don’t know him and don’t want him to join us. There was a time, of course, when the five of us did not know one another, either; and it could be said that we still don’t know one another, but what is possible and can be tolerated by the five of us is not possible and cannot be tolerated with this sixth one. In any case, we are five and don’t want to be six. And what is the point of this continual being together anyhow? It is also pointless for the five of us, but here we are together and will remain together; a new combination, however, we do not want, just because of our experiences. But how is one to make all this clear to the sixth one? Long explanations would almost amount to accepting him in our circle, so we prefer not to explain and not to accept him. No matter how he pouts his lips we push him away with our elbows, but however much we push him away, he comes back.
Editor’s questions:
1) Why does the narrator say that he and the other four were “friends”? What is the reason that they continue to associate with one another?
2) How is the sixth one annoying to the first five? Why don’t they want to be six?
3) Is there anything that the first five would need to know about the sixth for him to join them?
4) Why is the narrator skeptical about “long explanations”?
5) Why does the sixth keep coming back?
6) Why do you think Kafka titled this piece “Fellowship”?
7) Where does the fellowship originate, and what sustains it?
posted by Rex at 2:06 PM
11 Comments:
First, I do not beleive "The Fellowship" will be easy to synopsize, hoping desperately that there is such a spelling for the word.I suspect having questions provided by the moderater is the best way to keep the discussion with in parameters that are managerable.The short item it self brings up some fundamental and basic traits most human beings share, namely a firm dislike for change. Ironically the one constant there seems to be about life is that it changes. We can rationalize are responses and perhaps feel sure that our answer is true,but unfortunately we can never be absolutely sure we are right. I think of it in terms of infinity, ever approaching never reaching. 1. Friends, here seems to refer to a very loose association or gathering of persons who feel they have some common undefined interest. Their association continues because it appears they feel safe in this configuration and too lazy to examine the unhappiness they harbor about being together because they fear isolation. 2.Number 6 would like to join,and by seeking to join he changes the configuration and irrationally is percieved as a threat. 3. No because I don't believe the action is based on something logical or rational. 4.Long explanations often are seen as excuses or rationalizations. Is this fair , I'm not sure. 5. My answer is a question. Why not ,he is certain he wants to join. 6. Maybe because "Fellowship" is a universal emotion commonto all mankind and a fundmental urge needing to be fulfilled. 7.I believe it is innate in all mankind,it is that element of life that demands we are concerned about others and where possible offer assistance. As Aristotle said an individual isolated is either a beast or a god.And if I might add I would prefer to have neither against me!
Anonymous (AKA Ray, I think): thanks for your response. I’m responding, in a general sense, to the overall impact of the story on my sense of fairness and rights towards fellow man. I will make other comments on my impressions, and opinions on the questions, over the next few days.
This is a fascinating story. It seems to me an enigma that cannot be solved. The sixth man in this piece reminds me of the lawyer’s consternation in dealing with Melville’s, Bartleby the Scrivener, “I would prefer not to”, when ask to any other office task than copy text. What does one do!
Question 1: To identify the five as friends tells the reader that they shared a stronger relationship than just acquaintances or roommates. Their continued association is because of their friendship.
Question Two: Each of the five seems to have an affinity for the other four, therefore: they have a common bond of friendship amongst five.
None of the five seems to have an affinity for the sixth; even if the sixth does have an affinity for the five, the affinity is not common amongst all, therefore: there cannot be a common bond of friendship amongst the six.
Humans seem to have some unexplainable affinity for some other humans, and none for others. If this affinity is not mutual then friendship or love, between individuals or groups, will not develop or flourish.
Love: A deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.
Love: A strong predilection or enthusiasm.
Friendship: A person whom one knows, likes, and trusts.
Question 3:
No: if they already know enough to know they don’t want him, they would conversely know if they did want him.
Question 4:
Long explanations do not account for the “Mutual Affinity” issue. Long explanations would also increase the frustration of the sixth; affinity, if it exists, is a “first sight” feeling.
Question 5
Why does the sixth keep coming back: to create frustration and conflict in the story; and causing the reader to pursue the argument for why the sixth is excluded.
Question 6:
I think Kafka was trying to discriminate between the feelings of humans for one another from a group perspective as opposed to individual.
Fellowship: The condition of sharing similar interests, ideals, or experiences, as by reason of profession, religion, or nationality. The companionship of individuals in a congenial atmosphere and on equal terms. A close association of friends or equals sharing similar interests.
This is my last comment on this topic.
Thank you for visiting my blog.
I hope to hear from you on other topics.
I see a touch of irony in the title. When I think of fellowship, I think of the more welcoming fellowship of a church group that would typically reach out to new members. While the group of five may enjoy fellowship amongst themselves, I suspect that not only do they not want this sixth person to join, but they might want to stay isolated and keep out the rest of the world too. Plus there is a sense of isolation within the group of five too i.e. it could be said that we still don’t know one another.
Thank you Kim for your comment.
I hope you will visit again and join in on the next Critical Reader question.
Post a Comment
<< Home