A Classic Composite: Literature and Mankind

Article by Aly Moreno | Art by Jillian Hartshorne

Preface

There are ideologies that we, as the human race, work against for no other reason but man’s state of being. We meet unproductivity and turn the other way, graze absoluteness, and burn what lingers off. Our biggest fear is someone else’s spoil catching the trail of our navigation. Humans naturally align with free will rather extensively. My peers, whom I’ve observed preliminary to this writing, seek one of three objectives: post-secondary education, work, or absolutely nothing. All these in common require an active motion or choice, especially the latter. To remain still is the largest statement of all. With all of which enraptures you, blows you in separate directions, and you are not torn in two. I find the audacity rather courageous. Very few have the luxury to stand still and watch as life proceeds, even less can attain such abilities. This is not a critique of structure nor a critique of character. This work is subject to garnering human nature by where it stands and displaying the truth of its range. It is my strong belief that it is there where authority swells. In the execution of such a claim, the presentation of a myriad of literary works will support the nature I spring upon.

Two Treatises of Government

As I recall certain social disobedience to which we are susceptible, I am always led back to the nature of authority. What type of person sees their consciousness, for all that it is and deems the rigid thing fit to govern? To mend the issues of others they believe they, one day, will stand above? When answering this question we must shy away from the structure of politics, away from government and leaders, and into human nature. Mankind only looks in favor of itself. John Locke’s Second Treatise acknowledges how individuals allow themselves to secede from authority. It is not a notion of fear, intimidation, or manipulation that humans fall into, but sacrifices that the purified individual will make to ensure civility and order. In other words, certain liberties are deemed unnecessary when juxtaposing their consequences. This treatise is apparent in its direction to human nature, it inherently defines it. However direct this treatise may appear, many gather the laws, rights, and government behind his words, all to fall short in their basis. Locke recognizes what behavior ensues the nature of a soul, but only traces its identity. Humans are in a “state of freedom” that mocks a wind vane amidst a monsoon. As previously stated, remaining still and solidified in this mess is impressively dauntless. Humans proceed throughout their lives “without asking leave” of another being. On another note, Bob Dylan once sang that the answer (question in hand was left ambiguous) is “blowing in the wind” and, while I find the words to be true, an answer to the curio of human nature lies nowhere but within. Answers freely float across an atmosphere because they are housed within a body. While Locke explores what these traits create, it is up to the individual to decide where they are named. Authority only exists as a byproduct of the humble, once their willingness evolves into susceptibility. Therefore, social disobedience is not inherited from the egoists in a society. Rebellion catches in the ever-changing, traversive soul of the humble.

The Metamorphosis

Very rarely does a human reincarnate overnight as a cockroach. However, at nearly every minute of man’s existence, he questions how necessary his role as a laborer truly is. Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis encapsulates both of these sentiments. As the main character of his story takes on a new physical form, everyone around him flinches at the sight, at what body the dehumanizing job that he labors forces him to inhabit. How hypocritical is it to first rejoice at the tangible assets brought about by such labor, and later condemn their tangibility? Multiple themes diverge in this story and each orients the consequences of a particular labor force. The analysis of such a system becomes essential: Kafka immediately addresses the underlying issue of his cookie-cutter approach as something “happening inside” the subject. That no person can “make anyone understand” or explain the painlessly static phenomenon occurring within a being. Therefore, the first claim Kafka makes is the inability of self-identification in labor forces, yet he decides to tell one man’s story as an individual, no pattern is created. Paradoxically, man’s sterility consumes his identity, and his identity is just as withstanding in its absoluteness. Secondly, Kafka reinforces the concept that counteracts frivolous productivity. It is necessary to see the difference in its clarity; frivolous productivity shrinks disorder that may rise above it, whereas beneficiary productivity ensures that disorder intentionally ensues. The comments of thoughts and labor in an individual prove how fulfilling sterility may be when examining the consequences of our structured society. 

A Woman of No Importance

Oscar Wilde is a long-standing symbol of the unspoken for of his era. The greatest takeaway from this play is that Wilde seemingly understands women’s dynamics without experiencing them. Looking back at the works of literature previously mentioned, one is quick to make the judgment of all information having already been known or obvious. It is obvious because it runs through your veins: when your soul is called it must answer. What grievances Wilde springs upon women is less commending the sex and more to do with, once again, human nature. “Every [man] is a rebel, and usually in wild revolt against [themself],” is an ode to the ravishing and savage soul of the universe. At the heart of our world there is the solar wind, and at the heart of its inhabitants is a compass that dictates the state of our solidarity, movement, and behavior. A Woman of No Importance is truly unimportant— nothing profound about the universe is stated and no straws are left to grasp. What stands out is the perfectly mundane and domestic life of an individual, who is left to tear up cities of the universe. 

Conclusion

When we understand dialect and literature, we hold the key to mankind in our palms. Almost, unfortunately, we see the universe for what it is. You are everything that everyone before you has ever touched, breathed, or drank. You are the blood running through our veins, the water struck against a dam. Only pride would mistake its host as significant. Only a fool would deem themselves unchanging. What can you be when we take the universe out of you? There! Your soul! So it must be true; you must be the soul of the universe. You cannot be any other way. 

Kafka, Franz. The Metamorphosis. 1915. 

Locke, John. The Second Treatise of Government. 1689. 

Wilde, Oscar. A Woman of No Importance. 1893.