The idea that Kafka writes surreal, nightmare visions of a horrifying world is a very popular reaction to his work, and in short stories such as Metamorphosis, there is an indisputable surrealism. However, like with the political interpretation of The Trial, it seems to me that Kafka is being pigeon-holed in a way that leaves many other outstanding themes unresolved. The sense of the ominous presence of inhuman forces lurking behind every corner, the ultimate futility of human plans, the persistent search for the perpetually absent Transcendent, and the lack of any finality all suggest that The Trial is a nightmare, a very frightening one indeed.
             K. is never able to reach the higher level officials, nor is he able to communicate with knowledgeable people in the field of law. It really makes the reader think that the powers of the court are beyond human reach, and that they are governed by some super natural power that rejects any interaction with the common man. And as the interaction between the two becomes more strenuous, Joseph K. is overwhelmed by his internal guilt, guilt that is not caused by an infraction of a certain law but rather by the lack of knowledge and the inability to stand up to those who can not distinguish right from wrong.
             The various people Joseph K. encounters in the hidden recesses of this underworld of the law - ranging from legal advocates, experienced assistants, knowledgeable women, portrait artists, and other accused individuals all seem to be able to offer some small nugget of information, some piece of purportedly valuable and hard-worn advice, and through the application of this acquired information, K. is led into thinking that this will make a difference for his case. Yet the clues don't fit together, the advice does not hold any hope of acquittal, and the disparate mass of partial observations, slanted perspectives and inconclusive testimonies do not in any way p
             ...