The need to assign meaning is a distinct human quality. Individuals seek, and to a certain extent are defined by, the methods by which the objects and observations that occupy space in a perceived reality are explained and rationalized. Failure to do so implies not only a lack of understanding, but demonstrates the shortcomings of both the individual, and on a grander scale, the system employed by the individual. It is precisely at the crossroads of meaning and system that the idea of language, and furthermore, literature, take shape. Language, in its most fundamental form, is a means of communication rooted in humanly generated thoughts and ideas.
[...] It is this notion of eternity, of interminable existence, of operating at a particular moment in time within a synchronic structure, which reinforces the relationship between life and death as something beyond a mere matter of age, something more than the simple contrast between young and old. What is clear is that Odradek is some form of a representation of the binary opposition of life versus death. One could speculate that if not a human form, then perhaps Odradek exists as a dream, or an illusion. [...]
[...] While this abstract entity could be a dream or an illusion, it appears as if Odradek is of a more emotionally complex structure in the imaginative sense, in that dreams and illusions are visions that may or may not have occurred. Rather, Odradek could be understood to be a series of memories, either of the narrator, or perhaps the author, or even of no particular relation to the text, but memories in and of themselves simply existing, occupying time in either a fantastical or realistic realm. [...]
[...] What could be understood as its frame, or at least vital limbs, are small wooden crossbar projecting from the middle of the star, while another joins at a right angle, allowing it to stand upright if on two legs” (Kafka, 1). It is believed that this creature had some intelligible form at one point, and though senseless in its appearance, there are no signs of aging and it is its own way perfectly finished” (Kafka, 1). It is mobile, being too nimble to actually capture in a grip, lurking turns,” rolling down stairs, and often disappearing for months. [...]
[...] Thus far, the word “Odradek” has been used in reference to a particular creature in the context of this particular literary work, The Cares of a Family Man. Yet, simply being used as a reference point does not constitute the basis for a rational identity. The word is, at its core, a simple combination of the letters O-D-R-A-D-E-K. Its ordering could have been inverted to read or another combination such as P-O-I-NT-L-E- S-S-W-O-R-D could have been used to refer to the same creature. [...]
[...] What allows for a more concrete understanding are the differences between the two objects, defined by their respective chemical compositions, a definition that is indicated by the combination of letters that come to represent each object in its own unique form. Odradek must therefore be defined based on what it is not; to analyze it from any other perspective, for instance on the basis of its physical appearance, would be an illogical abstraction as it has no identifiable physical structure, but rather objects to which it is similar. [...]
using our reader.