Target: Anybody that does not study literature or has ever wondered why people who do pay so much attention to nit-noid details.
Freud once suggested, in a wry, old man's voice that "sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar." And this is absolutely true... In psychology. It is never true in literature and I imagine people wonder why that is.
Nobody has ever asked me this question but I remember sitting in high school surrounded by people who I think would have loved an answer. I also remember wondering how any teacher could stand at the front of a room with twenty five faces staring up (if he happened to have their attention) at him and never wonder why twenty of those faces demonstrated a lost and bewildered expression as he went on about the significance of a conk shell to a bunch of stranded children. It always made sense to me and I recognized the few other students who also got it but I wonder what it would have taken for the whole room to be in on it. Of course, I am not so much of an idealist to really imagine that possible but I think a simple explanation of why English Majors--which I mean to be anybody that reads literature for things like theme, symbolism, figurative language, etc.--do what they do would have really helped people not hate the subject.
So, what do I think the reason is? The long and the short of it for me is that (1)language leads inevitably to questions and (2)literature is controlled and manipulated language. But does language always lead to questions? It's possible to make a statement that does not leave any ambiguity, right? I don't think there is but why don't we try. I'm going to grab a book and choose any line and see what questions present themselves.
The closest book at hand happens to be a text book "The Norton Anthology: American Literature 1820-1865" and I turned to the first page of an excerpt from Moby Dick. The novel starts with the famous line, "Call me Ishmael." You might think there isn't much to this beyond the obvious: the narrator is named Ishmael. But who is he other than that? Where is he from? Ishmael isn't a common name. Which also begs the question, when is he from? Is there a reason for his ambiguity? He doesn't say concretely that his name is Ishmael, that's just what he wants you to call him that.
Three words and a handful of questions. Melville continues, "Some years ago--nevermind how long precisely--having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world." You can imagine how many more questions you can ask of this.
Why is this relevent, though? So, language might lead to questions, why does that mean English teachers everywhere have to stretch everything so far? Why can't the cigar or conk shell or what have you just be whatever it is? The reason for this lies in the second argument above: Literature is language controlled and manipulated to tell a story. But that story goes deeper than the plot because if it didn't nobody would read it. Initially that means character development and the emotional arc(s) that gives the plot meaning. And this is where the symbolism and tone and metaphors come in. When an author puts the cigar into her story (or emphasizes it in a non-fiction work) she expects it to bring certain things to your mind. A cigar has certain connotations and cultural significance. For instance, when I think of a cigar I think of a movie from when I was a kid called "All Dogs Go to Heaven" where the villain-dog wore a business suit and smoked a huge cigar. And I bring this mental image to a text. Obviously the author might not expect this exact image but she understands the general effect it will have on you.
So then, the real goal of a close reading of a text (which is what English majors do) is to get as much into the story as we possibly can. By reading (no pun intended) into the connotations and symbolism and figurative language (metaphors and similes) we can develop a more complete understanding of the story including the characters, plot and philosophy therein.
Freud once suggested, in a wry, old man's voice that "sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar." And this is absolutely true... In psychology. It is never true in literature and I imagine people wonder why that is.
Nobody has ever asked me this question but I remember sitting in high school surrounded by people who I think would have loved an answer. I also remember wondering how any teacher could stand at the front of a room with twenty five faces staring up (if he happened to have their attention) at him and never wonder why twenty of those faces demonstrated a lost and bewildered expression as he went on about the significance of a conk shell to a bunch of stranded children. It always made sense to me and I recognized the few other students who also got it but I wonder what it would have taken for the whole room to be in on it. Of course, I am not so much of an idealist to really imagine that possible but I think a simple explanation of why English Majors--which I mean to be anybody that reads literature for things like theme, symbolism, figurative language, etc.--do what they do would have really helped people not hate the subject.
So, what do I think the reason is? The long and the short of it for me is that (1)language leads inevitably to questions and (2)literature is controlled and manipulated language. But does language always lead to questions? It's possible to make a statement that does not leave any ambiguity, right? I don't think there is but why don't we try. I'm going to grab a book and choose any line and see what questions present themselves.
The closest book at hand happens to be a text book "The Norton Anthology: American Literature 1820-1865" and I turned to the first page of an excerpt from Moby Dick. The novel starts with the famous line, "Call me Ishmael." You might think there isn't much to this beyond the obvious: the narrator is named Ishmael. But who is he other than that? Where is he from? Ishmael isn't a common name. Which also begs the question, when is he from? Is there a reason for his ambiguity? He doesn't say concretely that his name is Ishmael, that's just what he wants you to call him that.
Three words and a handful of questions. Melville continues, "Some years ago--nevermind how long precisely--having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world." You can imagine how many more questions you can ask of this.
Why is this relevent, though? So, language might lead to questions, why does that mean English teachers everywhere have to stretch everything so far? Why can't the cigar or conk shell or what have you just be whatever it is? The reason for this lies in the second argument above: Literature is language controlled and manipulated to tell a story. But that story goes deeper than the plot because if it didn't nobody would read it. Initially that means character development and the emotional arc(s) that gives the plot meaning. And this is where the symbolism and tone and metaphors come in. When an author puts the cigar into her story (or emphasizes it in a non-fiction work) she expects it to bring certain things to your mind. A cigar has certain connotations and cultural significance. For instance, when I think of a cigar I think of a movie from when I was a kid called "All Dogs Go to Heaven" where the villain-dog wore a business suit and smoked a huge cigar. And I bring this mental image to a text. Obviously the author might not expect this exact image but she understands the general effect it will have on you.
So then, the real goal of a close reading of a text (which is what English majors do) is to get as much into the story as we possibly can. By reading (no pun intended) into the connotations and symbolism and figurative language (metaphors and similes) we can develop a more complete understanding of the story including the characters, plot and philosophy therein.
Unfortunately no authors leave a codebook so we can check our guesses to what is a metaphor, and what is just strangely worded =P
ReplyDelete