/lit/ - Literature

go fuck yourself

>I read to get a realistic representation of an experience
Well, that's kind of stupid.

4+4=5

>>4915702
How is that stupid?

>>4915693
What?

Symbolism =/= unrealistic in any way. Symbolism isn't an invention of literature, it's in literature because humans find unlikely meaning in things.

Symbolism doesn't need to be defended, it can't be separated from literature.

>>4915693
Sometimes you get sick of realistic representations of experiences

It's artistic, not to mention sloppy and awful, either way.

They weren't really pigs, OP.

Boxer was your grandpa.

>>4915693
>>4915693
i can't even respond because I don't understand how you can even think in absolutes.

>>4915693
Symbolism is unavoidable, you confederate of dunces. Even in you're 'realistic representations', even when symbols aren't intentionally designed, they exist.

Source: I'm a symbology major.

>>4915726
i hate you

>>4915693
Symbolism is fantastic when it's done right, that is, it's so subtle that you don't even know it's symbolism.

Tolstoy was a master of this.

>>4915693
Pleb: The Post

>>4915738
OP here: Perhaps I'll rephrase/reconsider, I just really fucking hate blatant symbolism.

>>4915723
luhmao

>>4915693
It sounds like you read books with shit symbolism

Oh my god, but isn't the very language that you are using to write this post nothing but an elaborate system of symbols that refer to other symbols and so on?

>>4915751
Well, Lord of the Flies has blatant symbolism, but it's infinitely fun to mull over their dimensions.

The crummy symbolism in The Great Gatsby on the other hand, is clumsy and ham-handed.

OP, you really need to be less...gay.

>>4915764
Why do I always hear this criticism of Gatsby...

I don't know how it's hammy if I could read the book without picking up on ANY of it...until I was a mature young man like myself.

>>4915759
>trying to make this more abstract and convoluted than it need be

the beautify of symbolism comes in not only from the inherent subtlety but the way in which it is presented, and relevant to the story

also refer to my first post in the thread! 8)

>>4915764
Can it safe to assume you're referring to the Eyes of TJ Eckleberg?

I thought the green light was pretty endearing, but I didn't care much at all for the sign.

>>4915730
ok

>>4915770
It's the green light and the billboard with glasses telling people to go to an optometrist.

Green Light=envy/greed (apparently)
Glasses billboard=Eyes of God have grown weak or something

That's why the gas station guy who goes murder-suicide says "god sees everything" and the adulterer gas station wife is all life "your so stupid! You got that from that sign!"

Ok, maybe the billboard thing is decent, but the green light is really fucken gay.

"Gatsby stared out into that green light at Daisy's house" every fucken night.

>>4915790
Thanks for not listening to my bullshit.

You're a real bro, bro.

>>4915805
Not my fault that I say all the interesting things on this board. This place literally goes to shit when I don't post--hence the last 3 days.

What OP reads:
>The universe (which others call the Library) is composed of an indefinite and perhaps infinite number of hexagonal galleries, with vast air shafts between, surrounded by very low railings.
What is going through OP's head:
>I'M A HUGE FAGGOT FEED ME COCKS I'M A HUGE FAGGOT FEED ME COCKS I'M A HUGE FAGGOT FEED ME COCKS I'M A HUGE FAGGOT FEED ME COCKS I'M A HUGE FAGGOT FEED ME COCKS

Nothing pisses me off more than this.
NOT EVERYTHING HAS TO MEAN SOMETHING.

>>4915832
That picture has seen a great resurgence since I posted it in this thread: >>/lit/thread/S4876533#p4877948

>>4915811
It's funny because I was just thinking how /lit/'s been pretty cool recently

OP, I hope you've learned that you did nearly the equivalent of going on /v/ and saying you don't like buttons, or going on /sp/ and saying you hate balls...

>>4915836
congrats, you and i have the same picture

>>4915832

>>4915832

>Implying the author's intentions are in any way significant.

>>4915832
>>4916064
can someone explain the value of interpretation? metaphor is powerful if it's actually effective, but isn't this just nonsense?

>>4916073
OK, let's talk about interpretation and the power of symbolism.

When you're creating a story or any sort of artistic content, you're not exactly conscious of every little detail you create. You can be subconsciously aware of it, and in the academic realm that's all that really matters because the art stands apart from the creator. Art is transformed by one thing in particular: outside context. This is why you read essays from feminists or people asking what Freud would think about a particular story. Looking at all the ways, say, sexuality appears in a story means you look for every bit that could possibly be considered sexual. Especially symbols. A gun or a sword is a perfect phallic symbol, and if it kills someone it's essentially penetration. A car is a symbol of masculinity, men are unnecessarily attached to cars because they think of all the things that come with it. Symbols are caused by implication and context.

>>4915832
>this katbert
Oy vey...

Words are symbols

>>4916102
So... the power of interpretation is ignoring the work itself and using it as a tool to project your worldview?

Such as for example:
>Symbols are caused by implication and context
>Symbols are caused by implication
>Implying implications of implying implications of...
>Everyone is full of shit and just implying whatever they want to hear others say

Sounds like sophistic BS, frankly. I mean there are people who do this, but I don't see why it should be lauded. After all it begs why anyone's interpretation holds any value since others ought instead create their own interpretation to progress their worldview, which further begs the question of why bother interpreting in the first place when you're just going to inject your own unaltered worldview.

>>4915693
>>4916131

http://vimeo.com/37848135

>>4916102
I searched really hard for an argument here, but I couldn't find one
if you say "ah this is a phallic symbol", it has no more connection to the text than if I were to say "booga booga boo, kubrik was a faggot"
perhaps, are you trying to invoke feeling in me?

>>4916142
mmm tittays.

>>4916102
>assume author can't understand his own work
>assume you can
>tenure forever
lol

>>4915693
Symbolism was the only way Animal Farm made it into Warsaw Pact countries?

Hemingway said "No good book has ever been written that has in it symbols arrived at beforehand and stuck in. That kind of symbol sticks out like raisins in raisin bread. Raisin bread is all right, but plain bread is better. I tried to make a real old man, a real boy, a real sea and a real fish and real sharks. But if I made them good and true enough they would mean many things. The hardest thing is to make something really true and sometimes truer than true."

>>4916140
>So... the power of interpretation is ignoring the work itself and using it as a tool to project your worldview?

You're thinking these people analyzing and writing write their opinion first and then try to find something to support it. That may be the case SOMETIMES (but they're not true academics if that's the case), there should always be actual supporting evidence.

You read something or experience something and you make an observation about it. From that observation, you search for more of the answers. That's really where all actual analysis comes from.

I understand you OP. If the author wants to tell me that "john is sad", he should show me john being sad, not describe how the rain falls and expect me to understand that john is sad.

>>4915780
i preferred the ever-gazing eyes, i think there was more you can draw from it than the green light.
I felt the light was just heavy handed without much depth, but i'd be interested to know why you prefer it.