Contextual or Traditional Grammar: Which One Actually Works In Writing?

Grammar teachers all over the United States are struggling with important questions such as “how should I teach grammar and why” and “what helps students the most?”  When asking these questions teachers usually have two methods in mind: traditional grammar, which has been around for centuries, and contextual (transformational) grammar, which has just recently approached with startling results.  Does contextual grammar have what it takes to outperform its multi-century-year-old predecessor?  To better help understand the differences between these two grammar methods one needs to know a brief history of each, teaching methods used, the pros and cons of each method, and research that has been performed and studied comparing said teaching methods.  Then, and only then, can one judge whether or not traditional grammar should give way to a new age and ultimately answer that troubling question: “how should I teach grammar in writing?”

Traditional Grammar

            Though ancient philosophers such as Aristotle, Socrates and Plato have made contributions to this method previously, traditional grammar has been around at least since second century B.C; enough is known about history to determine that, at around this time, schoolboys in Greece were taught grammar using these methods.  By the Middle Ages traditional grammar had reached its peak and was thought of, as Weaver states in Teaching Grammar in Context, “training of the mind” (3).  Some grammarians around the eighteenth century began to force English (a Germanic language) into categories designed for Latin (a Romance language), which makes grammar imprecise, and this, according to Noguchi in Grammar and the Teaching of Writing: Limits and Possibilities, is “what makes traditional grammar for students so difficult” (5).  Since then, the traditional method has been the standard for teaching students of grammar and has been this way until being questioned in the twentieth century.  Although some students of traditional grammar find their studies difficult, Noguchi suggests that “[the reason] teachers continue to teach formal grammar despite the research findings probably lies in several factors” (119), most notably: teachers are unaware of current research, teachers are aware of current research but don’t really believe it, teachers are aware of current research and believe it but have nothing better to offer in the place of formal grammar instruction (119).

Lee explains in his article, “The Promise of Transformational Grammar,” that the purpose of traditional grammar is to “explain the construction of sentences on the basis of the meaning of their constituent parts” (2), simply put, it is meant to teach students the various parts of a sentence and their function.  Those who have taken instruction in grammar may be familiar with exercises in:

1.     Identifying various types of phrases and clauses

2.     Understanding various sentence types

3.     Understanding various word functions within a sentence

4.     Diagramming (parsing) sentences

5.     Ensuring subject – verb agreement

6.     Correctly referencing pronouns

One may find that traditional grammar follows strict rules and guidelines that, at times, seem more complicated than they should.  Due to these strict guidelines traditional grammar is more often compared to arithmetic than composition.  Noguchi goes as far to say that “it would be no exaggeration to claim that students trying to learn even a small portion of grammar resemble cryptographers trying to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphics” (42).  If one has not studied grammar traditionally, Noguchi’s description should give an idea of how complex this method can be.

Though research (to be discussed in greater detail later) has shown that traditional grammar seems to have no positive effect on composition, Noguchi proposes that “formal instruction of grammar has potentially the most to offer in the area of style” (12).  The following are points Noguchi uses to argue that traditional grammar effects writing in the sense of style:

1.     Style, like grammar, typically has to do with form or,

at least, can be viewed with respect to form; style is a

characteristic choice of form.

2.     Style can be studied with respect to sentences; that is,

we can speak of a style of sentences.

3.     The style of sentences can and does contribute significantly

to the overall style of an essay; that is, there is considerable

                                          overlap between cumulative effects of sentence style and the

                                          overall style of an essay.

4.     Style is an area on which many of the technical concepts

introduced in formal grammar instruction become descriptively

relevant.

                                                                                                                           (11)

So what does all of this mean?  Some grammarians believe that style is a key element in composition.  Noguchi’s proposal suggests that traditional grammar aids the writer in forming better sentences, and however the writer decides to form these sentences is what develops that writer’s specific style which, in turn, these sentences accumulate to create an essay with overall better form and style.

            Unfortunately for traditional grammar, Noguchi’s proposal regarding the benefits to style does not seem to do enough to keep the formal methods from further criticism.  Lester states in his article, “The Value of Transformational Grammar in Teaching Composition,” that “there simply appears to be no correlation between a writer’s conscious study of grammar and his ability to write,” and if there was “then all linguists would be great writers” (1).  Even Noguchi, though he supports formal grammar’s influence on style, agrees that “formal grammar instruction, at least as it is currently practiced, cannot bring any significant benefit [to organization and content]” (12), which brings up the question, “what good is form and style if there is total chaos within the writing?”  The answer is quite simple; style does not matter if one cannot understand what is being discussed.  Noguchi gives three reasons why he believes traditional grammar is ineffective in improving writing:  

1.     Formal grammar, being uninteresting or too

difficult, is not adequately learned by students.

2.     Formal grammar, even if adequately learned, is

is not transferred to writing situations.

3.     Formal grammar, even if adequately learned, is

not transferable to writing situations.

                                                               (emphases, 4)         

Since formal grammar is “tedious and boring” (5) to most students, it is no wonder why it is not adequately learned.  If a student was to learn traditional grammar he or she may not even know / understand how to apply it to a writing situation, rendering the information virtually useless.  Noguchi’s third point argues that traditional grammar may not even be applicable to certain writing situations, again rendering the information futile. 

Contextual Grammar

            Compared to traditional grammar contextual methods are still in infancy.  Structural linguists began to surface in the 50’s and early 60’s giving birth to this new method of grammar and conducting several studies (Harris [1962], Bateman-Zidonis [1966], Mellon [1969]) during the last fifty years.  Weaver explains that “structural linguists based their grammatical descriptions on careful analysis of English as it was actually spoken in their time, not on hand-me-down rules from Latin and from English grammars of earlier centuries” (11).  The 60’s and 70’s gave way to the idea of transformational grammar – a method with such stunning results that it threatens the integrity of its ancient predecessor.  Neuleib states in her article, “The Relation of Formal Grammar to Composition,” that Harris’s study “is the one most frequently named by all researchers today as the study that really began to do a serious investigation of the worth of instruction in formal grammar” (1).  Research and studies continue even to this day, trying to uncover new ways of teaching better grammar.

            Hunter explains in his article, “A New Grammar That Has Clearly Improved Writing,” that in contextual grammar students are “taught to identify problem areas within their own writing [and they] learn mnemonic devices to identify different parts of speech and […] taught the interrelationships of all parts of a well-constructed sentence” (4).  From this description alone one will notice the biggest change among the two grammar methods – contextual grammar, unlike traditional, focuses on the student’s writing and not overbearing guidelines and definitions.  Hunter goes on to say that the most important difference from traditional grammar is at the “structural level” (5).  The following is a list of activities / exercises students will encounter in contextual grammar:

1.     Creating stronger sentences by using active voice

instead of passive

2.     Sentence combining   

3.     Sentence chunking

4.     Sentence unscrambling

5.     Sentence expanding

6.     Development of paragraphs

7.     Development of thesis

8.     Organization

9.     Style

10.  Editing workshops

11.  Writing essays and correcting errors through

multiple drafts

            When compared to the exercises of traditional grammar the most noticeable difference is the focus of activities – contextual grammar has made a transition from focusing on the structure of individual sentences to incorporating all of the exercises into the development of writing as a whole (i.e. an entire essay).  Lees explains that the “major central tasks of [structural] linguistics [is] the specification of the internal organization of sentence-enumerating grammars” (emphases, 4).  Therefore, in contextual grammar, organization is the key, not hard-to-remember definitions or sentence diagrams.  Many classes here at Indiana State University require at least one written essay per semester; these essays are graded on structure and development of his or her thesis.  Marks on graded papers are intended to be reviewed by the student and that student is expected to fix these errors on the next essay – this is contextual grammar in practice.

            With all the buzz about contextual grammar there has to be some good things that become of it.  Lester states that “in the area of stylistic analysis, transformational grammar promises exciting things” (1).  Hunter explains that “[contextual grammar] gives students command of structure due to its manipulative, chunking, and carefully sequenced strategies that cause students to experience, and therefore internalize, the system of the structure of the sentence as a backdrop to assist their composing” (emphases, 5).  This goes to say that students who benefit more from doing rather than seeing will benefit greatly from contextual methods.  Besides, learning contextually comes naturally to most – most everyone tends to learn naturally from practice and from mistakes.  As children nearly everyone learns to speak because they hear others speak and they try to imitate, not because their parents sat them down and taught them how to form sentences using diagrams and complex definitions – most parents would get nowhere with such a method, especially with younger children.  So the question arises, “if children can lean to speak through context why can’t adults learn to write through context?” 

            In the article “Why Transformational Grammar Fails in the Classroom” Luthy expresses that “[contextual grammar] has not been an effective means for teaching skillful use of the language” (1).  By “skillful” Luthy refers to “a description of language that would have [teachers] teach the structure of English sentences” (1).  Luthy also states in his article that teaching transformational grammar has disappointing results in adequate description of English sentences.  He also explains that transformational grammar tries (but fails) to explain the functions of relative pronouns, modifiers, adverbs as modifiers, etc – basically the various parts of a sentence and how they function.  Interestingly enough, it seems Luthy fails to realize that these methods transformational grammar “fails” in are closely related in context to traditional grammar – meaning traditional grammar also attempts to explain how these various parts function in a sentence, and, as studies have shown, also fail to help most students improve their writing.  Coincidence?  Weaver, however, makes a valid point: “writing alone will not necessarily teach students new grammatical constructions, unless teachers help them learn to combine sentences and manipulate syntax” (179).  Though writing is critical in contextual grammar, one may see it a sufficient when it is really not.  This misconception must be taken into consideration if contextual grammar is to be taught successfully.          

Research and Results

            Although numerous studies have been conducted on students of various age and skill levels, there are a few key studies that began the grammar revolution.  The following are brief summaries of studies performed and the results they had to offer.  Keep in mind, these early studies are what caused grammarians and other English experts to question the traditional method, a method that has not been disputed for centuries upon centuries.

R.J. Harris was one of the first to seriously study transformational grammar in 1962 at the University of London.  His study involved ten classes, five were taught using traditional methods and the other five were taught using contextual methods.  Harris’s study was the first to discover that students studying traditional grammar performed poorly compared to those students who study grammar in context.  These results were among the first to open many eyes and minds to the possibility of a better grammar teaching method.

            The Bateman-Zidonis of 1966 was performed by researchers in New Zealand for a period of three years.  During these three years students of lower grade levels were separated into two different types of studies: one without grammar and one with traditional methods.  The results showed that students with no grammar study were more successful, Neulib states, “at identifying inappropriate sentence structures and correcting them” (3).  By now experts noticed that there may be a dysfunction within traditional grammar and began seriously questioning its abilities in the classroom.   

            In 1969 the Mellon study confirmed that students who study transformational grammar learned and retained the material significantly better than the students in traditional studies.  These results questioned specific elements of traditional grammar and gave way to the question of what doesn’t work in traditional studies and why.  This study was one of the first to determine that traditional grammar methods may be too difficult and/or confusing for students to learn, retain, and apply sufficiently.  Weaver paraphrases some research that she found in the 1960’s edition of the Encyclopedia of Educational Research:  “One investigation found a higher correlation between achievement in grammar in mathematics than between achievement in grammar and composition” and that exercises such as “diagramming sentences teaches students nothing beyond the ability to diagram” (10).

           

Conclusion

            Although results vary among diverse subjects, one will notice that overall outcomes do indicate that contextual based grammar has the ability to improve writing skills in various aspects such as organization, structure, punctuation, etc.  Hunter argues in his article, “A New Grammar That Has Clearly Improved Writing,” that students who study grammar contextually “improve appreciably not only in their ability to revise and edit but also in their ability to write spontaneously and competently” (3); however, there are still those, such as Melvin, who believe that “our college freshmen surely are dummies” simply because “even the brightest can seldom explain the difference between transitive and intransitive verbs” (4).  With the research performed and the results almost always indicating that contextual grammar does help students write better one can now question whether or not being able to label a verb and distinguish its function is really vital to a students education.  As far as they can use the verb correctly is it really necessary to be able to label it?  If so, you may as well tell Paul McCartney (the Beatles), Prince, Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder (just to name a few) that they are dummies for not being able to read sheet music.  Does this ability really handicap their ability to play music? No. Few musicians now days are classically trained yet they are able to create music that sells millions of records – it would be foolish to consider them dummies.  If contextual grammar is able to create better writers then why not use its abilities? It is obvious that the dummies are not those who fail to learn how to diagram sentences, but very well may be those who teach it to better writing.

Annotated Bibliography on the Importance of Contextual Grammar

Hewings, Ann, and Martin Hewings.  Grammar and Context: An Advanced Resource Book.  

London & New York: Routledge, 2005.

Discusses how and why grammar is used in a variety of different contexts, mainly in communication.  Not intended to teach how to analyze grammar in great detail, but focuses on new research on how grammar is used in these contexts (communication).

Hudson, Richard.  Teaching Grammar: A Guide for the National Curriculum.  Oxford UK &

Cambridge USA:  Blackwell, 1992. 

Hudson gives important background information on academic grammar.  Hudson focuses mainly on the teaching of standard grammar and offers a variety of different lessons to follow.  Most of these lessons are intended to help teachers fix problems students have in writing and speaking.  From skimming, these methods seem to be a blend of traditional and contextual grammar melded into one.

Hunter, Anthony D.  “A New Grammar That Has Clearly Improved Writing.”  The English

Journal 85.7 (1996): 102 – 107.  JSTOR. Cunningham Memorial Library, Indiana State U. 21 October 2007.  < http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00138274 %281996 11%2985% 3A7%3C102%3AANGTHC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5>.

Hunter reviews the studies of Barbara Stubbs (teacher at Clearview Regional Junior High School in New Jersey).  Stubbs research has shown that her methods improve student’s abilities to revise and edit writing, yet her methods are different from traditional grammar. 

Social Anxiety in Children: Challenging Human Development

             Social anxiety disorder (SAD), otherwise known as social phobia, is a persistent fear of social situations despite the desire for social encounters, causing the individual to become distressed, inhibited and timid in social contexts (Morris & March, 2004). In unfamiliar situations or upon meeting new people, “shy” or “inhibited” children typically withhold responding or interrupt ongoing behavior, show vocal restraint, and withdraw from the situation (Elizbeth et al., 2006). Those individuals experiencing SAD have a difficult time experiencing social situations positively, often resulting in social withdrawal. Though it may not seem like many people have this problem, according to Wetherell nearly twelve percent of the general population develops SAD at some point in their lives (as cited in Comer, 2007, p. 128). The American Psychological Association states that SAD typically begins in late childhood or adolescence and continues into adulthood (as cited in Comer, p. 128).

Causes of SAD

            There are many possible factors in the development of SAD but some of the correlating causes include: genes, behavioral inhibition, parent-child interactions, traumatic conditioning, peer relationships, social skills deficits, social cognition and information processing, and parental psychopathology (Elizabeth et al., 2006). More often than not, a single specific event that initiated the onset of SAD cannot be identified among individuals with the disorder; however, a combination of events (either biological, environmental, or a combination of both) can usually be determined with some knowledge of what to look for.

            Biological. The root of SAD could very well lie in the genes that make an individual who they are. It has been said that genes account for around one-third of the variance in most measures of anxiety, and that first-degree relatives of people with anxiety were found to be ten times more likely to be diagnosed with generalized SAD than anyone else (Morris & March, 2004; Elizabeth, 2006). The results of various researches conducted on SAD indicate that genes linked to anxiety can possibly be passed along to offspring, predisposing them to the affects of SAD. There are, however, individuals whose parents experience anxiety yet they, themselves, do not experience any symptoms. This inconsistency within the genes theory tells us that other factors may be at hand.

            Environmental. Although some parents may increase the likelihood of their children developing SAD through the passing of genes, there are also non-genetic factors to be considered. For example, a parent affected by anxiety may model poor coping skills and engage in behavior that promotes heightened states of arousal and hypervigilance, which can cause the child to, in turn, imitate the same behavior (Morris & March, 2004). More direct parent-child interactions, such as child abuse, are also major factors in causing a child to develop SAD. According to Rodriguez (2003), physically abused children are more likely than nonabused children to demonstrate characteristics such as oppositionality, behavior problems, depression, fearfulness, social withdrawal, and lower self-esteem. Children with abusive parents feel less in control of their lives, often leading them to develop a model of the “self “as unloved and rejected, and a model of the “other” as unloving and rejecting (Rodriguez, 2003; Muris, 2007). Once a child develops this “self” and “other” model to asses the social world, anyone could be considered the “other” and perceived as a threat, causing the child to shut down and withdrawal from society.

            Aside from family, a child’s peers also play a very significant role in life and learning, often providing opportunities for learning specific skills that are not attainable through adult-child interaction (Morris & March, 2004). Positive interactions with peers can benefit a child greatly, providing them with skills necessary to develop relationships later on in life; however, negative peer interactions can increase a child’s odds of developing SAD. Physical abuse from peers, as well as any other form of peer victimization, has been linked to the development of anxiety problems in children (Muris, 2007).

How SAD Affects Development

            As a child withdrawals himself or herself from social situations, that child distances themselves from other people who could potentially provide the skills necessary to overcome anxiety before it develops into a bigger problem. As a child withdraws from social situations, he or she can become easily forgotten and neglected in group and school contexts (Adalbjarnardottir, 1995). Neglect from teachers and other influences will most likely result in the child not receiving the help needed to excel in academics or any other situation requiring assistance from others. Withdrawing from others can also interfere with the development of social skills and interpersonal relationships, which will inevitably perpetuate, possibly exponentially, as the child grows older. By the time the child is an adult and has developed a socially crippling problem such as SAD, that individual may experience problems with obtaining higher education at larger schools, holding a career, finding a spouse, or having many friends; essentially, SAD has the potential to decrease a person’s quality of life in general. As the virtues of life become increasingly limited to the person suffering from SAD, depression could take hold and cause further problems (in severe cases maybe even suicide).

Solutions for SAD

            Since SAD has been found to have an early onset, an early detection and intervention could help avert a lifetime of personal distress and social maladjustment, and also special attention should given to interpersonal work with children while they are still in their early elementary years (Morris & March, 2004; Adalbjarnardottir, 1995). There are two paths (or a combination of) that one can take to help alleviate problems associated with SAD: one that relieves and helps cope with situational problems (cognitive-behavioral therapy) and one that relieves physical causes and symptoms (medication).

            Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment. Therapy is often the best solution for those individuals with SAD that simply lack the skills necessary to navigate through social life. This type of treatment focuses on two aspects of the individual: the way one thinks and the way one acts. For example, an individual with SAD may have a difficult time in social situations because they see the “other” as threatening (as mentioned earlier); in this instance, the therapist may walk through the reasons why the client portrays the “other” as threatening and try to change those attitudes with various techniques.  Another example could be that the individual with SAD is so nervous about social situations that they tend to stutter or have other obvious nervous ticks which, in turn, affects their confidence in the social situation; the therapist would then concentrate on these issues and aid the individual in developing coping strategies to reduce or eliminate the bothersome behavior.

            A variation of this type of treatment comes in the form of family therapy. Morris and March (2004) describe family intervention as including both parents and focusing on training in reinforcement and contingency management strategies, coping techniques to deal with parental emotionality, and communication problem solving skills.  In family therapy, not only is the individual suffering from anxiety taught coping strategies but also the nuclear family. This family approach has proven quite helpful when preventing normal anxiety in children from developing into SAD. As mentioned earlier, parents of children who develop SAD tend to also have anxiety, thus the family therapy approach can also teach parents essential skills that, in turn, will increase the likelihood of that parent to display proper modeling in presence of the child.

            Medication. Sometimes behavior-cognitive therapy alone (or at all) does not help the individual with all the problems associated with SAD. Medications such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are usually considered the first-line pharmacological agent, the most common include: fluvoxamine (Luvox), fluoxetine (Prozac), sertaline (Zoloft), and paroxetine (Paxil) (Morris & March, 2004). The basic function of these medications is to help alleviate symptoms of anxiety and depression. Many psychologists and psychiatrists feel that once a person can physically feel better (or more upbeat) then that person will have more confidence in themselves and a significantly better chance of overcoming problems associated with SAD.

            Which Treatment is Best? Most commonly, a single treatment method does not have the capacity to eliminate the condition all on its own. For these reasons it has become commonplace for a therapist to recommend a combination of medication and therapy for a longer lasting positive effect. The idea is that the medication will help the client overcome any physical obstacles (such as a deep feeling of helplessness) that therapy may not be able to alleviate, giving the client an opportunity to regain enough confidence in themselves to have success with therapy. The key to a drug and therapy combination is that the therapy is intended to make the client less dependant on medications. There is a risk for medication abuse if the individual does not attend therapy as well.

My Thoughts on SAD

            I believe that SAD is a combination of biological and environmental factors; however, I feel that the environment may have a little more significance. For example, say a child is predisposed genetically to be anxious in a social contexts -- more specifically, afraid of not being as good as his or her peers in a given situation. I believe that whether or not that child receives appropriate attention will determine if they will develop SAD. For instance, if that anxious child is scolded by authority figures or peers for not performing just right then that child’s anxious feelings are being reinforced, giving that child a reason to not even try next time. On the other hand, if that child is praised for his or her good efforts regardless if they performed exceptionally or not, then that child will feel good about himself or herself and have a reason to participate again.

            Individuals with SAD are often misjudged, perceived as snobbish, or “too good to hang.” These misjudgments make it even more difficult for someone with SAD to face the world, let alone defend themselves against such allegations.  This lack of social acceptance for some individuals with SAD also prolongs the issues they face in everyday life.  What many fail to realize is that those with SAD want to be accepted and want to have relationships, but for whatever reasons (biological or environmental) they just cannot bring themselves to accept others. SAD is a problem among children because once they reach adulthood they may be socially incompetent and unable to fend for themselves in such an intimidating world. The virtues of social life that others take for granted are not readily available to those faced with SAD, and could eventually decrease quality of life altogether if not attenuated to some degree. SAD can be reduced among individuals; it takes an effort on everyone’s part to see that the children are given the attention and love they deserve. After all, it’s not as if children asked to come into this world, so why give them a reason to be afraid of it?

           

References

Adalbjarnardottir, S. (1995) How schoolchildren propose to negotiate: The role of social

withdrawal, social anxiety, and locus of control. Child Development, 66 (6), 1739-1751

Comer, R. J. (2007). Abnormal psychology (6th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers

Elizabeth, J., King, N., Ollendick, T. H., Gullone, E., Tonge, B., Watson, S., & Macdermott, S.

(2006). Social anxiety disorder in children and youth: A research update on aetiological factors. Counseling Psychology Quarterly. 19 (2), 151-163

Morris, T. L., March, J. S. (Eds.). (2004). Anxiety disorders in children and adolescents

(2nd ed.). New York: Guilford P

Muris, P. (2007). Normal and abnormal fear and anxiety in children and adolescents. New

York: Elsevier

Rodriguez, C. M. (2003). Parental discipline and abuse potential affects on child depression,

anxiety, and attributions. Journal of Marriage and Family. 65 (4), 809-817

Revealing Kafka Through Gregor: Introducing the Major Depressive Disorder

          Writers often introduce their own life and feelings into their stories because that is what they are most familiar with.  If a writer can better relate to their story then that particular work carries more meaning to them and, in turn, an enthusiasm is created and a masterpiece is most often born.  Some writers put their experiences and feelings into their stories willingly.  Other writers, however, are not even aware that they are putting so much of themselves into what they are writing.  When comparing Franz Kafka to his unfortunate character, Gregor, in “The Metamorphosis” one will find some very close ties between the two.  For example, both have issues with their family, particularly their father, and both have severe depression due to their overwhelming responsibilities and skewed family values.  The causes and symptoms of Kafka and Gregor’s depression define a psychological condition known as the Major Depressive Disorder.

            The Major Depressive Disorder, according to AllPsych Online, is described as having several symptoms including:  feelings of sadness and emptiness, reduced interest in activities, loss of energy, difficulty in performing everyday tasks and suicidal thoughts – all symptoms in which Kafka and Gregor exhibit in some way.  There are also causes to this disorder that fit incredibly well with Kafka and Gregor’s lives, which include:  lack of support system (i.e. family), stress, financial struggles and job problems.  These aspects of the Major Depressive Disorder will be discussed more thoroughly in relation to Kafka and Gregor.  Clues from various sources including “The Metamorphosis” itself (New Criticism) as well as Kafka’s diaries and biography (Biographical Criticism) will help define parallels between Kafka and Gregor and will link these individuals to the Major Depressive Disorder.

            Reading biographical information on Kafka, especially his diary entries, shows that Kafka, himself, struggled greatly with depression that very closely resembles Gregor’s feelings – a connection that should be established first and foremost.  “The Metamorphosis” is an account of how Gregor feels and why, and the story conveniently encompasses his life within nearly forty short pages – or does it?  Could Gregor’s feelings have begun with Kafka’s depression before “The Metamorphosis” was even written?  In Stanley Corngold’s essay, “Kafka’s The Metamorphosis: Metamorphosis of the Metaphor,” he explains early that Kafka’s “letters reveal Kafka’s moods all during the composition of [“The Metamorphosis”] – moods almost entirely negative” (79).  This comment explains that Kafka’s negative feelings were present before and during the creation of “The Metamorphosis,” a clue in itself that alludes to the origin of Gregor’s despair.  Zatonsky states that Kafka is sometimes regarded as a “gloomy misanthrope” whose journals “narrate the causes of Kafka’s tragedy – as an artist and a man … journeys to the sources of his fears and despair.” (“Remarks” 268).  Another key similarity that lies between Kafka and Gregor is Kafka’s relationship between his parents, especially his father.  Marthe Robert states that “The Metamorphosis was a response to Kafka’s violent altercation with his father” (172 – 173).  Milan Kundera elaborates in his essay “Somewhere Behind” that “the famous letter Kafka wrote and never sent to his father demonstrates that it was from the family, from the relationship between the child and the deified parents, that Kafka drew his knowledge of the technique of culpabilization, which became a major theme in his fiction” (27).  Anyone who reads “The Metamorphosis” will see this very same connection between Gregor and his parents; a connection so vivid that only one with experience, such as Kafka, would be able to convey that experience and its true feelings with mere words.        

            To begin with the symptoms of the Major Depressive Disorder, feelings of sadness and emptiness will be compared between Kafka and Gregor.  It is obvious that Gregor experiences sadness due to his transformation as a “monstrous vermin,” which severs all social ties he ever had with his family and work (“Metamorphosis” 3).  This inability to function as a human being would leave anyone feeling empty and useless.  A few letters Kafka wrote to Max Brod give an insight to how the writer feels about himself:  “I am a completely useless person, really, but nothing can be done about it…I am utterly on the downward path, and…I can’t help going to the dogs.  Also, I should love to cut myself, but as that is impossible…I have no pity on myself” (Brod 69-70).  It is apparent that Kafka’s “uselessness” as a person is embodied in Gregor, a shell of a person which both Gregor and Kafka feel they are.  Gregor, too, is on a downward path, but his downward path is much more permanent than Kafka’s which ultimately results in Gregor’s demise.  Another parallel between the writer and his character is that Kafka does not “avoid people in order to live quietly, but rather in order to die quietly” (Diaries 73).  We see this attitude after Gregor’s last confrontation with his family when he crawls back into his secluded room only to die quietly and alone. 

            Another symptom found in both Kafka and Gregor is the difficulty to perform everyday tasks.  From the beginning of “The Metamorphosis” Gregor has difficulty getting out of bed, opening the door to his room and even speaking.  Eventually, “Gregor [spends] the days and nights almost entirely without sleep” (“Metamorphosis 31).  One may argue that Gregor cannot perform these tasks simply because he is a bug, and this argument is legitimate; however, Kafka, who was never an insect, suffered from similar inabilities.  In a letter for Felice Bauer, his fiancé, Kakfa explains, “I was simply too miserable to get out of bed…and [I] shall write down a short story that occurred to me during my misery in bed and oppresses me with inmost intensity” (“Letters and Diaries” 64).  It is all too obvious that “The Metamorphosis” came to Kafka during his misery in bed.  Perhaps Kafka, on the morning of November 17, 1912, felt like the monstrous vermin he created Gregor to be.  Kafka, himself, also suffered from insomnia at “night, when anxiety [did] not let [him] sleep”– yet another characteristic that links Kafka to Gregor (73).  Aside from these incapabilities, Kafka also had problems of being “incapable of writing even one word,” wondering “who will save me?” (Diaries 31).  Though writer’s block is common among writers, it is distressing nonetheless not being able to get one’s thoughts on the page.  This inability to write in no way relieved Kafka’s depression but rather attributed to it.     

            Suicidal thoughts and intentions are the most disturbing symptoms of the Major Depressive Disorder and both Kafka and Gregor exhibit them.  Kafka often made comments such as “there will certainly be no one to blame if I should kill myself” (21).  There was a significant point in Kafka’s life, however, that alarmed his close friend, Max Brod, who received a letter with the following information:

I stood at the window a long time, and pressed my face against the glass, and I more than once felt like frightening the toll collector on the bridge by my fall.  But I felt too firm a hold on myself the whole time for the decision to dash myself to pieces on the pavement to be able to depress me to the necessary level…I had firmly decided to jump from my window without writing a letter of farewell – after all one has the right to be tired just before the end…
                                                                                                                     (Brod 93)

After reading the letter, Max was “gripped by cold horror” and wrote to Kafka’s mother, pointing out “the danger of suicide in which her son stood” (93).  Had Kafka been able to depress himself to the “necessary level” then that letter may have been his last.  That very same window scenario, interestingly enough, can be found within “The Metamorphosis” and provides an infallible link to Kafka’s suicidal tendencies.  Gregor has to remind himself occasionally that “thinking things over calmly…was much better than jumping to desperate decisions [and] at such moments he fixed his eyes as sharply as possible to the window” (“Metamorphosis” 6-7).  The mere fact that Gregor eyes the window so intently while trying not to “jump to desperate decisions” is a more than obvious pun alluding to suicide.  If this testament is not enough then one will find yet another clue in “The Metamorphosis” linking Gregor and the window to Kafka and suicide: Gregor would “lean against the window, evidently in some sort of remembrance of the feeling of freedom he used to have from looking out the window” (21).  This evidence is too convenient to be a simple coincidence.  The window Gregor is tempted to jump from just so happens to be the same window he leans against – just as Kafka presses himself against his very own window.  Both Kafka and Gregor are able to think through their suicidal urges, prolonging the agony that their unfortunate states bring to them.

            The final symptoms to be discussed in relation to Kafka and Gregor are reduced interest in activities and loss of energy.  Typically the only things Kafka lost interest in was whatever interfered with his writing, whether it be work, travel, or sleep.  Writing was Kafka’s only release from stress, and he constantly complained about not being able to write due to the lack of time he had after working or travelling.  When Kafka did happen to get a creative burst and begin to write, fatigue would compel him to sleep: “I am going to bed with little enthusiasm.  If only I had the night free and without lifting pen from paper could write right through it till morning!  That would be a lovely night” (“Letters and Diaries” 64).  Eventually, even sleep became a burden to Kafka; however, the only loss of energy he seemed to complain about, ironically, was usually attributed to his insomnia.  None of these complaints are out of the norm, but Gregor, on the other hand, displays more sever symptoms.  As Gregor’s misfortune progresses while living as a vermin he eventually loses interest in eating:  “Only when he accidentally passed the food laid out for him would he take a bite into his mouth just for fun, hold it in for hours, and then mostly spit it out again” (“Metamorphosis” 33).  This sudden loss of appetite is common among those who suffer from depression.  It was around this time that Gregor has also lost interest in cleaning himself and becomes “completely covered in dust… [dragging] around with him on his back and along his sides fluff and hairs and scraps of food” (35).  While crawling amongst the junk in his room, Gregor now becomes “tired to death” and does “not budge […] for hours” (34).  The pleasurable things that Gregor, despite being a vermin, enjoyed doing (eating, crawling, cleaning himself) have eventually become burdens that he no longer cares for.

            The most influential cause of the Major Depressive Disorder in Kafka and Gregor’s case is their lack of support system, such as their family – most notably their fathers who resemble one another in a remarkable way.  From the beginning, Kafka was said to have had a “lonely childhood” whose parents were most often too busy to spend time with him (Brod 9).  Kafka was constantly “overshadowed by the figure of his powerful and extraordinarily imposing father” whom he desperately sought approval from (4-5).  Approval from his father, however, was rarely obtained because fear kept them distanced.  Kafka comments that he was a “nervous child” mainly because his father could “only handle a child in the way [his father] [was] created [himself], with violence, noise, and temper, and in this case moreover [his father] thought this was the most suitable way, because [he] wanted to bring [Kafka] up to be a strong, brave boy” (21).  Violent, noisy and temperamental also describes Gregor’s father who threatens “deadly blow[s],” gives a “hard shove” that causes Gregor to “bleed profusely” and throws an apple that “literally force[s] its way into Gregor’s back,” aiding to the torment that eventually kills him (“Metamorphosis” 15, 29).  Kafka was convinced that he was “a mere nothing to [his father]” and Gregor, without a doubt, feels the same way given his equally, if not worse, harsh treatment (Brod 21).  Another interesting link between the two fathers lies in an armchair.  Kafka claims that “from [his father’s] armchair [his father] ruled the world” and that his “opinion was right, everybody else’s was mad, eccentric, meshuggah, not normal” (22).  In “The Metamorphosis,” Gregor notes that his father often “sit[s] in his bathrobe in the armchair” (28).  It is in the armchair that Gregor’s father also falls asleep in while wearing his uniform – the uniform being a symbol of authority.  

            With so much being said about Kafka and Gregor’s harsh, violent father figures, it is only proper to view the caring roles of women in their lives which will be done from a Feminist perspective.  Although Kafka’s father terrorized him with his presence during childhood, his mother tried balancing the support by caring for and even spoiling him (21).  In response to Max Brod’s letter regarding Kafka’s suicidal tendencies, his mother says, “’I, who would give my heart’s blood for any of my children, to make them all happy, am helpless in this case…but nevertheless I shall do everything in my power to see my son happy’” (94).  This motherly compassion is also found within Gregor’s family.  It is Gregor’s mother who considers him her “unfortunate boy,” believes that “Gregor [will come] back to [them] again,” and “clasp[s] his father’s neck, begg[ing] for Gregor’s life” (“Metamorphosis” 23, 24, 29).  Both of these mothers are willing to do whatever it takes to see their son happy, even if it requires resistance against the dominant father.

            Kafka and Gregor’s sisters also hold an important part in both of their lives.  It was Kafka’s youngest sister (out of three) who “was and remained for Franz one of the most trusted and intimate of humans beings” (Brod 9).  It was Grete, Gregor’s sister, who took the initiative to sustain his life after his transformation into the vermin.  As an effort “to find out [Gregor’s] likes and dislikes, she brought him a wide assortment of things, all spread out on an old newspaper,” revealing that Grete not only cares for her brother’s well being, despite his condition, but also his happiness (“Metamorphosis” 17-18).  Eventually, however, Grete becomes preoccupied with her own life and no longer gives the detailed attention to Gregor like she used to.  Instead, she becomes hasty in doing her chores and soon proclaims that “things can’t go on like this” and that she “won’t pronounce the name of [her] brother in front of this monster” (32, 37).  Grete’s sudden lack of care inevitably attributes to Gregor’s death.  To help better understand this sudden change in disposition, Nina Straus, in her essay “Transforming Franz Kafka’s ‘Metamorphosis,’” concludes that “Kafka holds in suspension European, urban, and early twentieth-century masculine attitudes toward women and transforms these attitudes by presenting Grete and mother Samsa in the roles of Gregor’s caretakers and feeders and then revealing their rebellion against these roles” (652).  From a Feminist perspective one will see that Kafka has created a satire on traditional beliefs of women, allowing them to break free of their duties of taking care of men and getting jobs which promotes self-preservation in Grete and mother Samsa.

            The last causes associated with the Major Depressive Disorder include stress, job problems, and financial problems – all of which Kafka and Gregor can also relate to.  Both Kafka and Gregor have an immense amount of stress due to job problems and their financial situations.  Kafka, like Gregor, struggles to please his father by assuming responsibility in the workforce:  “I can do what they want of me, and be the boss of the factory” (Brod 93).  In fact, it is this amount of unwanted responsibility that drove Kafka to contemplate suicide, remarking in his letter to Max Brod, “I had only the alternatives of either…jumping out of the window, or of going every day to the factory” (92).  The “agony the factory costs [Kafka]” parallels those feelings of Gregor’s toward his job as a salesman (90).  Gregor complains that he has “got the torture of traveling, worrying about changing trains, eating miserable food at all hours…no relationships…” and hates the fact that he must endure this torture “for [his] parents’ sake” (“Metamorphosis” 4).  To further Gregor’s contempt for work his boss shows up at his bedroom door to berate him for his unsatisfactory job performance (9).  From a Marxist critic’s perspective one will notice that Kafka views the work world as unjust, that an employer’s best interest is their only interest.  An employee’s misfortune is of no concern to the employer unless it interferes with their business, and even then, despite the misfortune, the employer will not hesitate to scorn those who do not live up to their expectations.  The inability to work and provide money for the family causes Gregor “shame and grief,” adding to the overall depression of his present state (21). 

           With the elements above described in better detail and how they associate with Kafka and Gregor, one can now relate these individuals to the Major Depressive Disorder and the mental suffering they both endured.  Although Kafka once told Gustav Janouch, an acquaintance, that “The Metamorphosis is not a confession, although it is – in a certain sense – an indiscretion,” there is sufficient evidence textually and biographically to argue differently (“Conversations” 75).  After all, it is the controversial theories of Sigmund Freud that argues the inability to be aware of the unconscious.  If this is true then Kafka would, indeed, be unable to realize what he actually created when writing “The Metamorphosis” – a revealing personal statement and invitation into his chaotic and depressing mind presented through the misfortune of poor Gregor.   

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bibliography

AllPsych Online: The Virtual Psychology Classroom.  15 May 2004.  All Psych and Heffner

Media Group, Inc.  15 April 2008 <http://allpsych.com/disorders/mood/majorde pression.html>

Brod, Max.  Franz Kafka: A Biography.  Trans. G. Humphreys Roberts and Richard Winston.

New York:  Schocken Books, 1947.

Corngold, Stanley, ed. The Metamorphosis.  Norton Critical Ed. Trans. Stanley Corngold. New

York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1996.

- - -.  “Kafka’s The Metamorphosis: Metamorphosis of the Metaphor.” Corngold. 79 – 106.

Hughes, Kenneth, ed.  Franz Kafka: An Anthology of Marxist Criticism.  Trans. Kenneth

Hughes.  Hanover: U P of New England, 1981.

Janouch, Gustav.  “From Conversations with Kafka.”  Corngold. 74 – 75.

Kafka, Franz.  “The Metamorphosis.”  Corngold. 3 – 42.

- - -.  “Letters and Diaries.”  Corngold. 61 – 74.

- - -.  The Diaries of Franz Kafka 1914 – 1923.  Ed. Max Brod.  New York:  Schocken Books,

1949.

Kundera, Milan.  “Somewhere Behind.”  Critical Essays on Franz Kafka. Ed. Ruth V. Gross. 

Boston: G. K. Hall, 1990.  21 – 31. 

Robert, Marthe.  As Lonely as Franz Kafka.  Trans. Ralph Manheim.  New York:  Schocken

Books, 1979.

Straus, Nina Pelikan.  “Transforming Franz Kafka’s ‘Metamorphosis’.”  Signs 14 (1989): 651 –

667.

- - -.  “Remarks on Kafka’s Journals.”  Hughes. 268 – 275.