Discussion - Week Twelve - Kafka - A Hunger Artist

[Jim]

This discussion covers the story, A Hunger Artist


“Even those who arrange and design shrubberies hunger artists are under considerable economic stress at this period in history…”


What did you think about the Hunger Artist’s explanation for why he chose a career in fasting? A punchline? Something else?

[Ellen]

I found it absolutely a natural response-not looking for crowds or acclaim or suffering but driven to find the food that will at last fill him and make him whole.

I love this story-probably my favorite Kafka. The "artistry" was what others saw and made of him; maybe he was too naive and let himself be used, maybe he was just indifferent (a little like Bartleby only not "preferring not to" but searching for.

[Jim]

Ellie wrote: "I found it absolutely a natural response-not looking for crowds or acclaim or suffering but driven to find the food that will at last fill him and make him whole.

I love this story-probably my fav..."

What threw me a bit was that prior to his last words, there weren't any hints that this was his reason. Instead, it sounded more ego-driven and that his motive was to fast until he had broken all records. I just didn't see it coming and I wonder what to make of it all.

[Ellen]

Perhaps it still is ego-driven, searching for the "perfect" food that satisfies all hunger. Surprising since he was Jewish that he should have a theme that Jesus preached. I strongly identified with this story and felt all along that that was his reason even if the actual statement comes as something of a "punchline"

[Zadignose]

Okay, the punchline. Now that I think of it, it's a bit irksome. I liked the story in all its other particulars, but I was inclined to dismiss the conclusion as an eccentricity because I didn't want to read it as a summation of the work, or as a final enigma of the parable, but I guess I can't really get away from it. As such, it perhaps even spoils the story for me, at least to a degree.

Perhaps I can find an "out" in the fact that his mind was going, or the conclusion is itself too laughably absurd to take literally as an explanation of his life.

There was a little bit of foreshadowing in that it was mentioned that fasting was easier for him than what others believed, for reasons they couldn't imagine.

Meanwhile, I liked the absurd central premise that people would be entertained by watching a person starve. The story has a lot of the tension we've seen in other stories, in that there are reversals and complexities of the way that people communicate and understand one another, as in the way the different types of watchers play their roles, and how the artist resents those who are most lax and sympathetic, while appreciating those whose skepticism serves its purpose, even while it's also an affront to his honesty/integrity.

There's doom in it, in that the artist, as one who has the highest expectations for himself, is the one who is most disappointed. And there's conflict within the relationship between artist and audience, as the artist is to some degree and idealist, and yet is so profoundly affected by the variance between his real relationship to the audience and how he believes it ought to be.

The story itself, as a seed of an idea, can just have arisen from the punny literal interpretation of "starving artist," where in this case the artist's starvation is one with his art.

One more thing that I appreciated, which is an echo of a theme in The Refusal is the ritual and fatal aspect of much that occurs. Specifically detailed events, which are quite peculiar and apparently special, are presented as routine, expected, and not simple-past events but near universals of what always went on in the artist's performances.

Quite poignant were some of the final details, as the fact that no one bothered to update the signage that showed how long he had been fasting (validating the impressario's logic about setting a maximum limit of 40 days), and the way that the artist was swept up and disposed of, literally buried, along with the straw from his cage.

Finally, the story is a good (whether or not ironic) expression of the nostalgia for a lost art, neglected by a faddish "progress" that loses sight of the old values (which were nevertheless esoteric and beyond the grasp of the public to really appreciate anyway).

[Jim]

Zadignose wrote: "Okay, the punchline. Now that I think of it, it's a bit irksome. I liked the story in all its other particulars, but I was inclined to dismiss the conclusion as an eccentricity because I didn't wan..."

All good points.

While reading your post, I was thinking about the various religious penitents, christian, hindu, etc., who do various kinds of self-flagellation/depravation and sit on display while doing so. What would we think of such a religious type who, when asked why they were doing their specific penance, replied something like, "I don't want to go to hell because I don't like hot weather." We would be disappointed in not hearing about the person's dedication to god and such - much like I felt disappointed by the Hunger Artist's punchline.

[Ellen]

I guess I'm alone in not finding the ending disappointing. The artist does what he has to do, sometimes the public, sometimes not but that's not the point, at least in one version of the artist, of the vision.
The same thing, I guess, of the mystic. The point is not the practice but the goal-spiritual union, in this case, however one envisions the route.

[Ellen]

Oh good.

[Ellen]

This is a little odd, I know, but the story reminds me of comedian Andy Kaufman (who was on Taxi). At the height of his popularity, Kaufman insisted he was not a comedian, not trying to be funny at all, just doing what interested him. And later in his career, he got into women wrestling and became very unpopular. He said, I'm still just doing what interests me. It's just now it doesn't interest other people.