Sunday, November 29, 2009

Symbolism

Probably the best sentence I can relate to in this reading is when it says, "One of the most frustrating experiences many people have (like me) with complex literary works and films arises from the sense that one thing means something else, yet that 'something else' can hardly be identified, captured, or named." When I read something I can pick up on some symbolism, but I know there's something else there sometimes. But it seems like I just can't get a hold of it and explain it. That is why I think talking and discussing it with a group or class like we always do is a great thing because one person might be able to pick that one thing up. And if no body can pick that one thing up, people can give their thoughts which might lead another person to pick up on something else, which in turn could pick that one thing up as a group effort. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like that happens every time in class.
I also like when the writer said, "Writers don't want symbols to obscure meaning. They want to use symbols to reach new meaning." I thought about it and I think I came to realize that if every author and writer only used signs and symbols that are already obvious and meant to point out one specific thing or plot, of course there would be a great point to it, but we wouldn't really have to think and therefore wouldn't really learn in a way. But if you use symbols, like in 'Waiting for Godot', there could be multitudes of meanings that the author had never even thought about. We could have sat all day in class and talked about the different meanings in 'Waiting for Godot'. Anyways I hope I made sense, and now I realize that symbolism is really important and good.

2 comments:

  1. Good opening sentence. I agree that the hardest part of literature to understand is the things that have double meanings.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I also find double meaning frustrating. I prefer clear cut answers.

    ReplyDelete