Is analysis of themes/symbolism an exercise in pseudo-intellectualism, or is there something to it?

Question

I know many authors use symbolism deliberately to be discovered by the reader but how often is this the case, and how often is it simply a case of random pattern recognition?

If you type 'themes symbolism' into Yahoo this is the first webpage:
http://www.rit.edu/~sjg2490/lotf/analysis.html

Did William Golding deliberately use the symbolism referred to on this page?

Answer 1

i love this sort of analysis... but i may be a giant pseudo-intellectual. i don't care if symbols are intentional or not. arguing over that sort of thing can be fun, and finding your own themes for a story can make the reading/ absorption of the material so much more provocative.

i remember reading lord of the flies in school - it was one of those books that we beat to death with analyses of symbolism and themes, like catcher in the rye. in high school, it made me hate the literature we were analyzing with such minute and seemingly pointless detail. but now i love finding those little things in books that authors may or may not have intended. personally, i think those symbols listed on that page were intended by Golding. some of the one's i remember discussing for catcher in the rye though... like the hooker's green dress (representing innocence?) which for some reason always stuck with me... i can't be sure that they were intended.

so what's my verdict, then? i guess i don't have one, except that i hated that stuff in school but now i love it. and i used to be not much of a reader and now i'm pretty avid.

Answer 2

In my youth, which is a long time ago, the word intellectual seemed to become almost a swear word.
At school I sometimes jibbed at the minute analysis of Shakespeare's plays, because the analysis destroyed the plays. We were asked to take apart, word for word the beauty of the language and the construction of his plays . In the end there was nothing left.
My , very personal opinion, is that, in art and literature, you feel drawn to that form which has something to say to you.
If you can't accept cubism as art and you don't understand it, that's fine - it's not for you. If Virginia Wolfe leaves you cold, O.K. For me, pseudo-intellectualism is when people rave about books, paintings, architecture or whatever, because they think it's the 'in thing'.

Let's be honest, the Swisslife 'Cucumber' in London may very well be an interesting building and an engineering feat, but does it belong in that location?

Answer 3

Quite often, I really don't understand it myself. I don't consciously think of symbolism. It just kind of happens. I have often asked classes to just READ a story and enjoy it and not try to analyze it. My God, sometimes it just goes too far. Teachers want explanations of every little thing in the story. Why was there dust under the bed? Why did the moon rise at 6:47? Sometimes it truly drives me nuts. Yes, there always end up being some kind of symbols - things an author uses to represent moods, emotions, or other things in their story. But most authors write for others to enjoy - not to drive students crazy with analysis. I know that isn't a very teacher like thing to say, and yes I have had to do the symbolism thing with classes myself, but honestly I do not like it. It takes the joy and pleasure out of a story. You might as well be reading Grey's Anatomy (the book not the TV show). Since these authors are deceased and didn't leave behind any study notes explaining their stories, quite honestly your guess is as good as mine whether or not Golding deliberately used symbolism or if he was just trying to tell a great story - which he did. I have told students before, it's kind of like analyzing why Leonardo put that smirk of a smile on the face of Mona Lisa. Do you know why he did it? I don't. And Leonardo isn't here to ask. So the true answer is Mona Lisa smiles for whatever reason we think she does. Your decision.

I feel the same way about symbolism in stories. I know, a radical statement from one who has taught before, but as a writer. I would prefer you read my work and enjoyed it and not analyzed it. I write for people's pleasure - not to torment and torture them. If I ever have to analyze The Rocking Horse Winner again I think I will barf. I always tell classes that DH Lawrence wrote MUCH better things and you should read Women in Love or Lady Chatterly's Lover -- some of the great things he wrote and not that dumb rocking horse story. Pax- C