Can Jan Neruda’s Prague be read as a precursor to Kafkaesque Prague narratives?

Prague, in Central European literature, is not merely a geographical location; it is positioned as a literary “subject” with its historical, social, and existential layers. In this context, the relationship established between Jan Neruda’s Prague Stories (Povídky malostranské, 1877) and Franz Kafka’s narrative universe, which took shape at the beginning of the 20th century, is significant not only in terms of national literary continuity but also in terms of modern literature’s understanding of space.

1. Prague in Neruda: Social Realism and the Everyday Nature of Space
   Jan Neruda’s Prague appears as a micro-social universe, particularly shaped around Malá Strana (The Little Quarter). This space produces a public sphere where the individual is constantly observed, and gossip and social judgment are decisive. Neruda’s realism focuses on the small tragedies of everyday life rather than grand historical events (Haman, 1989).

Here, space:

Restricts the individual’s sphere of action,
Constantly reproduces social norms,
Functions as a silent but persistent element of oppression.
However, this oppression does not yet acquire a metaphysical or ontological dimension; it is more at the sociological and moral level (Černý, 1998).

2. Kafkaesque Prague: The Ontological Depth of Alienation
   Kafka’s Prague, on the other hand, is constructed not as specific streets and neighborhoods, but as a labyrinthine space of power. In works such as The Trial, The Castle, and America, space ceases to be a definable city; it transforms into an abstract structure that stifles the individual’s search for meaning (Deleuze & Guattari, 1986).

In Kafka:

Space produces the individual’s feeling of guilt.
Authority is invisible, but absolutely active.
Social oppression becomes an existential destiny.
In this respect, Kafkaesque Prague can be read as a radicalized and internalized continuation of Neruda’s realistic Prague.

3. Points of Continuity: From Neruda to Kafka
   While it is difficult to speak of a direct aesthetic interaction between Neruda and Kafka, some structural continuities are noteworthy:

3.1. The Encompassment of the Individual by Space
In Neruda, it is the neighborhood; in Kafka, the bureaucratic system; in both cases, the individual becomes passive in the face of an order that transcends them (Williams, 1977).

3.2. Visibility and Control
In Neruda’s neighborhood life, everyone is a witness to everyone else; in Kafka, the witness is invisible but everywhere. This situation suggests the literary evolution of modern forms of surveillance (Foucault, 1975).

3.3. The Ordinary Human Figure
Both authors center on the ordinary individual rather than the “hero.” However, in Neruda, this individual is meaningful within a social context; in Kafka, this meaning has collapsed.

4. Points of Rupture: From Realism to Existentialism
   In Neruda’s narrative world, ethical judgment and social empathy are still possible. The narrator is ironic but compassionate towards his characters. In Kafka, however, the narrator is not neutral, but cold and indifferent. This rupture is a literary reflection of the transition from 19th-century realism to 20th-century modernism (Bradbury & McFarlane, 1991).

Therefore, Neruda’s Prague is not an aesthetic but a historical and experiential precursor to the Kafkaesque universe.

---

Jan Neruda’s Prague should be read not as a direct prototype of Kafkaesque Prague narratives, but as an intermediate stage preparing the urban experience of the modern individual. While Neruda makes the everyday pressures of the city visible, Kafka abstracts these pressures, transforming them into a universal existential problem. In this respect, Neruda’s Prague serves as a silent but decisive threshold on the path to Kafka’s labyrinthine world.

References
Bradbury, M., & McFarlane, J. (1991). Modernism: A Guide to European Literature. Penguin.
Černý, V. (1998). A History of Czech Literature. Karolinum Press.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1986). Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature. University of Minnesota Press.
Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir. Gallimard.
Haman, A. (1989). Tragedy or Hope? The Czech Struggle. Oxford University Press.
Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and Literature. Oxford University Press.