Hunger Artist Published in 1924,

Hunger Artist

Published in 1924, Franz Kafka's 'The Hunger Artist' is an unforgettable story that recounts the pain and anguish of an artist who earns through public fasting. The mordent tale is highly symbolic in nature and signifies the rapid though subtle death of the artist and his art. The story revolves around a fasting artist who recalls the times when people would pay tribute to public fasting feats by visiting the artist on every single day till he broke his fast in style. In those days, "there was good money to be earned putting on major productions of this sort under one's own management" (1) but he sadly agrees that, "interest in hunger artists has declined considerably." (1)

The feat is no longer fascinating to the crowd as they have stopped visiting the artist and are more interested in other activities at the circus. Even the management doesn't really care anymore since the hunger artist is making much. The large crowds at the circus hardly notice his dull and solitary cage but if they did, the artist would consider it an honor. He was grateful for all the other activities at the circus that drew large crowds. "....he had the animals to thank for the crowds of visitors among whom, here and there, there could be one destined for him." In the end, in order to prove his worth or rather to end his sorry existence, the artist performs the feat for one last time and dies. The administration quickly replaced him with a panther - which was clearly a more lucrative option.

The story, on the surface, recounts the tale of a suffering artist but it is actually symbolic of art in general in this rapidly commercializing world. The artist represents every artist with a serious love for his talent and profession who is gradually losing his worth and value in a world that has become too materialistic and commercialized. The story may make you wonder why would an artist starve to earn? But it is not actually starvation; the story is symbolizing the starvation afflicted on every artist today. Remember the artist is not starving consciously but the society is no longer taking care of his needs as the artist in the story tells his supervisor: "...I couldn't find a food which I enjoyed. If had found that, believe me, I would not have made a spectacle of myself and would have eaten to my heart's content, like you and everyone else."

The artist also shares a weird relationship with the public. This is an interesting point to understand. The artist is in love with his profession but his love is fleeting. It is not based on his true passion for his art but on the fact that it gives him public adulation and respect. He is craving for public's love and when that love is taken away, his passion for his art diminishes to the point that it becomes non-existent. Kafka is trying to explain that art never dies and the artist doesn't have to starve if he feeds on his passion. But if it is people's adulation that he is craving, he is always vulnerable. The conversation with the supervisor highlights this sickness.

The artist is talking to the supervisor. Remember the supervisor represents the public. "I always wanted you to admire my fasting," said the hunger artist. "But we do admire it," said the supervisor obligingly. "But you shouldn't admire it," said the hunger artist. "Well then, we don't admire it," said the supervisor, "but why shouldn't we admire it?" "Because I had to fast. I can't do anything else," said the hunger artist." This conversation actually forms the crux of the entire story. The artist is looking for validation while the public is apathetic. A true artist on the other hand is consumed with passion for his work and public admiration is not his main concern. But in this story, the suffering artist is craving for attention. When that attention is denied him, he loses respect for his work too. He believes he would have done something else if he could. But the only reason he fasts is because there is nothing else he knows.

The food that he seeks is public attention and when he doesn't get it, he starves to death. The story has few layers of meaning. It is not a simple one-layered tale. On the one hand, we meet are being introduced to the suffering artist who is a victim of commercialization and on the other; the same artist is being blamed for his starvation.

Everything has to have an element of entertainment or people won't stay. This is another idea the story forwards. The author tells us that in a commercial world, all that anyone really cares about is entertainment. People's attention span is shorter and their love for the artist is fleeting. They will stay for as long as they are entertainment and then move forward. In order to keep their interests alive, you need to present something exciting every second. True art has lost its audience and appreciation is now a scarce commodity. Art is not appreciated for itself but for the excitement that it creates.

It is for this reason that the manager at the circus has involved a few antics with the fasting feat. The hunger artist should behave violently at times and it has to be limited to forty days. No one is interested in the fast itself but the violent outbursts of the artist for its sheer entertainment value: "he reacted with an outburst of fury and to the general alarm began to shake the bars of his cage like a wild animal. Yet the impresario had a way of punishing these outbreaks which he rather enjoyed putting into operation." (Kafka 1) the public is hardly interested in the art itself and this remains the case till the very last second of the artist's life.