Talk:The Metamorphosis/Archive 1

Translation (?)
Just wondering if Ian Johnston made the translation. His wiki says he's a Doctor in Melbourne. Disambiguate the link to his page ?

German Mistake
In the footnotes, the author of the entry states that "sich verwandelt" is a separable verb. This is not the case, it is rather a non-separable reflexive verb. "Sich" is in this case the reflexive of the subject, whereas "verwandelt" is the past participle of "verwandeln," a non-separable verb. Were "verwandeln" separable, it would conjugate as "Ich wandele mich ver," which is false, instead of the proper conjugation "Ich verwandele mich."

Dear father: from fra–– I mean Gregor
Kafka made many referances to his relationship with his father through Gregor's View of his father as well as in Kafka's Letter to His Father, he said "My writing was all about you," which shows directly the huge importance of the role of the father in The Metamorphosis. I highly suggest looking further into this as I am. Feel free to add on to this paragraph.

Description of Grete
"While Grete initially volunteers to feed him and clean his room, she grows more and more impatient with the burden and begins to leave his room in disarray out of spite." This seems like a somewhat subjective interpretation to me. Was she leaving his room filthy out of spite, or was she cracking under the pressure of being the family's workhorse?

Satirical interpretation
My outright interpretation of the story is that it shows that Gregor was ultimately an unimportant person in the lives of those around him. While his transformation is initially inconvenient for everyone, the truth is they all somewhat resented him. He put great concern into his work but once his employer saw that he was done for, his employer disappeared from his life. His family was very concerned over his duties, but once they were presented with the fact that he could never serve in his original capacity again, they cast him aside and put their lives together, realizing that their dependency on him was an illusory convenience.

I believe it's a satire of the middle class worker; who spends his life to please sadists for money so he can in turn support an unnecessary lifestyle, who grows apart from the people he is supporting because he spends so much time working.

Is this interpretation really not the common one? It seems so obvious. :D Mbac 20:46, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's what I was thinking when I began reading it. At the end, however, the most important theme I could find was that the more the family treated Gregor as a bug, the more his mindset changed to one of a bug. --Dyss 23:58, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I tend to look at it as being about (the superficiality of) human relations and its relationship with the individual mind, similar to what Dyss said. It can be looked at in many different ways, which a testament to Kafka's brillance...but, the theme of dehumanization (or more generally, the fundamental nature of human) is obviously the overriding one, and I think we're all just looking at different aspects of that dehumanization. --Tothebarricades.tk 00:13, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I think it's more about how a depressed person percives themsevf as inconveniencing and worthless to everyone around them. Kafka's constant depression is I think very important in understanding the theme's of his work. Klonimus 06:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The family saw him as a walking meal ticket. He worked all hours, he got up at 4am whilst the family were still in bed, and his father later enjoyed a leisurely breakfast. Yet when he was in trouble and needed help, he got none from anyone except his sister.

Possibly a common experience for those who go from being breadwinner to disablement, unemployment or senility.

Exile 19:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Kafka's reaction
In Rudy Rucker's afterword to White Light, one reads: "'A final influence was Franz Kafka. Kafka's friend Max Brod said that when Kafka read 'The Metamorphosis' to him, Kafka laughed so hard that he fell out of his chair. Franz on his back, all eight- or is it six? - legs kicking.' (pg 268 1997)"

Is this worth adding in? Is it true? Did Brod really say that? --Gwern (contribs) 21:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Spaceball reference
In another Mel Brooks movie, Spaceballs, Dark Helmet passes a reference to Kafka when their spaceship is transforming into a gigantic maid.

Just because it involves a maid doesn't mean it's a Kafka reference. Is there something I'm missing? 163.118.215.31 23:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe the exact line, when Dark Helmet give the order to transform the ship, is "Prepare for the metamorphosis, Kafka" Liamdaly620 01:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The Fly?
I thought the quote from The Fly was a paraphrase of Chuang Tzu's dream of being a butterfly, where he wondered if he was a butterfly dreaming he was a man StrangeIdiot 22:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)StrangeIdiot

Where's Grete?
What happened to Gregor's sister? Didn't she have a section just a few days ago? Why did it get deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Garsha (talk • contribs) 01:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Are all the citation needed tags necessary?
How are we supposed to really provide a source that the story was alluded to in the various other works? 199.126.137.209 07:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Animated Metamorphosis
There was an animated rendition of Metamorphosis. It was produced in a Central European East Bloc nation in the 1970s. Does anyone know of the producer/ director or the exact nation in which it was produced? Dogru144 01:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Disgrace to the work
Sounds like the person who wrote the majority of this page read only the Sparknotes version of the novel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.107.83 (talk) 11:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Love that self-loathing
Perhaps the most interesting thing I take from the story is an indulgence in self-loathing, for which, of course, Kafka is well-known. I think that one of the reasons, if not ione, Kafka did not want the creature shown, is because he wanted the reader to envision Gregor as both an insect and a man - while his physical description renders him insectile, his thoughts are conveyed in a very human-like manner.

Yes, I do think the criticism of bureaucracy and the suffering of the middle-class and familial struggles all come through as well - even though Kafka is indulging in self-hatred, we sympathize more with Gregor than the other characters, who are made out to treat Gregor fairly monstrously (the real metamorphosis may be that the other characters turn into monsters, while the monstrous vermin remains fairly human, despite all the suffering his physical condition causes him).

That's just what I take from it. I do like what some other interpretations say, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Putrescent stench (talk • contribs) 19:54, September 30, 2004 (UTC)

I would not evaluate the behavior of Gregor's family as "monstrous". They are just human.(No user) 23:25, 19 August 2006

I saw it as a commentary of the mindset of the European population after the First World War. The Western civilization that they were so confident about was shattered, and they were left with disgust. In real life, this feeling was then followed by WWII. In the book (which was written in the inter-war period), it is followed by optimism after Gregor's death. Is this a correct (or at least plausible) way of looking at the story? I'm curious... Peaceman 03:47, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. It was written in 1912! i hate that you can edit this page people could type anything so this synopsis could be untruthful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.233.58.100 (talk) 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Exile 19:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Have a Nice Life, Little Sister
I remember that the last line of this work describes Gregor's younger sister after his death, who at the end of a train ride "got up and stretched her young body." This may seem icky, but I totally read that physical description as a kind of semi-incestuous sexual reference, as though Gregor's sister's youth is something he always coveted, and now that he is dead her youth is something that Kafka sardonically describes in the story's last line to indicate that she is still alive and beautiful, while Gregor is dead and hideous.

Tortured sexuality, thy name is Kafka!

Arkhamite 14:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Critical interpretation
This is considered a signifigant novel. And the importance extends beyond the explicit plot, and into the symbolism. This page could benefit from a section giving a properly cited critical interpretation of symbolism and philosophy represented in the work. The section on the translation issues is a good start, but at lot more could, and I believe should be added. The listed external links look like a good start. I might get to this in a few months if I remember, but I'd love it if someone beat me to it. -Verdatum (talk) 05:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Home Movies reference
Does any one know about the show Home Movies on Adult Swim. There was an episode were the kids did a rock opera about Franz Kafka Metamorphosis. I think that something about that can be added to the television section on the article's page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Driski555 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Plot Summary?
This article is blatantly missing a summary of the events that occur in the book and the general views of Kafka. If someone could manage to write one up, that would be fantastische. Matt White (talk) 00:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from these URLs: http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/metamorph/characters.html and http://www.bookrags.com/studyguide-metamorphosis/char.html Material was added here. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Short story or novella?
How long is this narrative? Is it really long enough to be considered a novella? I've always thought of it as a short story.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 07:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Orig. German Fischer Buecherei version is more than 50 p. There're multiple character developments, so I'd guess it's a novella.BubbleDine (talk) 15:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

There has been a huge discussion between literary scholars if it's a novella or a short story. An end of the discussion is not in sight as there are arguments on both sides and it seems to be something in between. Therefore most German schools teach that it's a [b]narrative[/b] what can be seen as an umbrella term for both novellas and short stories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.135.78.184 (talk) 22:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I asked my German teacher an he even refers to it as a parable. So it's really unsure which kind of narrative it actually is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.135.76.12 (talk) 15:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

"word games"
I don't know German, but I didn't think you could negate a word that doesn't exist. Thus I found this sentence very confusing: "It is very characteristic of Kafka to play word games (and could be why these direct terminologies are not used in the narration): the Un part of the word, grammatically speaking, is a negation that makes the word opposite to “clean” and “suited”, although there was no such word as Geziefer in 20th century German." Some explanation or deletion might help. TrickyApron (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the significance of three's in The Metamorphosis. Also, how is this a allegory to religion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshi37 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The word "Geziefer" originally means animal that is suited for sacrifise. Since I assume that the sacrifise of animals has been going on long before the 20th sentury, I am pretty sure that both the word "Geziefer" and its negation "Ungeziefer" must have existed when Kafke wrote Metamorphosis. Besides, why on earth would Kafke make up a word that is so central for Metamorphosis, and risk having his audience misunderstand him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.48.163.34 (talk) 12:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The Retransformation of Gregor Samsa
Anyone know where I can read or buy this book? -Hoekenheef 21:44, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/offer-listing/0553213695//002-3311933-9190423?condition=collectible lists one version that includes it, though it is $18.50. I have the exact same version and 18.50 is a ridiculous price. It's a 100 page paperback. It is written in 1916, but I only have the english translation. If it falls under the public domain, I could transcribe it to wikisource, but I believe a translation has its own copyright. If anyone can clear the copyright up for me, and it is legal, I'll put it on wikisource. --Dyss 02:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Free Online Editiontranslated by David Wylie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.152.107.196 (talk) 16:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Not a non-human?
After reading the translated english texts several times only the narrator and Gregor ever discribe or refer to him as a non-human. Nowhere do any other characters discribe what they see when they look at him. Only the widowed servent toward the end calls him a name that is in line with his own discriptions of himself and that of the narrator, however calling someone a name is not the same as discribing their physical characteristics. What if it is a disease that has morphed Gregor into something hidious, like leprocy or small pox or polio? That would not address the climbing the walls or celing yet no other characters are witness to this since he could have covered the hanging framed photo with his body as a standing human. How would that change the way you read this story? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpfyffe (talk • contribs) 07:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Interpretation
Presently, all this page does is summarize (albeit quite well); from a surface-level view, "The Metamorphosis" seems nothing more than a children's story. The full value of the novella can only be expressed through an analysis of the work. I'm hunting for some interpretations out there online that can be cited...right now, the article is almost ridiculous, beginning by deeming the novella one of the most famous works of the 20th century and then not making any attempt to explain why. Perhaps there might be something to be found in the history of the page... Cervantes de Leon (talk) 12:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Spider Man... Really?
I do not think that Spiderman should be included as part of the references to Kafka. If that is the case, you should include everything that has ever turned into anything in a movie! Most of the references I understand, but this one is a stretch. -- Unsigned 04:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.179.103.164 (talk)
 * I think its plausible, but I've removed it for now because it is unreferenced. Ideally, all information on Wikipedia should be cited to a reliable source. Thanks, liquidluck ✽ talk  05:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Allusion?
Where in the film The Reader was The Metamorphosis featured? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.69.206 (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Another Movie Reference -- Naked Lunch
I'm to lazy to get the exact quotes at this time (going to bed) but I just finished reading the book for the first time this week, and also happened to watch the movie Naked Lunch on Netflix during the same period. There are a lot of similarities and also a few references to this work...something along the line about how Kafka like such and such was. It was mention more than once. If I get around to watching it again or googling the reference I'll add them. Just wanted to bring this up so that it could be added as another reference in the movie section of the sight. Cheers! --Iamhewhoisnot (talk) 05:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Look of the bug
One of Franz Kafka's main wishes about this story was that the look of the bug was never to be described or drawn so that the reader could decide for himself what the insect looked like. - Iammaxus

I've always prefered "As Gregor Samsa woke from restless sleep, he found himself transformed in his bed into a monstrous vermin", but to each his own. Cockroach is >right< out.
 * I suppose that depends on your definition of "vermin". -67.163.21.39 20:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

This may just be me, but I've always wanted to see a version that says, "As Gregor Samsa woke from a restless sleep, he found himself transformed in his bed into a monstrous critter." Much more colloquial sounding, and funny- more like Ungeziefer.

How about creepy-crawly?
Yeah, like you said. I added a suggested translation using creepy-crawly AND putting the verb at the end. The point is that, ironically, the looser the translation, the closer to the original language you get!YankeeInCA (talk) 16:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Nabokov and dung beetles
I seem to recall Nabokov -- who was of course no stranger to entomology -- saying (in Lectures on Literature, I think) that Gregor is definitely a beetle -- I want to say a dung beetle. Must be nice to be so positive about flights of other people's fantasy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.141.118.67 (talk • contribs) 06:09, October 16, 2003 (UTC)
 * Nabokov wrote a lot about the text, it can be seen here, http://victorian.fortunecity.com/vermeer/287/nabokov_s_metamorphosis.htm
 * That's awesome! I love the annotated page and wish I could see more. And I would definitely defer to Nabokov's expertise--in entomology and in literature--as to the literal nature of Samsa's transformation.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 16:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Nabokov or his work, but the logic of the thought that "Gregor was not a cockroach, but a beetle with wings under his shell, and capable of flight" is flawed. Many species of cockroaches have wings and some species can fly, so Gregor having wings under his shell and being capable of flight does not prove that he is not a cockroach. Perhaps someone misinterpreted Nabokov or perhaps Nabokov's assessment is incorrect. Regardless, the entry on the page should probably be edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch999 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Gregor is Definitely an Arthropod
I don't have the book on hand, but I seem to recall that Kafka describes some trouble that Gregor has with the bedclothes and his difficulties in getting out of bed, and at that point Kafka states that Gregor's new physiognomy includes a hard shell, that this shell is segmented, and that he has many legs. In that case, if Gregor is an animal that has a segmented hard shell and legs, he is definitely an arthropod, which means he could be an insect, spider, or even a crab.

Although lol if Gregor were a crab or a spider, he might have gone after his father and pinched or bitten him when he threw that apple at Gregor! I don't think we should assume anything from the cleaning lady's statement; she probably means "dung beetle" as a perjorative and not an actual taxonomic term, as cleaning ladies generally do not like or know much about insects.

I just ordered a new translation of this work because of the whole "Ungeziefer" issue that I learned about on this article. Thanks Wikipedians.

Arkhamite 14:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, it would make sense if he was an insect (as most commonly accepted), but can't be a crab at all because of how he can walk up on the walls. Also, there is nothing else in the book that gives any lead towards Gregor possibly being a spider. So it's probably safe to assume he's a bug of some sort. 168.187.66.184 13:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Could It Be a Centipede?
Am I the only one who gets the impression that Gregor turns into a centipede of some sort? Maybe looking a wee bit like those mutlipedal creatures in that Escher illustration with the surreal stairs. First of all, the number of his legs are never specified and second of all, and this could be strictly PoV here, but I think it's easier to imagine a huge centipede than a huge, say, cockroach or dung beetle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.135.39 (talk) 13:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Accept other options
Kafka uses an intense amount of symbolism in the story. You have to accept the possiblity that Gregor might not really be a bug, but instead Kafka used that image to make the alienation between Gregor and his family more prevelent in his story. The limited point of view presented by Kafka through Gregor suggests some sort of bias on what has actually happened to Gregor's appearence. Gregor might just think he is a bug or feel like a bug given his family experience. The fact remains that Kafka intentionally left the option up to the reader. As a Modernist writer, he knew that the conclusion was ultimatly up to each individual that read his story. Kubass747 (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I think that Kafka choosed a vermin mainly because of two things: they are fragile and are always in the mood to get crushed by people.

User without account (yay!): Ramirillo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.42.51 (talk) 06:29, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Trivia
I have removed a number of listings that are unimportant and unsourced pieces of trivia. Just because items can be sourced to external or internal links does not make them noteworthy; only those items that can be sourced to significant coverage in WP:RS publications should be readded. Flowanda | Talk 05:41, 11 April 2011 (UTC) Many were readded so I deleted them. RadioEverleigh (talk) 16:22, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Samsa in Slavic
Few people are aware of this but the name "Samsa" or "sam sum" (сам съм) means in Slavic languages "alone I am"

This is in Bulgarian. What are the "alone I am" equivalents in Polish, Czech or Russian? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.31.60 (talk) 08:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

SAMSA... S+8=K, F+8=M, S+8=K SAMSA=KAFKA... Is this makes sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.110.98.94 (talk) 21:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Another Movie Reference -- Flushed Away
In the 2006 movie Flushed Away, there's a reference to the book. Ironically, you can see a vermin reading a book with "The Metamorphosis 	Franz Kafka"  written on the cover. 187.35.193.135 (talk) 13:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Seminal Work
The article needs some explanation as to why this work is cited as being seminal of the 20th century. Also some explanation of the alleged symbology is needed. Flaviusvulso (talk) 15:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Alternate Interpretation???
I believe the whole story is meant as an allegory for the fall of religion. When religion is a central part of the family life, the family are comfortable and they are willing to help each other. But when religion has been stigmatized to such an extent that it is viewed as a cancerous 'vermin' on society (as it is viewed for the last century or so) the family falls apart. The lodgers that move into the house represent the Middle East and how they see the corrupt Western world as a clown, for entertainment purposes only. Now that religion is dead, the family (the Western world) had life turned into misery and work. This was also written at about the time pollution started happening. Coincidence? I think not.

When Gregor's father pelts him with apples, this symbolizes religion being once and for all ridiculed, and this is truly why Gregor dies (for religion cannot exist without faith in humans). When he dies and his family quickly move on, finding themselves better of financially, this represents the devil taking over the lives on atheists and them descending into Hell.

I think this is a common interpretation and quite frankly I am surprised and dismayed it is not included in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.108.137 (talk) 16:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Since Kafka was an atheist and an anarchist, I find this interpretation very hard to believe.Tgpaul58 (talk) 19:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If it is a common interpretation there would be to be a relaible source referencing it out there. But currently that is not the case in the article Ottawa4ever (talk) 15:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I also find the idea that a story written in 1912 comments on the Middle East's view on the west to be absurd. The relationship the OP speaks about was not anything of any particular importance during Kafka's lifetime, if it even really existed yet - Muslim powers are the time attempted to imitate Europe, not distance themselves from it. It would not become a issue of note about until the 1970s at the earliest and more like the 1990s or 2000s. 108.180.204.90 (talk) 17:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As a Kafka and German literature scholar at a university, as well as a German speaker, I find this "alternative interpretation" absurd. There is no legitimate scholarship that would facilitate such a reading. It's the confused conclusion of someone who is too absorbed in reader response criticism. There is literally nothing in the story to corresponds in any way to the Middle East as well. Anything added along those lines would need a highly respectable source, the existence of which is unlikely. Icarus of old (talk) 20:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

The « Plot » Section (See Below: "A Vermin?")
The plot summary is written in an atrocious affectation of English-language prose. I had to reread certain sentences because this muddled grammar had me confused. And then some - in considering the rhetorical tone that is apparent in many sections of this article - which might not be suitable for a wiki article. 24.102.148.14 (talk) 23:55, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

MTV
Back in the early 1990's, MTV ran a spot to promote literacy featuring IIRC, John Malcovich?, reading the opening as they showed the giant creature waking up. MMetro (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Feed Your Head with Aidan Quinn. Blackguard  01:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Lost in Translation: With a verb terminated?
I have to take exception to the claim that one cannot terminate an English sentence with a verb. In fact I think that most readers of English would have no problem with:

Als Gregor Samsa eines Morgens aus unruhigen Träumen erwachte, fand er sich in seinem Bett zu einem ungeheueren Ungeziefer verwandelt.

As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself in his bed and into a monstrous vermin transformed.

This might not be grammatically correct. But the meaning, tone, and impact are preserved.

I'm not putting this into the article (as it might constitute "Original research" or something like that). However, I wonder if someone could explain why professional translators eschew this translation. Why do "they" claim that a sentence in English cannot with a verb be terminated?

JimD (talk) 20:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

^ i like how someone tried and failed at putting a verb at the end of their sentence. ("be" is a verb. "terminated" is not.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.70.107.244 (talk) 04:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

No, terminated is a verb.

Agreed...the current "professional" translators sound more like pedantic academics than literary artists, if they think the Germanic constructions can't be legitimately represented in English. Here's another way to do it:

"'As Gregor Samsa one morning from uneasy dreams awoke, he found himself in his bed having been into a horrible creature transformed.'"

Here's my take: Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams; into a hideous insectile creature did he find himself transformed. Neftaly (talk) 05:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

^| I don't take the oft-used "Elements of Style" by Strunk and White for granted. Preferentially, things translated into non-Archaic English should sound the same. 24.102.148.14 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I'd suggest deleting the part of the "construction of sentences" in Kafka's work. While it is true that (finite) verbs are being put at the end of subordinate clauses in German, this is not a specific construction made by the author, but rather the normal (unmarked) form of such a sentence and therefore focusses nothing in particular. Further is the given example false, since the sentence "fand er sich in seinem Bett zu einem ungeheuren Ungeziefer verwandelt" is not the subordinate clause, but the independent clause. The finite verb "fand" is in it's correct position as predicate. The word "verwandelt" is not the finite verb, but rather the participle form and part of the adverbial phrase "zu einem Ungeheuer verwandelt".

[Als] [Gregor Samsa] [eines Morgens] [aus unruhigen Träumen] [erwachte], [fand] [er] [sich] [in seinem Bett] [zu einem ungeheuren Ungeziefer verwandelt].

[subordinating conjunction] [subject] [noun phrase] [prepositional object] [predicate], [predicate] [subject] [reflexive pronoun] [adverbial clause of place] [adverbial clause of manner].

I don't see, why this construction would not be directly replicable in English sentences, since following the German word order is unnecessary:

[When] ]Gregor Samsa] [awoke] [one morning] [from uneasy dreams], [he] [found himself] [in his bed] [transformed into a hideous vermin].

Following the normal word order of English sentences (as the German sentence does respectively), the meaning and focus remains the same. Pamu784 (talk) 22:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Sources for English Translations

 * http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2015/may/13/kafka-metamorphosis-translations
 * http://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3Akafka%20AND%20metamorphosis%20AND%20mediatype%3Aaudio
 * https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5200
 * http://www.kafka.org/index.php?english_transl

--Honestly, Bodhi (talk) 01:38, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Survey of critical interpretations
I'm begging any scholar of Kafka and/or modern literature to please provide a summary of leading interpretations of the work. It is wholly inadequate that one of the "seminal works" of the 20th Century lacks any hermeneutical content - just plot and character summaries. What makes the work important? What is Kafka saying, and how do the symbols and literary devices operate? I don't think we're looking for a treatise, but an overview is essential. fishhead64 (talk) 05:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Ungeziefer
Dutch and German are brother languages. In dutch we have the word "ongedierte" which means exactly the same as "Ungeziefer" does in german. Literal translation would give you "Unanimals" (Plural). It's used in both languages for the kind of small animals you don't want around you or in your house or your garden (During Nazi-germany era the Jews where compared to them as being similar). The ones that bug you, eat your food, piss everywhere or might give you diseases. Like rodents, insects, spiders etc. So vermin is a reasonably good translation unless you guys know a better one in english (I'm not english so I leave that one to you after my explanation of the term "Ungeziefer". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.170.222.56 (talk) 21:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Copyright
Hi. I just removed a section which was a copyright infringement from an English translation of this work (see my edit summary for details). I've reversed the undo, but won't revert further - I'd advise against reinstating the material. 5.151.215.19 (talk) 22:52, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

This article is missing "Interpretations and Meaning"
Hello, I would like to understand different views on the meaning of this story, why it is considered to be a classic example of Kafka-esque writing, and how it fits into the writing of the period in general. If this article were a school paper, I think it would get a low grade without these aspects of its being considered a triumph of the literature of the period. 172.10.237.153 (talk) 03:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Manga Refference -- Tokyo Ghoul
A possible reference that could be included "In Popculture"-section would be the japanese Manga Tokyo Ghoul, which heavily references "The Metamorphosis, including the Protagonist Kaneki Ken directly compareing himself and his personal situation after being transformed into a Ghoul with Gregor Samsa, a reference to Samsas change in taste concerning food which mirrors the protagonists situation, the Protagonist being paired with Centipide imagery, which is the insect Samsa is sometimes interpreted having turned into and finally him himself transforming into Centipide-esque form during fights. I think the heavy references to The Metamorphosis justify an inclusion into this section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810B:C3C0:A3:94CF:CEA2:DC16:7B9A (talk) 02:44, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Metamorphosis.jpg

A vermin??
Vermin is a plural noun. You can't say 'a vermin'.

Further, I see nothing particularly 'scientific-sounding' about 'insect'. It's just about as general as the the original German word.

The best translation, surely, is 'bug' which covers most people's reaction to the little creatures. Add to that the adjective of your choice - horrible, monstrous, whatever.

Instead of trying too hard to trapnslate from one language to another, just feel the meaning and get close enough. People are mainly intelligent and will get the idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.58.54 (talk • contribs) 12:55, July 3, 2005 (UTC)


 * The problem is not the literal meaning, but the emotions that go along with it. "Vermin" implies disgust, while "insect" can be anything, like a butterfly or something.  The singular of 'vermin' is 'vermin', so 'a vermin' is fine. AySz88 ^  -  ^  01:28, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree. This is not a manual where you just translate the meaning of a text, this is literature as an artform. You have to try to capture emotions and linguistic art as well. 'Insect' is too scientific. Kafka could have used 'Insekt' if that were his desire. But he used 'Ungeziefer' which is pejorative. "Monstrous vermin" might sound unwieldy in English, as mentioned in the article, but "ungeheures Ungeziefer" sounds unwieldy in German too. It's supposed to, because it's Kafka! --hanszarkow 01:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The following link proves that vermin can be used singularly. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vermin Exile 19:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Completely wrong, vermin is plural only and can't be used as singular. Subsequent descriptions show that Gregor has turned into a kind of beetle, and insect is at least a valid English word. Insects and beetles do have a negative image - basically, would YOU like to wake up tomorrow and find you'd changed into an insect?


 * The connotation is what's important to the translation. If somebody were to try to insult you by calling you an "insect", your reaction probably would be "ummm...ok...whatever", since "insect" is typically a relatively neutral word.  You'd have a different reaction if they called you a "bug", a "pest", or perhaps even a "worm"!  "Vermin" might be fine, but most people would likely be foggy on what its exact scope is (i.e., are we talking just bugs, or are street rats also included).

"Vermin" seems perfectly acceptable as a singular noun. Where did you hear that it is to be used in a strictly plural fashion? Personally, I don't feel that the distinction, in this text, between "insect" and "vermin" is very strong, though the former does seem to evoke a more explicit, defined image. Also, to my ear, at least, "vermin" does sound more innately reprehensible, revolting, than does "insect." When I read the book (i.e., whenever I read it), I always envisioned Gregor Samsa as a big, weird "roach-like" thing; I don't feel that it is particularly significant whether he is to be imagined with or without "hidden wings" (it really has no literary connotation).

(Commando303)


 * Singular is right here. Go read your OED; for vermin we can see a sense "{dag}b. A single animal or insect of this kind." --Gwern (contribs) 21:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Guys whenever I see "vermin" I think more about weasels and muskrats and raccoons and things like that, not bugs. --Rebent 19:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

"vermin" is either singular or plural, but certainly uncountable. So while it can refer to a single creature (as the OED says), the word itself cannot be individualized, and you cannot possibly say "a vermin". Quite apart from that, "vermin" is more likely to refer to rats and mice. I am an English native-speaker, but I only know the story in German and have never read a translation. I am pretty shocked to see this sentence translated thus. Incidentally, "unruhig" doesn't mean "unsettling" either, but "restless". I would translate Ungeziefer as "creepy-crawly". 84.44.140.55 (talk) 16:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

More correctly: "He was vermin" -- Just like the previous user mentioned. The noun is surely uncountable. And I'm Shirley! ... Anyway, to wit, the summary section is written in fairly poor english. I created a new item at the top of the talk page to help warrant anyones review of the appertaining text. 24.102.148.14 (talk) 23:55, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I haven't read the book (in English translation) for decades, but my recollection is that Gregor Samsa woke up to discover that he was a cockroach. Might that have been the insect specified in the translation I read? I have no idea which one it was. John Link (talk) 22:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)