Wednesday, January 2, 2019
Due Friday, January 4th - Read and Respond to "The Hunger Artist" by Franz Kafka
Directions: Please read "The Hunger Artist" by Franz Kafka. Next, compose a blog response where you explore the following: This short story is an allegory. What symbolic elements does Kafka use to describe the life of the artist? How can you apply it to artists/art that you know (modern music, film, literature, theatre, etc). How does Kafka's views differ from that of Wilde? How are they similar? Further, what are your views on the "purpose" of art? How does it impact your life?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Overview : Toni Morrison has created a duality in Beloved, as at once the daughter Sethe murdered out of love, and as a former slave who lo...
-
Directions : 1) Please read the following "Recitatif" by Toni Morrison. 2) Take notes . Read slowly, and try to visualize ... -
Part I: Freewriting Either in a series of bullet points or freewriting, explore the following as they pertain to you: “Nature” – Ethnici...
Kafka uses the Starving Artist to show artists’ dedication to their work. They are willing to make art a priority even if it means putting themselves down. I feel like shows something about audiences and how people will be super focused on something and then in a matter of a few days, it will fade. For example, when a new movie is released on Netflix, it's the latest fad. Recently the movie Bird Box has been what everyone is talking about it, and people are even making challenges out of it. However, in a matter of a few days, everyone will have watched and no one will even remember it in a few weeks. Also, I feel like the audience watching a man suffering and not doing anything about it is similar to today’s music industry. Millions of people listen to explicit lyrics that degrade people or are insulting, however, people still like the singers and listen to their music, supporting them. While Kafka believes that the art and the artist should be recognized, Wilde has different opinions. He believes that artists should create as a passion and not for fame. I personally appreciate art, but don’t necessarily understand it. There are some pieces that I think I can analyze, however with modern art, I don’t understand the simplicity of the pieces and their meanings.
ReplyDeleteMichelle, I loved your connection to the fads with this piece. It's such a good point and so true that after so long it fades away and people seem to have forgotten what was once such a big thing. Same with music and supporting people whose lyrics degrade people.
DeleteI really like how you connected this to Bird Box because I just watched it and totally agree with you.
DeleteI found “The Hunger Artist” to be an incredibly unique short story about the pains and woes of art, and how far an artist is willing to go for their craft. The artist is described as being kept in, “a small, barred cage,” with, “his ribs sticking out prominently,”. Even when his allotted time for fasting was complete, the artist found himself wanting to, “keep going,” and resented the very people who wanted him to stop - many of which were the same that cheered him on to keep going a few days prior. I think Kafka purposely put the hunger artist in a cage, as it certainly represents how many artists trap themselves in their work, never wanting to leave and never truly satisfied with their artistry. They devote their entire life to their craft, much like the hunger artist quite literally ended his life as a result of his own work. I think it is certainly reflective of modern music artists, who oftentimes completely disappear for months on end, simply to hone their craft and produce music that they are proud of. While Kafka and Wilde both seem to appreciate art at its purest form, they are definitely on two different ends of the spectrum; while Kafka desperately loves art and believes both the art and artist themselves should be acknowledged, as Michelle said, Wilde seems to think that art should simply be admired for its beauty and elegance as opposed to its underlying meaning and background. Personally, I love art. It is an outlet for creativity, and things like music and drawing make me very happy. I will say, however, that my opinions don’t seem to be as extreme as Kafka’s, nor as aloof as Wilde’s.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that this was a unique short story, I don't think I've ever read something like that and I'm sure many people haven't either.
DeleteThe work of Wilde and Kafka exhibit the contrast between Romanticism and Realism as literary methods. Both speak of the influence which time has on art—how modernity inevitably becomes old-fashioned. Wilde states that,“The old believe everything: the middle-aged suspect everything: the young know everything.” Likewise, Kafka makes clear that “While for grown-ups the hunger artist was often merely a joke, something they participated in because it was fashionable, the children looked on amazed, their mouths open…” Like Michelle said, Wilde and Kafka are in agreement that the youth represent the popularity of current trends, but that as they age that interest, or artistic style, will be forgotten and replaced.
ReplyDeleteIn response to this, Wilde proposes a form of art detached from life, while Kafka points to failure of the public to understand the artist. Wilde’s notion of aestheticism is reliant upon the ability of artists to create art independent of public interest and demand. He says that, “The only thing that the artist cannot see is the obvious. The only thing that the public can see is the obvious. The result is the Criticism of the Journalist.” Ideally, because romantic art is not relatable to a certain period or group of people, it cannot go out of style, as in the plight of the hunger artist. However, Kafka emphasizes the sacrifice that artists make to spend their time creating, and the consequences for the artist if the public cannot perceive the purpose of the art. For the hunger artist, “It was impossible to fight against this lack of understanding, against this world of misunderstanding.” Kafka implies that certainly, realism evolves quickly, but romanticism is doomed to failure for the public cannot even understand their own history, much less that which is not “obvious.” I’ve experienced this when I see “abstract” art and it is be difficult to make sense of, but realistic portraiture or landscapes are easier to comprehend, even if they are centuries old.
Emma, I thought your connection to youth representing the popularity of current trends was such a good point. I didn't even catch that, but it's true, Kafka brings up children all throughout his piece and if you think about it youth controls what's popular in our media today as well! :)
DeleteFranz Kaftka’s The Hunger Artist is both a thought provoking story and a bizarre tale of seclusion and martyrdom. The “Hunger Artist” sits in his cage, isolated from a world, which no longer appreciates his art, and is carted out daily for viewing by those few who continue to gawk and judge. Typically, butchers arrive daily to monitor the artist’s diminishing existence. These overseers are symbolic of those in society who critique the artist and choose to cut them down to their most ordinary and unimaginative parts. The Hunger Artist is an allegory that presents the proverbial “starving artist” as a trapped and constricted artist who is misunderstood by the ignorant everyday masses. The cage is symbolic of the limitation placed on an artist’s truest-self, and in the end, the panther, a wild, base creature, stands in juxtaposition to the artist's elevated aesthetic. Unfortunately, Kaftka, whether ironic or not, misses the point on art. For me, art must be experienced by the person from that individual’s own perspective. Kaftka’s insinuates that the artist should be understood on the artist’s terms, but unfortunately, each person, brings to the artistic experience their own life’s experience, and the artist must be secure enough in their work to gift the interpretation to the viewer. In this regard, I align with Oscar Wilde’s concept of aestheticism.
ReplyDeleteThe interpretation of art in A Hunger Artist is unique and shocking, but looking past the morbid nature of the art, it is a conventional tragic but romantic depiction of an artist. In a literal sense, by sitting in a cage for people to view, the Hunger Artist puts his passion on display, which comes naturally to him but amazes others. He even uses the Impresario as a promoter while touring and is subject to shifting fads, similar to how a band may operate today. Predictably, the hunger artists continues his work to his own detriment simply for the art of it and the deep personal meaning it has to him, much like a painter who spends their last savings on a canvas they will never sell. In this regard the Hunger Artist is essentially a variation of the modern tortured genius or starving artist, however things complicate when comparing it to Wilder’s view of art. On the one hand, the Hunger Arts aligns with Wilder’s view of art in that he has no overt political message or intended meaning. However, in a subtle way, by giving every part of himself to his work, the Hunger Artist unintentionally makes it more than just entertainment. Additionally, he states during his time at the circus that only those who can identify with hunger can appreciate his work, adding an aspect of suffering in solidarity to his performance. There is also the fundamental problem that his work is not beautiful and very realistic. Instead, the Hunger Artist occupies the grey area in which good art tends to habitat, only in this case it is between grotesque spectacle and sympathetic tragedy.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the obscurity behind the Hunger Artist’s work, my own thoughts on the purpose and qualifications of art are also vague. In my view, art is any tangible expression of an object or one’s self for the purpose of being consumed by others. I recognize that my view of art is broad, but I think that it is more proper in this case to keep the base requirements low and make subjective decisions from there than to potentially eliminate swaths of possibilities. Art exists in every form of media I can think of, probably many that I don’t know of, and ones that don’t exist yet. As such, any major restrictions would likely eliminate something I would certainly consider art. Additionally, there such a thin difference between art and other that drawing such a line would be impossible. For example, what is the difference between dancing, a form of art, and doing jumping jacks and calling it dance, if any exists. The result is a complicated mess, but I believe that it is worth it to be precise because art has a large impact on my life. I consume art all day long. In my car I listen to music, which I also do while doing my homework. When not doing homework I watch T.V. and movies, I hang posters on the wall, I even read on rare occasion. I consider all of these things to make my life more interesting and so I do not want to deny any of them the dignity of being called art.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed Kafka’s short story, “The Hunger Artist”. I think that it really relates to modern day artists. In this day and age it takes a lot to get noticed with the flooding of art in the forms of music, pictures, writing, etc. on social media. To really stand out, artists must present themselves in a different or new way to grab society’s attention and will go to extremes to do just that. I agree with Kristy that the cage was a major symbol of this story. The artist is confined to a cage while outsiders “were given the task of observing the hunger artist day and night”. This small amount of time that the onlooker watches the artist can represent the time it may take for someone to study a painting or listen to music, but then they leave and continue on with their lives. It is only the artist who knows how much time and effort that goes into their work, while the onlooker just sees the end result. Kafka gets at this point by referencing a cage where the artist is not separated from his work, but lives it 24/7. This is very relevant today because a lot of times I see art or hear music and judge it based on that short observation. But it does not really compare to the months and months the artist has poured into it. Like the hunger artist, modern art usually experiences a “significant decline in popularity”. We are used to a fast-paced world where we are always searching for something new and toss the old aside. Kafka emphasises this idea when he talks about the hunger artist’s cage was not “the star attraction somewhere in the middle of the arena, but...outside in some other readily accessible spot near the animal stalls”. Although he may have been interesting to begin with, his act took a backseat to the newer acts and animals and he was tossed aside. This view is the opposite of those of Wilde. Although they both admire the finished product, Wilde looks for the art’s aesthetic value, while Kafka praises the entire process of the art, including the artist themself. I see this in my own life everyday. I listen to the new music on the radio and forget about what was considered “new” a few years or even months ago. Therefore, I feel like the purpose of art is to reflect the world and people’s views on it. As the world experiences change, so does art.
I totally agree with your view about having to do something completely outrageous in art in order to get recognition and acknowledgement for your work; the Hunger Artist really showed an extreme version of that and allowed the reader a little glimpse into the woes of an artist's attempts at their work. I also like your point about how we only really get a glimpse into the long spans of time that artist's devote to their craft.
DeleteYour thoughts about the artist's value to the public versus the actual piece's value to society is really interesting.
DeleteI like you thoughts on the contrast between Kafka and Wilde. I especially like you analysis on Wilde's views on art's aesthetic value, very insightful.
DeleteWhile reading A Hunger Artist, much like other peers mentioned, I thought it was a good reflection of the dilemma many artists face today in publishing artwork. The struggle between public recognition and appealing to them versus expressing oneself truly without caring about external views often blurs especially with the commercialization of various art. As was mentioned by Michele, Netflix would be a greatly different platform if shows remained regardless of popularity merely to express the artists views while in reality it is solely what the target audience wants to see. In a similar fashion, artists often struggle with what to portray as whatever they put out is going to be interpreted differently by each viewer. In the text, the artist had children and adults view the exact same event in such contrasting mindsets. The reactions they had, though seemingly harmless, may have caused more harm than the hunger itself. As Rian discussed, I also had a difficult time assessing what "art" is and what it is supposed to be. I feel personally that art is merely a means of expression similar to words or actions, but has morphed into this destroyed aggregate of fighting for attention and public acceptance. Unfortunately, this aforementioned issue causes many expressive artists to remain unexplored as they are swamped down by popularity.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn both technique and purpose, Franz Kafka’s “The Hunger Artist” differs greatly from Wilde’s works. One of the primary differences is its interpretation of art, or of the artist himself. Of course, Wilde had advocated aestheticism--”art for art’s sake”--as opposed to art with depth. Kafka, on the other hand, displays these conflicting views on art with his short story. Here, the message seems to convey how, if one does not “feel” art or the artist, they do not understand it/them. This is stated on the seventh page, where it describes, "If someone doesn’t feel it, then he cannot be made to understand it." In the short story, those that view the hunger artist seemed to be incredibly ignorant. Like Kristy had mentioned, I also thought that the cage acted as a metaphor. However, I saw it as a reflection of society’s closed-minded views, where they cannot comprehend the true intentions of the artist. In other words, they cannot understand the artist beyond the cage. "Because no one understood how to take him seriously" (4), the audience viewed the artist as an animal, or as another thoughtless source of entertainment. This reminded me of the episode “Fifteen Million Merits” from the Netflix show “Black Mirror”. At the end of the episode, a character’s threat of suicide becomes entertainment for an unsympathetic audience. Like “The Hunger Artist”, the viewers here are depicted as small-minded and unfeeling, unable to interpret what the “entertainment” is trying to express. Similar to Wilde, Kafka is satirizing society with his story.
ReplyDeleteI really like your connection with "Fifteen Million Merits"! Everything that happened to the main character was seen as entertainment to audiences, with the overall idea that people are drowned in the need for fulfillment, whether that be entertainment or materialistic fulfillment. The unsympathetic audience really mirrors how majority of us are today, many view artists ( in musicians, actors, etc.) as merely people who are obligated to entertain us.
DeleteI think your interpretation of the cage is really interesting, I didn't take too much time to consider the actual physical cage but rather the separation. When you say the cae is a reflection of society’s closed-minded views, I think that's really powerful.
DeleteA Hunger Artist explores the relationship between an artist and their audience in a literal sense. Being a performing artist, the hunger artist is in constant view of his audience, just as he spends his time observing them. This closeness proves distressing at times, those who ignore him leave the artist longing for the other observers for whom he was “doing everything just to keep them awake, so that he could keep showing them once again that he had nothing to eat in his cage and that he was fasting as none of them could.” Everything the artist does he does to show that he is an honest hunger artist, capable of sustaining his fast, that he is someone worth watching. The hunger artist’s motivation, driven by proving something to a crowd he seems to look down on, filled with resentment. “Why did people want to rob him of the fame of fasting longer, not just so that he could become the greatest hunger artist of all time, which he probably was already, but also so that he could surpass himself in some unimaginable way, for he felt there were no limits to his capacity for fasting.” An artist’s own resentment to the people he creates for carves an unsustainable existence. Dissatisfied with his art, with the responses to it, the artist has nowhere left to turn, creating something far from art with his whole self on display and yet so little of it shared. All those eyes on him and yet not one connection. Even in his attempts to prove his honesty as an artist, he keeps his feelings away from the watchful eye, hides his distaste but perhaps not well enough, abandoned by the world outside his cage. If someone spends their time honestly observing the subjects they are portraying that they feel they understand them, it is difficult to think that they could look on them with any sort of deep bitterness or superiority. In a sense this reminds me of Jim Morrison, constantly showing up intoxicated to performances, disrespecting his fans and bandmates, while trying to establish his place as an artist separate from their audience. This is a common theme of the eccentric artist who adopts a persona and falls so deeply into the role that they cannot see anybody outside themselves, or the person who they were before their art. Provided that Kafka sees the hunger artist as a negative figure, Kafka and Wilde could have very similar views. Thinking on Wilde’s quotes, “Those who see any difference between soul and body have neither,” and “Pleasure is the only thing one should live for. Nothing ages like happiness.” As the artist separated his internal self from his external self he caved in, alone, as he realized he had not lived a fulfilling life so separated from and angry with those he performed for. My art is mainly comprised of abstract emotions and pleasing visuals rather than complex symbolism. I think aestheticism is far more honest than it aims to be. I don’t think it is possible for the artist to separate themselves from their art entirely that it has no meaning. It does not lack the soul or body that it intends to neglect. Creating something beautiful for the viewer to observe, without anything but one’s own subconscious behind it, becomes a secret whispered between you two, a conversation of the soul and of emotions that they can see it for themselves, deriving their own feelings on it. The artist first makes art for themselves, as art is something that cannot be denied ownership over the artist, and cannot be replicated by anyone who doesn’t love the act of creation. For what little the artist takes, they give everything else away. To me, aestheticism is really just the beauty of one's own visions and emotions that can then be observed in their aesthetics but also evoke unavoidable emotions. The difference between aestheticism and symbolic art is that it evokes the own emotions of the viewer, not the emotion’s the artist has told them to feel. I think feeling is unavoidable in art similar to the idea that, “If someone doesn’t feel it, then he cannot be made to understand it.”
ReplyDeleteAudrey, I thought your personal outlook on art and your own art in particular was really well written. As someone who doesn't consider themselves cultured in that arts at all, you really opened me up to seeing that world!
DeleteI was intrigued by Franz Kafka’s ability to create such a strong allegory out of an artist who chose to starve himself in a cage for the amusement of bystanders. The cage stood out to me as a major symbolic component within the reading, representing the artist’s detachment from society. Not only do the spectators lack the ability to understand the artist’s work, but the artist also lacks the ability to understand the spectators. From the artist’s perspective, he is putting in a massive amount of effort only to be ignored by people walking by. However, from the perspective of the spectators, he is a mere nuisance in comparison to all the other attractions. The level of disconnect between the hunger artist and the real world serves to show how their is clear lack of understanding between the viewers and the artist, especially in the modern day. Kafka demonstrated his wish for art to be appreciated by others in order to gain personal satisfaction. Oppositely, Oscar Wilde believes that art should be seen only for its beauty. I appreciated what Ian said about how each person will bring his or her own life experiences to a piece of art. I agree that art will not always manifest the same reaction in each person. Every viewer will pick out certain components of art and see them for the beauty that they are, but each in a different light.
ReplyDeleteI think you have a really good point that not only do the spectators not understand the artist, but he also did not understand them. They are both confused by the other's motives, and I think you did a really good job seeing and explaining that
DeleteKafka utilizes a public art display conducted by “the hunger artist”, in order to highlight the struggles of an artist. The idea of the hunger artist is similar to a person as the main part of the art piece that’s present today, consisting of a man who sits in a cage for forty days without eating while the citizens get to come and marvel at him. What was most interesting to me was the focus on the audience, the children and the adults in the town. They are used to show the pain that an artist goes through to please the audience, including how he would “[sing] during the time they were observing, for as long as he could keep it up, to show people how unjust their suspicions about him were” (2). He does this in order to prove himself, to show his abilities and that he’s stronger than they think he is. Kafka also uses the doctors and hospital meal that the artist fights to show how the artist fights for their convictions. Often, artists and even normal people are pressured to change their views to conform with society. This meal is representative of that, it attempts to take away what the artist had been fighting for, his art, because it’s different. He states it directly on page three, “Why did people want to rob him of the fame of fasting longer, not just so that he could become the greatest hunger artist of all time, which he probably was already, but also so that he could surpass himself in some unimaginable way, for he felt there were no limits to his capacity for fasting” (3). This story can be applied to modern artists that use their vulnerability as the main aspect of their work. Similar to the hunger artist, people are uncomfortable with their vulnerability and pain. Movies that attempt to highlight a social injustice tend to make people uncomfortable because they don’t like to look directly at it. It can be painful to see something bad happening to people, animals, the Earth, etc. because you can feel like you contribute to the problem or simply can’t stand looking at their pain. Kafka’s views differ from Wilde in what they use, while Wilde follows aestheticism, Kafka uses allegory. In aestheticism the focus is on beauty rather than narrative but in allegory it uses metaphor and narrative in order to tell a story. My views on the purpose of art is that it depends on the artist. While some artists, use their art for something powerful like allegory, others simply do it for the sake of being art. For me, I pay more attention to the artists who use their art for something bigger than themselves which tends to be the more modern artists like banksy, Shepard Fairey, etc. This impacts my life by inspiring me to want to do something similarly powerful with art that I make whether it be film or drawing.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the reading there was a long-running comparison of the hunger artist to something inhuman, being publicly viewed as nothing more a bony vessel dedicated entirely to its craft. This longrunning comparison made the ending even more bleak, as when people eventually grew tired of this man devoting his entire lift to his craft, immediately after his death he was replaced by a literal animal that brought in more attention and praise for simply existing than he ever did. This notion of artists being treated more so as a brief spectacle for the public than a living thing with a voice extending beyond that of their art that is being focused upon persists within modern society as well. Historically within our culture, trends enter society rapidly, but leave just as quickly. As expressed within the work, “why did this crowd, which pretended to admire him so much, have so little patience with him? If he kept going and kept fasting longer, why would they not tolerate it?” Ultimately, this is due to humanity’s natural instinct to leap from one flashy thing to the next. Art was his whole life that persisted before and after rising to attention in the public’s eye, but no one really cared about that. This glamorization and quick entertainment for the public was more “excruciating” to the artist than the act of starving within itself. Though Kazka puts emphasis on just how deeply artists tend to throw themselves into their work regardless of the rapidly fluctuation public attention (or lack thereof), Wilde argues that such meaning should absolutely not be placed into art, nor should this strain be put on the artist. However, they likely would agree about the magnitude of toll that putting one’s full soul into their art causes; Wilde would argue this exact reason is why there should be no meaning, whereas Kazka would argue that this toll is what creates meaning to the artist for their own personal satisfaction.
ReplyDeleteDevotion of one’s self to their art instantly reminded me of movie stars such as Christian Bale that method act, gaining or losing over 100 pounds for a role, behaving as their character even off set, and fully internalizing their role as a part of themselves. Though this is an extreme example, I do believe it still qualifies as art. Ultimately, I think art is subjective. A creator can make something with no intentional meaning behind it, but people can still interpret anything in any way that they choose, hence making even something designed with the purpose of not being art, art. This notion impacts the way I view movies, songs, and works of literature knowing that there is an infinite amount of ways for something to be interpreted, and there is no true right or wrong answer. I also think this concept helps to further strengthen skills such as critical thinking, free thought, and being open-minded.
I really like your point about artists merely being viewed as a spectacle as opposed to a living breathing human being. The hunger artist seemed to really take this to heart, and ended up dying as a result of his devotion to his work. I also definitely agree with your observations about Wilde and Kafka's similarities and differences when it comes to art.
DeleteI believe in this short story Kafka is trying to demonstrate the importance of audience and setting. The Hunger Artist was marveled over when he was his own attraction, but when upgraded to a larger platform, audiences were quick to forget his value. Kafka purposefully makes the artist starving to illustrate how many artists are craving fame and representation for their work. This literally hunger represents the deeper meaning of the hunger and wanting they feel to be remembered for their work. This wisetale shows how artists can often be overlooked for their talent, when other elements come into play. An artist that comes to mind is country singer, Sam Hunt, who has written top hits for many years for other famous country artists. Despite his strong songwriting skills, until recently he could not become successful himself. He has the skill set and characteristics all along, but was bought out by larger artists to whom he sold his songs for them to perform. From what we’d read of Wilde so far, his work is comical and has a light tone while Kafka’s story is quite the opposite. Ending in the death of hunger artist and immediate replacement by a new attraction represents how quickly one’s life can be forgotten. These themes are rather dark and differ from Wilde’s selections, although they both provide insight to the meaning of life and our purpose as human beings. Growing up with my mom who is an artist, she has repeatedly reminded me of the purpose of art and creativity. For this very reason, I believe art has an utter importance to our society and can be used to express emotion or political standpoints and can be used as therapy or a soothing outlet for many in everyday life.
ReplyDelete^Jessica
DeleteI found your interpretation of the purpose of art to be quite profound. I agree that art is vital to our world and it is fascinating how much emotional impact a piece can have.
Delete
ReplyDeleteThe overall setting for the story is very dark and depressing and it shows the frustrations and problems the artist had to face due to people's lack of appreciation for his art. It’s hard for the hunger artist to express his true potential in his talent, “Why did people want to rob him of the fame..” (3). The suppression of his free-will and capability to push to his true form is equivalent to a musician’s record label or manager that does control a big portion of their production of art whether they enjoy it or not, it is for utmost profit. His desire for people to try to understand his achievements of fasting shatters his pride when the audience believes he’s cheating, resulting in “the hunger artist himself was the only one… capable of being completely satisfied with his own fasting” (2). Ultimately, his final words led by his death expressing his artistic talent led to inevitable suffering as he was starved by the people that never consumed his art and the full beauty of it. Wilde’s ideas are very different than what is expressed by Kafka, the hunger artist is described to be misunderstood with his levels of meaning he conveys through his talent. In the end, he is replaced with something that is seen more pleasurable and entertaining, a panther. The panther is described as a symbol contrary to the hunger artist, “It enjoyed the taste and never seemed to miss its freedom” (8), living comfortably in the cage given the attention it desires. Although the hunger artist and panther are vastly different in a cage, they are at one point both trapped with a purpose determined by the audience. However, it points to a bigger picture in contemporary society, no matter what talents or different traits we are attracted to present, we are quick to turn a blind eye when our interest diminish. It represents the “trends” we see nowadays, and how little emotional attachment or sympathy we feel when we only expect self-amusement.
I agree with your focus on the effect that the audience's appreciation had on the hunger artist. It seems as though the hunger artist's incapability to get over how other people viewed what he was doing inhibited him from seeing if what he was doing truly made him happy.
DeleteKafka throughout the story explores such an interesting perspective of what it means to be an artist in both today's society and in a broader sense. Throughout the short story, I was fascinated by how somebody could come up with such a bizarre way to explore these heavy concepts. I definitely think some of my peers already have pinpointed some things I picked up on. Michelle mentioned fads, and how today there’s always the big thing that people are talking about, but fast-forward a couple of weeks and everyone has moved on, and it’s in the past. Sometimes it makes you feel bad for these people, they get a taste of the spotlight and just like that they are no longer relevant anymore. This is also probably a weird connection, but one artist that came to mind for me during this reading was Kanye West. Recently, he’s always in the spotlight for some controversy or saying some ridiculously crazy thing. It’s so sad that these artists get so enthralled in this insane lifestyle, where all they know is the fame and the paparazzi and the spotlight, that it starts to take a toll on their mental health -- and they lose a sense of being and what they once identified as. You can kind of see that in The Hunger Artist, as soon as he became the Hunger Artist, that was the only thing he could identify with, he lost all sense of self and being.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the short story the panther is introduced, and he kind of serves as an opposing entity compared to the hunger artist. The hunger artist, who has spent his whole life searching for this spiritual becoming of self, is now replaced by this careless and elaborate animal. Maybe that’s where the views of Kafka and Wilde differ, Kafka is displaying an emotional journey through the hunger artist. Where Wilde is the elboarate and new display of freedom. Much like how Wilde in his writing appeals to people through aestheticism and pretty, wording and captivation … the panther does as well and this can be frustrating for the Hunger Artist who is going on this huge emotionally tolling journey.
My views of the purpose of art are always conflicting. When we were talking in class about the meaning of aestheticism and Wilde’s work, that for sure hit me. It’s something I think about a lot. I’m one of those people that always needs a “So What?”. I like political and social-analytical themes in literature, because it makes me feel like I’m doing something worthwhile. It’s funny that we’re bringing this up, cause recently I was just thinking about how I never read the old types of books that I used to love. I used to love these realistic fiction novels, young adult fantasy or romance books but now I find myself rarely allowing myself to read them. Even though they are good books, nicely written with attractive diction and language, I feel like I’m wasting my time. Like I make myself guilty for reading a mystery novel when I have the copy of ‘Ghettoside’ or ‘The Color of the Law’ sitting next to my desk. Sure I love reading nonfiction and intellectual books, but I feel like I force it too much. I don’t allow myself to enjoy pointless literature like I used to, and it’s sad. I hope reading Wilde will give me a chance to challenge that, and re explore the fun and comedic literature I once adored, even if I could be reading about something slightly more productive.
Nadia, I like how you connected your views on the short story to things we see today. In my post I also looked at the sadness behind fame and how it can break people or lead them to do things that aren't the best for them mentally or physically. It's interesting how you were able to connect the artist in the story to someone like Kanye West because with both of them I feel that we can see the risks and consequences that can come with having too much pride or fame.
DeleteI like how you contrasted Wilde and Kafka through with this line, "Maybe that’s where the views of Kafka and Wilde differ, Kafka is displaying an emotional journey through the hunger artist. Where Wilde is the elboarate and new display of freedom." Both are proving some point about the effects that the audience has on people. Kafka embracing the effect, while Wilde tries to reject it.
DeleteIt's interesting how you mention feeling guilty about enjoying books with less purpose than others. I think that the great thing about art is that both can have value to the self from learning more vs. simply enjoying yourself. From Kafka to Wilde it is clear art can have many interpretations, even if their own definitions were more concrete to them, the viewer can take whatever parts they need for their own mind.
DeleteFor me, “The Hunger Artist” demonstrated how passionate and dedicated artists are to their work. The hunger artist fasted for 40 days; this must have taken an incredible toll on his mental and physical health. However, he clearly thought the consequences were worth it to create art he was proud of (I think he was proud of it in the beginning but the end where he said he wished he could have found a food he enjoyed really threw me off). Unlike Oscar Wilde, Franz Kafka thinks art should stand for something and have a deeper, more powerful meaning. We see this in the hunger artist, while his art is not visually pleasing (something Wilde believed art should be) it had depth and meaning to it. Wilde, on the other hand, would have been unsupportive of the hunger artist because it was not beautiful to look at and it was too deep for audiences to fully grasp. One thing that stood out to me was when the hunger artist transitioned to the circus, he lost what made him special and he began to fade into the background. I think this is very true of many musicians today. Musicians join record labels that are very concerned with making money and they can have the artist create music that does not fit their normal style, they are forced to lose their individuality and conform to what is popular. I honestly think art should be created for enjoyment and if that means the artist wishes to include a deeper message, he or she should. I appreciate art most frequently by listening to music and by looking through the work of photographers.
ReplyDelete- Anna
DeleteFranz Kafka took something that the audience would expect to be metaphorical, and instead made it quite literal. “The Hunger Artist” is quite literally someone who makes their body a piece of art by fasting for up to 30 days.I found it very interesting that the hunger artist did what he did because of the reactions of people. When people would come and see him in the cage, they would be in awe of him. After the forty days were up, he would plead to not be taken out of the cage. He wanted to prove to the people and to himself that he could continue to fast, and he could not be broken. We see this very situation, however, later in the story when he is forgotten about and it only found moments before he dies. This is symbolic in the fact that most artists have a time that they reach in their life when they can no longer continue to make art. Usually it is not as sudden and significant as death, but it is like the death of their art. Even though they can still be well known for it, a very important piece of them dies. Kafka and Wilde are similar in the fact that they follow the same upward plotline. It start with the low point for the character, and they gradually work their way up to the best part of their life, where they usually die. In “The Hunger Artist” it is harder to identify the high and low point, but it is clear through the tone of voice of the speaker that as he got more famous for being the hunger artist, his life got better. He was proving to himself and other people that he has free will, and could fast for the full 40 days.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, The Hunger Artist was a very meaningful and unique short story, as it demonstrates the consequences of having too much pride, and putting popularity and the wants of others above one’s own needs. The artist’s hunger for fame rather than food leads him to harm himself again and again in order to get the satisfaction that drawing a crowd brings him. He does not care about the fact that he has been able to complete his 40 day fasts over and over again “for he was also so skeletal out of dissatisfaction with himself, because he alone knew something that even initiates didn’t know—how easy it was to fast. It was the easiest thing in the world. About this he did not remain silent, but people did not believe him. At best they thought he was being modest. Most of them, however, believed he was a publicity seeker or a total swindler (2).” The only thing he cared about was what the audience thought of him, and he would never be proud enough of his own accomplishments to move onto a less harmful career. When his popularity finally died down for the last time, an old and broken hunger artist signed a contract with a circus as “it was certain that the popularity of fasting would return once more someday” and he “was fanatically devoted to fasting more than anything else (5.)” However, “in the early days he could hardly wait for the pauses in the performances. He had looked forward with delight to the crowd pouring around him, until he became convinced only too quickly...that...most of these people were, again and again without exception, only visiting the menagerie (6).” The artist’s realization that crowds no longer wanted to see him lead to his depressed state and, ultimately, he allowed himself to be forgotten and die. Without the fleeting joy that an audience brought him, the artist felt that he and his art served no purpose, yet it was the only thing he felt he had to live for.
ReplyDeleteGrace, I think your last sentence really ties down an important idea of the text quite nicely. It's so common today to, all decisions people make and their lively hood -- whether they are public figures or not -- relies on some sort of response from an audience.
DeleteThe Hunger Artist was filled with symbols, as the plot was not meant to be taken heavily. It was the messages, themes, and symbols that make it a good piece of literature. The cage was the most symbolic piece because he’s trapped inside this lifestyle of an artist it’s all he knows, “Because I had to fast. I can’t do anything else,” The dedication this man had to his craft was obvious, it was all he had, which I believe is something Kafka is trying to say about all artists. The line “The honor of his art forbade it” really struck me and got this message across.
ReplyDeleteThis piece definitely ties into modern culture because it expresses the changing trends in our society. All types of artists, both in current times and in the past, have put their life into there work. Yet the reality most medias will be popular for one moment in time and forgotten about the next. This makes the many passionate creators out there feel as though their lives have gone to waste, just like the story of The Hunger Artist. It seems as though Kafka has a similar cynical outlook on life, like that of Wilde’s. Yet, the way they perceive art is very different, it is evident through this work that Kafka appreciates all forms of art and more importantly the artist behind it. I have respect for all art forms and the many different medians they come in, even if I cannot understand it myself. Music, historical and modern art, photography, film, and literature have all had a very big impact on my life, they’ve shown me how to feel through some else’s experiences. That is something very unique that I do not get from anything else.
I feel you covered a lot of good aspects, namely I liked how you connected the story to the modern examples which convey the same ideas. I agree especially with the fact that many artists, especially now, strive to appeal to public perception rather than truly express themselves which you touched upon.
DeleteThe hunger artist doesn’t understand why the audience can’t just appreciate what he is doing. If they could just stop questioning what he is doing and simply admire him, they would see how truly amazing he is. The artist’s perception of his art, which would also be his perception of self and his identity, is emphasizing the idea that art cannot be called art until outside viewers call it art. An artist is nothing without other’s opinions. The hunger artist continues to fast in order to prove some kind of point, that exact point being somewhat unclear, but in the end he is trying to prove that what he is doing is truly remarkable. He use to complain about how people were ignorant to what he was doing, but he thrived off of the attention. By the end of the piece, the hunger artist realizes that he is no longer the main attraction that people are coming to see, and this leads him to question is purpose. He use to boast about how he could fast much longer than 40 days, but he stopped because he was expected too. Once the people stopped watching him all together, he continued to fast until his death. It seemed as though that was how he would’ve wished to die, doing the thing he loved, but that was not the case. The hunger artist admits in his last moments that fasting was the only thing he was good at, and that he shouldn’t have been admired for it after all. Without an audience, his craft became meaningless, and since he was his art, he became nothing. Kafka argues that art is nothing without people’s judgement, while Wilde would disagree. Wilde criticized what people viewed as true art and literature, satirizing popularity in his plays. Wilde didn’t like the deeper meaning of art, believing it should just be admired for its beauty. The hunger artist died doing what he once believed to be true art, and Wilde would’ve found that ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the perception of part is largely based on someone's interpretation of something and that it often is not called "art" until publicly received as such. You made a really good connection to tying Wilde's interpretation of art to the text and I thought it helped explain the aspects that differed between the two.
DeleteI also thought that it was interesting how the hunger artist only felt successful when people would watch him and applaud him. He thrived off of the opinions of other people, and without that he felt useless even though he would continue to fast either way.
DeleteAfter reading “The Hunger Artist” by Franz Kafka, I was astonished at first glance. However, after looking at in more in depth, I was able to understand the author’s purpose. The author uses the starving artist to demonstrate how artists can often be separated from society due to their dedication to their work. By showing how the starving artist was going to extreme measures for his work, causing him to be distant from society, Kafka is able to achieve his purpose. This demonstration of an author’s diligence reminded me of Steve Jobs biography as he went beyond measures to create a product that was easy for the costumer to use, and he disregarded his coworkers who had a different opinion. This addamance is similar to that of a passionate artist, which is what triggered this connection. The reason why Kafka and wilde differ is because Kafka believes artists should get recognition and uses the Hunger Artist’s craving for acknowledgement to demonstrate that. Wilde on the other hand believes that art should just be admired for its message and nothing more is needed. To me, I believe art is a platform for people to express ideas that are often tough to express over words. Art is everywhere, ranging from books to paintings to speeches, and it has given me inspiration and new perspectives in my life.
ReplyDeleteIn “The Hunger Artist” by Franz Kafka, the hunger artist is initially widely desired for his art. People flocked to watch him every day and he seemed to “capture the attention of the entire city.” However, as time progresses, he finds himself “abandoned by the crowd of pleasure seekers, who preferred to stream to other attractions.” He also attributes his own self-worth to his ability to perform well enough and is constantly pushing himself to do better because he feels that he doesn’t have any value without his art, so he pushes himself to the very limit and is disappointed by the 40 day limit for his fasting. Kafka’s representation of the hunger artist and his descent from fame is comparable to the treatment of famous musicians today, in my opinion. They often feel enormous pressure and when they become less successful, they attribute this to being less talented than they were and try to push themselves further. The hunger artist feels that the people who watched him merely “pretended to admire him” when in reality they “[had] so little patience with him,” which is similar to the almost dehumanization of celebrities. Ordinary people do not view them as regular people most of the time and they seem almost like fictional characters. I found that Kafka’s views differ greatly from Wilde’s in regards to art. While Wilde clearly makes fun of excessive symbolism and believed in the purely aesthetic value of art, Kafra clearly demonstrates his belief that art should be appreciated for its symbolic meaning, rather than just be aesthetically beautiful. The hunger artist believes that his work has a deeper meaning that needs to be understood, and “if someone doesn’t feel it, then he cannot be made to understand it.” Personally, I can appreciate that art can have meaning to it, but if I am looking for art I typically pick favorites purely based on what I think looks or sounds good. Art impacts my life in a very large way since I listen to music, read books, and consume other forms of art on a daily basis,
ReplyDelete