I think that the similarity between this story and Bartleby is that the hunger artist refuses to do something that is considered commonplace for his own unique reason. This is similar in that Bartleby "prefers" not to work for a reason different than the normal reasons of laziness and fatigue.
I think the most important connection between Bartleby and A Hunger Artist is the fact that the protagonists in both stories are regarded as outcasts and oddities by the other members of society. Bartleby is at first diligent, but he is soon considered by the lawyer and his associates to be a nuisance that they need to get rid of. Similarly the Hunger Artist is "admired" by his audience, but when his 40 day fast comes to an end they cannot wait for him to eat (and in this way rejoin their society?/become normal again?). Also the theme of food was present in both stories (I'm still a little unclear on how this plays a role in Bartleby).
"Bartleby" by Herman Melville and "A Hunger Artist" by Franz Kafka both propose a theme of rebellion. In "Bartleby", the narrator, a lawyer, tells Bartleby to read over some documents, but the worker simply replies, "I would prefer not to". This reply is considered unethical in a professional workplace, but was surprisingly used multiple times throughout this short story. Similiarly, "A Hunger Artist" introduces a hunger artist who fasts for a long period of time, but doesn't appreciate the little recognition he recieves. He ultimately wants to receive fame and popularity and does so by staying in the cage and refrains from eating, even when the impresario forces him to eat. The hunger artist's behavior is considered unreasonable in society, but the artist continues his actions.
At first, I thought that the Hunger Artist, unlike Bartleby (who seems to dislike people in general), wanted to gain fame and popularity through fasting. Many lines throughout A Hunger Artist, by Franz Kafka, suggest how the hunger artist wanted to get the world's attention. Kafka writes, "...he could astound the world by establishing a record never yet achieved" and "...who had of course been looking forward to these visiting hours as the main achievement of his life", showing us how the hunger artist looks forward to the attention he receives from his audience. However, the last few lines of the story threw me off. Was it the panther that ate the hunger artist? Anyways, going back to Bartleby, I think the reason why the hunger artist decides not to eat may be for Bartleby as well ( "...because I couldn’t find the food I liked"). Maybe Bartleby just doesn't enjoy the food available to him. The only time when we actually catch a glimpse Bartleby eating was when Ginger-Nut delivers him ginger nuts.
Both books are similar because they both contain an oddity, except the only difference is that in A Hungry Artist, you know what the oddity is thinking. They're both people who are able to fit in the society as an own unique personality, but they're the odd ones in the group. Both oddities in the stories are quite similar. Bartleby seems to be attracted to the room and reject everything else. He has a fetish for Gingernuts, and later starves to death without them. On the other hand, the Hungry Artist an attachment to the cage for some abstract reason. And he only fasted because he had not found a food he had liked. They are both oddities with similar views.
In A Hunger Artist, the hunger artist's thoughts are shown, but in Bartleby, you don't know what's going through Bartleby's head because you only get the narrator's point of view. The hunger artist and Bartleby aren't understood by people around them (they are strange people who aren't "normal") and they both starve to death in the end. The style of writing seems more sophisticated, to me, in Bartleby.
I think that these two pieces are different because for the most part we learn about the character through description in one and through actions in another. In Bartleby other than him refusing to do anything we don't learn much about him until the narrator pieces his information together. The small descriptions and observations help the narrator put together what kind of life Bartleby was living (ex, he doesn't eat, he lives in the office, multiple pale/still references). In the hunger artist the artist basically sits around, but through the information given we can see that he wants to be as honest a person as possible by trying to make as much human interaction as he can. His actions show that he wants the people to know that he isn't a fraud. (Ex he would converse with the people and answer their questions. Also he would sing when the people on guard didn't watch him to prove that he wasn't eating.) We learn more about the artist than we do of Bartleby though actions. On the other hand, I do think that these stories share the same moral of selfishness in one way, shape or form. Bartleby didn't do any work for the narrator after a certain point. In a way since he opted out of doing what he prefered not to do even when the narrator gave him choices (ex giving him ideas on where else he could work) he can be considered selfish. In addition, even after he was asked to leave he stayed on the premises only to be taken away by the police. The hungry artist was selfish because he wanted to become more popular at first. He also said himself that he did this because he didn't find the food he liked. This is selfish because his reaction to not getting the food he wanted was somewhat childish because if you think about it he refused to eat unless he got what he wanted.
Bartleby and the Hunger Artist have . The Hunger Artist is mainly a biography or an inside look into the world of a Hunger Artist. Bartleby focuses on the interaction between the society and a member detached from it. However, Bartleby is a anomaly while the hunger artist is a subject judged by society. Bartleby doesn't see the point in doing anything, including living, and in his passiveness confuses everyone until they decide to remove him. The Hunger Artist is admired and lives off his fame until he is outdated. Since he gets no recognition, he can reveal his secret and peacefully die but is also cast out by society. Bartleby does not seem to look for or induce care and attention.
In both the "Hunger Artist" and "Bartleby" the themes are centered around rebellion. Bartleby "prefers not to" do any paperwork for a mysterious reason. He either is rebelling against the treatment of his boss or has a mental problem. The Hunger Artist chooses not to eat in order to be recognized by people for his incredible fasting ability. The hunger artist prefers popularity while Bartleby prefers to be left alone. -Thomas Cui period 2
I think that the similarity between this story and Bartleby is that the hunger artist refuses to do something that is considered commonplace for his own unique reason. This is similar in that Bartleby "prefers" not to work for a reason different than the normal reasons of laziness and fatigue.
ReplyDeleteI think the most important connection between Bartleby and A Hunger Artist is the fact that the protagonists in both stories are regarded as outcasts and oddities by the other members of society. Bartleby is at first diligent, but he is soon considered by the lawyer and his associates to be a nuisance that they need to get rid of. Similarly the Hunger Artist is "admired" by his audience, but when his 40 day fast comes to an end they cannot wait for him to eat (and in this way rejoin their society?/become normal again?).
ReplyDeleteAlso the theme of food was present in both stories (I'm still a little unclear on how this plays a role in Bartleby).
"Bartleby" by Herman Melville and "A Hunger Artist" by Franz Kafka both propose a theme of rebellion. In "Bartleby", the narrator, a lawyer, tells Bartleby to read over some documents, but the worker simply replies, "I would prefer not to". This reply is considered unethical in a professional workplace, but was surprisingly used multiple times throughout this short story. Similiarly, "A Hunger Artist" introduces a hunger artist who fasts for a long period of time, but doesn't appreciate the little recognition he recieves. He ultimately wants to receive fame and popularity and does so by staying in the cage and refrains from eating, even when the impresario forces him to eat. The hunger artist's behavior is considered unreasonable in society, but the artist continues his actions.
ReplyDeleteAt first, I thought that the Hunger Artist, unlike Bartleby (who seems to dislike people in general), wanted to gain fame and popularity through fasting. Many lines throughout A Hunger Artist, by Franz Kafka, suggest how the hunger artist wanted to get the world's attention. Kafka writes, "...he could astound the world by establishing a record never yet achieved" and "...who had of course been looking forward to these visiting hours as the main achievement of his life", showing us how the hunger artist looks forward to the attention he receives from his audience. However, the last few lines of the story threw me off. Was it the panther that ate the hunger artist? Anyways, going back to Bartleby, I think the reason why the hunger artist decides not to eat may be for Bartleby as well ( "...because I couldn’t find the food I liked"). Maybe Bartleby just doesn't enjoy the food available to him. The only time when we actually catch a glimpse Bartleby eating was when Ginger-Nut delivers him ginger nuts.
ReplyDeleteBoth books are similar because they both contain an oddity, except the only difference is that in A Hungry Artist, you know what the oddity is thinking. They're both people who are able to fit in the society as an own unique personality, but they're the odd ones in the group. Both oddities in the stories are quite similar. Bartleby seems to be attracted to the room and reject everything else. He has a fetish for Gingernuts, and later starves to death without them. On the other hand, the Hungry Artist an attachment to the cage for some abstract reason. And he only fasted because he had not found a food he had liked. They are both oddities with similar views.
ReplyDeleteIn A Hunger Artist, the hunger artist's thoughts are shown, but in Bartleby, you don't know what's going through Bartleby's head because you only get the narrator's point of view. The hunger artist and Bartleby aren't understood by people around them (they are strange people who aren't "normal") and they both starve to death in the end. The style of writing seems more sophisticated, to me, in Bartleby.
ReplyDeleteI think that these two pieces are different because for the most part we learn about the character through description in one and through actions in another. In Bartleby other than him refusing to do anything we don't learn much about him until the narrator pieces his information together. The small descriptions and observations help the narrator put together what kind of life Bartleby was living (ex, he doesn't eat, he lives in the office, multiple pale/still references). In the hunger artist the artist basically sits around, but through the information given we can see that he wants to be as honest a person as possible by trying to make as much human interaction as he can. His actions show that he wants the people to know that he isn't a fraud. (Ex he would converse with the people and answer their questions. Also he would sing when the people on guard didn't watch him to prove that he wasn't eating.) We learn more about the artist than we do of Bartleby though actions.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I do think that these stories share the same moral of selfishness in one way, shape or form. Bartleby didn't do any work for the narrator after a certain point. In a way since he opted out of doing what he prefered not to do even when the narrator gave him choices (ex giving him ideas on where else he could work) he can be considered selfish. In addition, even after he was asked to leave he stayed on the premises only to be taken away by the police. The hungry artist was selfish because he wanted to become more popular at first. He also said himself that he did this because he didn't find the food he liked. This is selfish because his reaction to not getting the food he wanted was somewhat childish because if you think about it he refused to eat unless he got what he wanted.
Bartleby and the Hunger Artist have . The Hunger Artist is mainly a biography or an inside look into the world of a Hunger Artist. Bartleby focuses on the interaction between the society and a member detached from it. However, Bartleby is a anomaly while the hunger artist is a subject judged by society. Bartleby doesn't see the point in doing anything, including living, and in his passiveness confuses everyone until they decide to remove him. The Hunger Artist is admired and lives off his fame until he is outdated. Since he gets no recognition, he can reveal his secret and peacefully die but is also cast out by society. Bartleby does not seem to look for or induce care and attention.
ReplyDeleteIn both the "Hunger Artist" and "Bartleby" the themes are centered around rebellion. Bartleby "prefers not to" do any paperwork for a mysterious reason. He either is rebelling against the treatment of his boss or has a mental problem. The Hunger Artist chooses not to eat in order to be recognized by people for his incredible fasting ability. The hunger artist prefers popularity while Bartleby prefers to be left alone.
ReplyDelete-Thomas Cui period 2