The roundabout (Kafka)

The Kreisel is a short parable-like story about a tireless philosopher by Franz Kafka, written in 1920 . Max Brod gave it a posthumous title and published it.

The complete text

A philosopher was always hanging around where children were playing. And if he saw a boy who had a top, he was already lurking. As soon as the top was turning, the philosopher chased it to catch it. He didn't care that the children were making a noise and trying to keep him from their toys; if he had caught the top while it was still spinning, he was happy, but only for a moment, then he threw it to the ground and walked away. He believed that knowing every little thing, including a spinning top, for example, was enough to understand the general. That is why he did not concern himself with the big problems, that seemed uneconomical to him, if the smallest detail was really recognized, then everything was recognized, so he only dealt with the spinning top. And whenever the preparations for turning the top were made, he had hope that it would now work, and if the top turned, hope became a certainty in his breathless running after him, but then he held the stupid piece of wood in his hand, he felt sick and the screaming of the children, which he had not heard before and which suddenly went into his ears, drove him away, he stumbled like a top under an awkward whip.

Interpretative approaches

It is actually not a story that is being told here: Stories create a single “case”, what is reported here is what “always” happens - and that twice in a row if one thinks of the middle section, which is of the same length (namely, “He believed "To" the spinning top "). This arrangement of the text is reminiscent of Auf der Galerie , where the same process is also depicted twice from a different point of view, without this being given the status of the factual. Here as there, the unity of the text is not established through a narrated action, but rather in the clash of the two opposing descriptions.

Indeterminacy theorem

From the point of view of classical physics, the philosopher's program is doomed to failure because it is precisely the "economy" of his approach that makes him overlook the fact that, by intervening in the children's game, he himself becomes part of the system that he wants to understand. Like the physicists who, according to Werner Heisenberg's (1901–1976) uncertainty theorem of 1927 (the so-called “uncertainty relation”), cannot succeed, momentum (“rotation”) and steady state (“stupid piece of wood”) of the smallest To determine particles such as atoms or electrons, because the measuring process (“catching” the top) destroys the unity of both.

Inner conflict

However, this external problem reflects a repressed internal conflict . It is not without reason that the philosopher seems to have chosen a “toy” for his research. So he “lies in wait” for the children with a view to a possible top game, but then loses them completely from eyes and ears until, after the failure of the experiment, they are suddenly over-present and become the whip that the philosophers themselves throw at them a gyro - a gyro, however, which does not rotate precisely, but rather "wobbles". The fading out of the children from his area of ​​perception catapults these wise men into an intermediate state, where neither the talk of “toys” nor of “stupid pieces of wood” applies. The “big problems” would indeed be solved here, but the solution is the problem.

shape

Grammatical consideration

The work consists of a paragraph, which at the beginning outlines the scenery with simple main sentences and introduces the story. The text, and therefore the philosopher's dilemma, is clear through short and precise formulations.

Linguistic representation

The language of the short prose piece is generally very calm, sober and objective. Both the first and the second account of what happened in the story (as well as the middle section) are indicative . One is therefore inclined to read the whole text very factually and especially the second part as an analysis of the previous one. The discussion of the philosopher's intentions gives the impression that the narrator has fathomed the philosopher's dilemma at heart.

Narrative perspective

In this parable, the narrator's position is difficult to make out. It is true that the protagonist is at the same time a philosopher and a failure, but he is not the narrator, since he too becomes part of the drama and is viewed from the outside, from an authoritative level. The narrator seems neutral, even if the conclusion: "[He] staggered like a top under an awkward whip." Seems to be valued.

Individual evidence

1. ^ Jürgen Born, Gerhard Neumann, Malcolm Pasley and Jost Schillemeit: Franz Kafka, writings, diaries, letters. Critical edition. Verlag S. Fischer Frankfurt am Main 1982.
2. ^ Peter Höfle: Franz Kafka. The judgment and other narratives. Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt am Main 2003.
3. ^ Peter Höfle: Franz Kafka. The judgment and other narratives. Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt am Main 2003.
4. ^ Peter Höfle: Franz Kafka. The judgment and other narratives. Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt am Main 2003.

Web links