![]() The indiscriminate approval of every personal choice, irrespective of the harm it causes, has borne the full ethical weight of progressive politics in Western societies for decades now. Can a society that sanctions such performances be considered just or sane? Can the desire to harm (or even kill) oneself be taken seriously, even as entertainment, without a criminal offence? Are the guardians who policed the integrity of the performance for the public, or the crowds who paid to observe it, benign or judicious in their judgments? Were they any more sane than the artist? If he was masochistic, were they not sadistic? His tale invites his readers to ask broader questions of themselves. ![]() The artist was irked because he felt his integrity besmirched by the limit. He must be acting! It was bad for business. The hunger artist’s impresario likewise insisted that the “performance” last no more than 40 days, not out of concerns for the artist’s health, but because he determined that public would become incredulous. In his story, to ensure the crowds were not being deceived, three butchers (of all people) oversaw the near-death proceedings. This is where Kafka’s story transcends the hunger artist and invites his readers to reflect. ![]() This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Manage Print Subscription / Tax Receipt. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |