Well, Kathy,
I'm not sure I’m agree with you're comment, completely.
Actually, there is something right, Kafka wrote the book in a manic manner, but it is not a shame for such a writer. Don't forget his life style and interest in symbolism movement.

Any way, if someone could ask the correct meaning of the book's title, he/she could be informed better about the context, a-priory.

We (Persian) had a good chance to read the book, with the translated name "مسخ" which means the “Psychological process of changing” (Spatially from better to worse.)
I must indicate that the Persian translation of the book was performed by premier Farsi writer and translator “Sadegh Hedayat.”

By the way, back to the meanings i indicate that
"The Metamorphosis" can be understood as "change in form or structure" and unlike the first paragraph and the whole story supported this simple idea; it is only the "cover" meaning of the book.

But, let’s take a look under the hood!
Why not we translate the title as “change or succession of changes in an organism which enables it to survive in a new environment?”
This can give us a chance to comprehend the symbolic language used in the book: "living in the dark world of just working and living, with no satisfaction" (back to the writer era (1919) and personal life.) I refer to the paragraph "What a job! What a job I choose! Daily journey."
Don’t rush; this is just the beginning of twisted meanings in the book…

Finally I mention that “Not all people enjoy the symbolic literature.” And of course this is not a vantage or disadvantage to be a fan of symbolism movement.

Sincerely
Mohammad Tavakoli

I'm sorry but I do not see where the problem is?

What is wrong with the German version sentence? Sounds like perfect German to me, and the meaning is obvious too.

You should try reading it again when you're older. I also thought it was stupid the first time I read it. But, I read it again about 15 years later, and it was great.

He isn't a cockroach, at all. Kafka intentionally left the kid of insect his was ambiguous

What a shame you were made to read this, when you obviously didn't have any desire to do so. This way any great book can be spoilt for readers.
In fact "Methamorphosis" is a symbolistic book with meanings behing meanings and not to be taken at face value.
ANd I wonder about your teacher - you read it for german class, right? - who didn't prepare your class that you knew what to expect.

what's "over the top" is how badly you've missed the entire point of the story. stick to harry potter from now on, unless all that wizard talk is too confusing for you...

Hey Kath,

I just wanted to say sorry on behalf of the educated community. We were wrong to judge this a literary classic; I guess none of us realized that Gregor's just a cockroach and that there's no explanation for it. The community and I went up to Johns Hopkins the other day, and surveyed the mental health department. 98% of them agreed that "yeah, that kafka fool was irretrievably insane, ergo 'The Metamorphosis' has insignificant literary value." What fools we all were! If only the Emperor could return his new clothes...

Well, looks like its time to start burning every copy in every Literature class in the country. Can't look back, though; always must try to recover from our mistakes! Oh Kafka, you conniving scoundrel, you!

P.S. Hope you don't mind, we'll be abandoning "Masterful use of Symbolism" from our list of characteristics of excellent literature, as well as changing the standard of "Understandable to a majority of people at/above a high school reading level" to "Straightforward, resolution-oriented, and written with a vocabulary of under 200 words." Thanks again!

And the literatti peacocks come out to strut. So far we have: 'Read it when you're older and smarter like me'; 'Stick to Harry Potter, you moron'; and a sad variation of 'The literary establishment thinks it's genius so how could your opinion possibly matter?'

And the sad part is within all these appeals to authority they actually think it turns this circle-jerk of a metaphor into something impressive.

Stick to your guns, Kathy. Even pretentious assholes with Lit degrees can't spin straw into gold.

Austin wrote: "what's "over the top" is how badly you've missed the entire point of the story. stick to harry potter from now on, unless all that wizard talk is too confusing for you..."

Great, another elitist prick. The literary world doesn't have enough of those! Sneer more please.

Kathy, I agree with your assessment of this book.

The problem with these "classics" is that people who don't like them are viewed as uncultured morons, and the people who do like them are viewed as snobbish.

Can't the people who like them just like them and the ones that don't just don't? Personally, the ridiculousness of it all is what made it interesting to me, but I guess some people might view it as stupid.

Aj. Not all people with Lit degrees are pretentious. I am going for my creative writing degree. However if there are pretentious literati then there are pretentious opposites as well. I wish we could steer clear of finger pointing and name calling. It's distasteful.

Thanks, Adam. Well said, but I must confess that a little disagreement among those who comment is much more fun than "Oh, I just love Kafka. Don't you?"

The word in the first sentence (ungeziefer) translates more appropriately to "pest" or "vermin", not cockroach.

even "insect" works better than cockroach.

What are you talking about?! Jesus struggling for mankind? Did you even read the damn book!?

Does anyone think it's possible that Kafka simply wrote a story, didn't know where he was going when he started and only speculated vaguely where he had been after he finished? I don't know the answer to that. If you do, that would be great. You've made me want to read it again, so I can understand all your very thoughtful analyses.
I always thought he meant cockroach because they're creepier and they never die out.

I think the whole problem is labelling books as a "literary classic" in the first place. It's a book. As long as you find enjoyment in it who bloody well cares. I actually forgot it was a "literary classic" while I was reading it and just went along with Kafka's imagination. I enjoyed it.

I love this story! I also love most The Harry Potter books. Even though it pains me to see this get such a low rating I think all the harsh comments are completely unnecessary. It's okay to hate "classics", even pretentious elitist ones.

Anyways. Loved this story and I'm bummed you didn't.

I guess I'm in danger being called an elitist prick - which I don't want to be. I don't feel any need to attack or ridicule anyone. But I just think that this review and its point of view - sticking to the obvious part of the story and hating it - is sad. It's anyone's given right to reject engaging in a piece of art that works beyond the level of the obvious. It's just that you just lose out on something rewarding and beautiful.

There's no accounting for taste, or lack thereof. I would have moved on after saying that were it not for your obvious attempts at not only refusing to like the book (which is completely ok) but also refusing to understand it (which is simply not ok because it entails that you refuse to let go of ignorance ON PURPOSE). I seriously can't agree with that or even understand that.

Excellent analysis, especially the multiple references to "cockaroaches" and not cockroaches. Tony Montana would be proud.

I laughed when i read your comment, Jonmichael.