ns, information, configuration, or constitution so to speak. Therefore from a logical perspective everything that a bureaucratic system embodies is void in this situation providing Kafka’s audience with an undeniable impracticality in terms. I think that the point of this impossibility is to allude to the premise that bureaucratic systems in general are in effect the antithesis of what their mission is. I use the term “bureaucratic systems” in a generalized sense to encompass all forms of menial nominal systems that are structured in such a way as to be devoid of practicality and logic. The existence of such industrious organization is to have a set of specific regulations and policies so as to facilitate a person to get from one point to another in a structure that is hindering to understand as a whole. So, in essence bureaucratic systems were developed to assist people to get to a means that they would be unable to reach without such structure, but as is illustrated in The Trial and in life the exact opposite is to be found.Furthermore, if such structures have not proven to epitomize illogical absurdity, Kafka furthers this association by creating a jurisdictional establishment that is lacking in any delineated or coherent conventions or foundations, therefore creating a self-effacing cycle of paradox that in no way can be broken or used to the advantage of the individual that needs such advantages.As if this depiction of the incongruous is not the shining example of absurdity this notion is only furthered by the general acceptance of the structure that is carried out by the characters in the novel. At no point do any of the characters that are encumbered by Herr. K’s trial explicitly articulates the ludicrous and specious nature of the proceedings that were at hand. In fact the exact opposite rings to be true, adding an air of surrealism to the already alienating tone of the story. As much as it seems that thi...
