Freedman wrote a critical essay on Kafka’s work called “Kafka’s Obscurity” and I Have to say there are a few things that I disagree with. In the beginning of the critical essay, Freedman states that Kafka usually writes his stories with a problem solving activity. He also says that we are bound to these puzzles because we are unaware of them and one big event will eventually make us aware of the puzzle. One of the biggest disagreements I have with Freedman is his idea that throughout the entire story Gregor was a vermin and his that his life had little meaning to begin with. I disagree with these opinions because I believe that Gregor meant something to his family, at least before his “Verwandlung”. First off, I don’t think for a minute that this story was a problem-solving activity. For me this story followed a man who thought he was getting somewhere and eventually wanted to set himself and his family free. Even In the course of his journey through his metamorphosis he listened in as “his father explained the family’s financial situation and prospects to both the mother and the sister.”(Kafka 25). This quote shows that Gregor indeed still cared for his family enough to worry about their problems even though he no longer had much to do with them. He worked his entire life to solve this problem and to loosen the debt that his family was confined by. Therefore since Gregor ended up dying I believe that the problem was not solved. In the Critical essay, freedman states that human beings are bound to puzzles, and that we can’t free ourselves from them; in fact we aren’t even aware of them until some big event forces us to come into awareness. But again I Believe that Gregor wasn’t at all ensnared in that much of a puzzle; because in the novella he planned many things before his metamorphosis and one of them was to send his sister “next year to the conservatory, regardless of the great expense that involved” (Kafka 26). This shows that Gregor’s metamorphosis wasn’t really one big event to bring him into awareness, but in fact it was really just a big inconvenience and again there was no puzzle because in my eyes Gregor was going to be well off with his family. Also he seemed like the type of trustworthy guy who would be able to fulfill his responsibilities to his family and use all of his power to make sure he comes through in his commitments. In the final paragraphs of Freedman’s critical essay he expresses that Gregor’s death was a freedom of sorts, and that even though his life was extinguished he gained a sort of independence from the problems that were troubling him. I believe that Gregor never thought that he was gaining any type of independence or freedom from his family, Gregor loved his family deeply. Gregor went through a lot of pain during his metamorphosis and this changed him, and the way he comprehended his situation. But not in the way freedman explains it, not where he feels
