Page 183 - the-trial

decided, and this help did not seem in any way less ques-
tionable than that of the lawyer. K. valued the painter’s help
far more highly because it was offered in a way that was
more harmless and open.
The painter had pulled his seat closer to the bed and con-
tinued in a subdued voice: “I forgot to ask you; what sort of
acquittal is it you want? There are three possibilities; abso-
lute acquittal, apparent acquittal and deferment. Absolute
acquittal is the best, of course, only there’s nothing I could
do to get that sort of outcome. I don’t think there’s anyone
at all who could do anything to get an absolute acquittal.
Probably the only thing that could do that is if the accused
is innocent. As you are innocent it could actually be possi-
ble and you could depend on your innocence alone. In that
case you won’t need me or any other kind of help.”
At first, K. was astonished at this orderly explanation,
but then, just as quietly as the painter, he said, “I think
you’re contradicting yourself.” “How’s that?” asked the
painter patiently, leaning back with a smile. This smile made
K. feel as if he were examining not the words of the painter
but seeking out inconsistencies in the procedures of the
court itself. Nonetheless, he continued unabashed and said,
“You remarked earlier that the court cannot be approached
with reasoned proofs, you later restricted this to the open
court, and now you go so far as to say that an innocent man
needs no assistance in court. That entails a contradiction.
Moreover, you said earlier that the judges can be influenced
personally but now you insist that an absolute acquittal, as
you call it, can never be attained through personal influ-

1 The Trial