Unravelling themes, symbolism and other such literary stuff

[direstraits]

How many of us here look out for things like a book's theme, uncover any symbolisms used and its underlying messages? Do you deconstruct the book in your mind, and marvel at how the book was formed and how carefully it is layered?

Or do we pick up a book, read from cover to cover, shelf it, mull about it a bit, then move on to the next thing?

There are books where you cannot do extended analysis, because it's too simple, but what about for 'loaded' books, that is packed full of themes and messages that it looks like it's gonna break at the seams.

In other words, so we do think about the material we read until we get a CliffNotes version of the book?

ds

 

[Mari]

One thing that makes a book great literature instead of a passing read is its symbolism and layers. Moby Dick is my favorite American example. Joyce is my favorite from across the Pond. Shakespeare is the strongest example of all.

When I read that kind of thing, I do explore this depth. In fact, I usually re-read the book in an annotated edition. I read the original to enjoy the prose, then I read the annotated edition to gasp at the brilliance of how so much more was embedded in it.

So I don't really read books so much as study them.

 

[direstraits]

Do you have any simple tips for helping those of us who simply read for fun to look for these things?

I sometimes do feel that when I read a book that's obviously richly layered and painstakingly constructed (rather than just written), that it's a waste to simply put the book back onto the shelf - it's rather like underappreciating the book.

Take for instance Palindrome Hannah, which according to Lord Voldemyk is constructed like a palindrome as well where the stories read backwards and forwards (paraphrasing). I mean, would casual readers appreciate such a subtle construction?

ds

 

[Ronny]

I guess I'm more of a casual reader, I get some of the obvious symbolism but I don't spend a lot of time analyzing what I read. If I really, really liked a book a may go back and read it slower to pick up more details.

 

[novella]

I think every book has so much embedded in it that it's impossible for me to ignore it. Of course there are writers like those mentioned by Mari who had sophisticated mastery of the language and were able to fluently use multiple meanings and referential imagery that is a vital part of the work.

But I think all writers use the tropes of the language, usually quite unconsciously, and so do it so artfully that it adds a great dimension to the book. Fitzgerald, for instance, with his obsession with physical beauty, the green lights, the song of the nightingale. How much of this is intentionally referential, and how much comes out of a fluent mind using the embedded tropes of the language unconsciously and naturally? Intent doesn't take away from the product, or add to it either.

And then there are those clumsy contemporary writers who try so hard to consciously be referential and complex. I find most of that intolerable.

And then there are the most pedestrian talespinners whose work has as many references and layers and cultural/linguistic revelation as you like, but who probably write with all that far from their minds.

To me, it's the primary fascination of reading. It's always there, whether you choose to see it or not.

 

[direstraits]

I agree novella. Sometimes you know there's more to the book than words when you read from people like Saramago and Ayn Rand, who is definitely saying something behind the story and characters. But what? So you dig deeper. It's very satisfying when you realize something new.

My question then - do you try and figure out everything by yourself, now that the internet is available? Or do you go online, check out commentaries or comments or discussions of the book, to see if there's anymore life you can wring out of the book?

ds

 

[StillILearn]

... I think all writers use the tropes of the language, usually quite unconsciously, and so do it so artfully that it adds a great dimension to the book.QUOTE]

Interesting observation, novella. I'm coming to believe that careful reading can be, almost, as important an ability as writing, and a skill that may take a lifetime to develop.

(I had to look this one up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropes)

 

[novella]

Mostly I don't go to other references. At my age and experience and particular education, there's really not much online that can add to what I can glean from the 'average' book. There are big exceptions.

Last year I was getting a real kick out of Chaucer. There are so many jokes in The Canterbury Tales, but my knowledge of Middle English and his frame of reference is full of huge holes, and there's so much good scholarship out there, so I was looking online and reading commentaries about the various tales.

Another example might be Foucault's Pendulum, which I wasn't crazy about. I'm not into the religious occult (in the hidden sense) at all, but he's got an unquestionable grasp of his material, so as I read that I was interested in finding out more about the obscure historical references there.

But I was a lit major and an avid reader for so long, an editor for many years, a writer for many years, and discussed literature at home all the time while growing up, so reading some dude's blog on, say, Annie Proulx or Joan Didion might be fun, if it's well done, but I wouldn't go there for any bigtime insights.

The again, there are authors like Anthony Burgess who are so endlessly mindbendingly referential that they do take some time to read, and I can always use more cultural insight reading his work. But it's like doing the Times (UK) cryptic crossword. The more you do it, the more you know how it works.


How about you, ds? Do you use online references a lot? Which kind do you prefer?

 

[direstraits]

novella, looking for online references is the major reason I joined an online book forum. However I suppose I get caught up in the fun.

Before the internet, I did not refer to anything, just me mulling about books I've finished. I do not have friends whom I could talk to about the books I read, so there's only so far I can go. Plus I'm without training on what to look out for in novels. An example would be 1984. I felt so empty when I finished the book, and I felt like the ending required some sort of resolution, but nobody was there to tell me exactly what the book was *really* talking about.

I learn a lot from here too. For instance, when I finished Life of Pi,

Spoiler

I was convinced that the tiger story was true, and said so in the Life of Pi thread. However, after reading other people's opinions, and thinking about it, I think the Tiger story is from Pi's imagination - a way to survive his reality for so long.

When I'm online, I just use google, and check whatever comes out. I generally like to read people's opinions on the book, but if there's an 'official' annotation to the work, I'd go for that too.

ds

 

[novella]

I haven't read Life of Pi, but I think 1984 is a great example of a book that is intentionally rife with historical references and symbols and really *should* be read with an understanding of the historical context.

If you don't know anything about post-war England and Winston Churchill and the English class system and the Cold War political landscape, you're basically reading 1984 in a vacuum. While you might find it to be an 'entertaining' read, the book was a political treatise that was intended to comment on the times.

In a book like that, looking for narrative and emotional closure is kind of beside the point. The emptiness is what you are meant to feel.

I'm not a big fan of bald political commentaries like 1984, Slaughterhouse-five, Farenheit 451, and Catch-22, but they do have their merits in the literary spectrum, they have many fans--and they deserve to be read. Personally I just feel they are heavy handed. My fave of the genre is Aldous Huxley, which goes beyond commentary to something more fantastic. Similarly, I love the movie Brazil, mostly because it has that English love of the bizarre.

 

[sirmyk]

Novella, I think you'd love Life of Pi. Just an opinion...

 

[direstraits]

Ah, Lord Voldemyk, you've arrived. Did you know I mentioned you in this thread? What's your take?

ds

 

[StillILearn]

... Aldous Huxley, which goes beyond commentary to something more fantastic.

Maybe we should all be rereading Island, instead of 1984.

 

[sirmyk]

Ah, Lord Voldemyk, you've arrived. Did you know I mentioned you in this thread? What's your take?

I just read this thread from the beginning and noticed the reference to PH. Thanks for looking into my novel. I love being under discussion. And I love books that spark such discussion.

I think themes, symbolism, imagery, and "other such literary stuff", are responsible for separating great literature from the mediocre. The same goes for movies. When seeing The Sixth Sense for the first time, I picked up on the use of the color red and caught myself searching for red (which acted somewhat as puzzle pieces to the "catch" of the movie) through the duration and enjoyed M. Night Shyamalan's beautiful cinematic project.

I often use colors, symbols, etc. in my work, but try not to overuse such things, because I know it can irritate the reader to hit him/her square in the face with a shovel/overabundance of colors, symbols, themes, and the like. With Palindrome Hannah I wanted to do something unique by incorporating palindromes throughout the entire novel (some of the character names, street addresses, expenditures, and, of course, the novel as a whole becoming a palindrome) but did so in a subtle way, so that the reader would not be annoyed by palindromes in general.

Life of Pi took symbolism, theme, and "other such literary stuff" to a new level.

Take for instance Palindrome Hannah, which according to Lord Voldemyk is constructed like a palindrome as well where the stories read backwards and forwards (paraphrasing). I mean, would casual readers appreciate such a subtle construction?

Casual readers... no. That is the difference between Literary and Mainstream. Yeah, PH got tagged with the "horror" genre, but I would think of it more as "literary horror".

 

[Shade]

I may have got this wrong, sirmyk, but when you say Palindrome Hannah got 'tagged' with the horror label, wasn't this the publisher's fault by putting "Fiction: Horror" on the back cover? And since it's print-on-demand, and so presumably you're the publisher (again apologies if I've got this wrong), isn't that your fault?!



Incidentally, I like the idea of a palindromic novel. Seems like an advance on B.S. Johnson's The Unfortunates, Milorad Pavic's Landscape Painted with Tea/Last Love in Constantinople/Inner Side of the Wind, Felipe Alfau's Locos, Calvino's Castle of Crossed Destinies, etc., where the chapters or stories can be read in any order the reader chooses. Having them go backwards and forwards at the same time is a nice move.

 

[sirmyk]

I may have got this wrong, sirmyk, but when you say Palindrome Hannah got 'tagged' with the horror label, wasn't this the publisher's fault by putting "Fiction: Horror" on the back cover? And since it's print-on-demand, and so presumably you're the publisher (again apologies if I've got this wrong), isn't that your fault?!

Unlimited Publishing is transitioning from a "self-publishing print-on-demand" organization to a more "traditional print-on-demand", so I am only attributed as a contributing publisher on the copyright page of the book. There wasn't a "Fiction: Literary Horror" option, so I chose "Fiction: Horror", since the novel is primarily horror based. There are few options for this labeling of books (and I love the concepts behind POD publishing, and its potential future).

Incidentally, I like the idea of a palindromic novel. Seems like an advance on B.S. Johnson's The Unfortunates, Milorad Pavic's Landscape Painted with Tea/Last Love in Constantinople/Inner Side of the Wind, Felipe Alfau's Locos, Calvino's Castle of Crossed Destinies, etc., where the chapters or stories can be read in any order the reader chooses. Having them go backwards and forwards at the same time is a nice move.

I'll check out these books. I need a few things to read. And thanks for posting the back cover image. I love Michael Ian Bateson's work; he did some amazing plates for PH.

Now... back to the thread.

 

[Stewart]

A similar novel/twist, I suppose, is Pavic's Dictionary of the Khazars which I've not got around to buying yet. Shade, you've read Pavic - read this one?

 

[StillILearn]

Maybe we should all be rereading Island, instead of 1984.

Brave New World would have been a better comparison. Island just popped into my head. I think I must have liked it more.

 

[novella]

Brave New World and the new Ishiguro would be a great discuss-and-compare set to read together!

 

[Shade]

Stewart, yes Dictionary of the Khazars is probably his best, ie most accessible. I have to be honest and admit that though I'm happy to cite Pavic's titles, I didn't get very through Last Love in Constantinople and have yet to read The Inner Side of the Wind, though I have it here beside me. I had to get it from the US as it was never published in the UK, which may not augur well for its readability. Last Love... was published in the UK, but only in hardback by a small press (Peter Owen), whereas Dictionary and Landscape Painted with Tea were published by Penguin, though both are sadly out of print.

novella: I'm not convinced that Brave New World and Never Let Me Go would have much to say to each other. BNW is firmly in the whither-society mould, like Nineteen Eighty Four, a novel of social interest (and in my view much more fun than Orwell); Ishiguro's novel, although it takes a future dystopia as its springboard, is really much more about individual lives and how we each cope with mortality. At least that's my take.