CosmicJocker

You’re really a little pig!
Anyway, I’ll test Joey Ramone’s compliment on the girl tonight.. I’ll tell you how it went: I think it works.

Oh my God!
I would like to say something intelligent, but when I was little, among other things, I hit my head...

The problem isn't just adding information. See the wrecking car manual.

"What keeps us away from this music is the fact that we cannot stand its carnal vitality, the animal joy that must – with all the strength we have – be kept at bay while we do the 'serious things'...
Eh, people like Maite are revealing..."

Among OTHER things, I don’t appreciate that certain JUMPING BACK AND FORTH between normal WRITING and CAPS lock. REALLY, it’s quite ANNOYING.

But it's your first: YOU’LL MAKE UP FOR IT!

The record seems quite interesting, so thank you.
Your page is definitely beautiful: why did you "hide" it?

I like the linked piece.. this suspended atmosphere filled with omens.. Interesting. (after all, I expected nothing less from you)..

Perhaps the cretti are the works of Burri that fascinate me the least. Nevertheless, wherever one finds him, one finds good fishing. With a disregard for modesty, I point out a little page of mine on the former Tobacco drying houses in Perugia, where the cretti communicate with some of his other works.

Great and great...

Let’s put it this way: to give an idea of these stories, your second paragraph is a masterpiece. However, there's that sentence: "The materiality of the immaterial proposed is unfathomable with the mere tools of literary analysis." I completely agree, but for me, it's unfathomable even with the tools of an esoteric theory.

Moreover, it is unfathomable even for Kafka: there are, in his work, allusions to a Law promulgated by an unreachable Other Place. An inscrutable Law, mandatory, crystal clear in its execution and perfectly ordered, even if this order comes from the absolute indecipherability of a Chaos with geometric precision. Kafka knows that such a Law exists, that "materiality of the immaterial," but he also knows that he does not (and will never have, being a man) the means to grasp it fully.

It's as if you wanted to "bend" him to a conviction you already have inside you, but on which he would at least have some hesitations (I think of Breton who, to endow Surrealism with noble lineage, cited Nerval, Lautréamont, or Rimbaud as fathers who did not know they were).

I too believe that Freudian psychoanalysis cannot explain everything about the so-called "human abyss" (or "human abyss" inserted in the cisma), but, you see, certainly, Kafka's relationship with his father, that constant reference to feelings of guilt could be analyzed from that perspective as well (of course, these two factors are much more present in other works of his and perhaps it’s no coincidence that you chose to review this one: more elusive, more interpretable than others).

Would it be a comprehensive analysis? For me, no, not even the Freudian one. Just like yours. Just like mine.

With Kafka, I find that the interpretative blanket is always too short. There is never anything that fully satisfies me, and perhaps that is precisely where his greatness lies.