Not that, please not that!
Peter Kuper's adaptation of Kafka's Metamorphosis is certainly very impressive in itself.
But in context, it is only expressionist horror, out of Steven Berkoff's stage version, and so also completely misses and misrepresents what is so special about Kafka's story in particular, and his writing in general. It is the lack of such an histrionic style that strikes me as chilling.
Two remarks of the author suggests he believed expressionism to be a limited style. Gustav Janouch asked him "What do you think of Kokoschka's drawings? " Kafka replied: "I do not understand them. Drawing derives from to draw, to describe, to show. All they show me is the painter?s internal confusion and disorder." He points to one image: "In that picture the roofs are flying away. The cupolas are umbrellas in the wind. The whole city is flying in all directions. Yet Prague still stands ? despite all internal conflicts. That is the miracle."
And with particular reference to Metamorphosis, on October 25th 1915, he wrote to his publisher Kurt Wolff Verlag to make a request.
"Dear Sir,
You recently mentioned that Ottomar Starke is going to do a drawing for the title pages of Metamorphosis. Insofar as I know the artist's style ? this prospect has given me a minor and perhaps unnecessary fright. It struck me that Starke, as an illustator, might want to draw the insect itself. Not that, please not that! I do not want to restrict him, but only to make this plea out of my deeper knowledge of the story. The insect itself cannot be depicted. It cannot even be shown from a distance."
Metamorphosis, as the title sort of hints, is about change, and how it is a permanent condition. The bit at the end where the sister "stretches her young limbs" stands for that. So, the moment the insect is depicted visually, it is contained; the imagination is restricted and change halted. Perhaps this explains the popularity of fantasy comics, while also contradicting the bloated claims made on their behalf.
