More than I meant to say

[Colleen Thomas]

In school I was a very strict literalist. I refused to see any symbolism in any work. Drove my teacher's nuts. Part of my problem back then was we would spend days finding all the hidden meanings and messages in a poem or story. I reached the conclusion that if the author had meant all of that to be in there he would still be writing it.

To a mockingbird was my crowing achievement in my daily battle with my english teacher. After an impassioned speech about me being bull headed and an exhaustive explanation of how the work was allegory for the christian faith I simply asked if he thought the author was good. After an exclaimation of how great the author was I asked if he was so good and wanted to talk about god why did he have to couch it in terms only a theologian of the time would understand? The poor fellow short circuted.

Little set up there for something I have noticed in my works. People sometimes see a whole lot more in them than I intended. Political & social commentary I never even considered, but that do appear to be there. By and large it isn't intentional, but it is there.

It left me wondering do we put these things into our works subconciously? Or do people who read them find their own meaning within our words?

-Colly

 

[lucky-E-leven]

It left me wondering do we put these things into our works subconciously? Or do people who read them find their own meaning within our words?

-Colly

The only thing I think I can find in my work is themes. Sometimes they're intentional and other times not. Nothing small that makes a particular statement, or at least none that have been brought to my attention.

I think people find their own meanings in things often times. I do. I can go read a book and be in a good place in my life and later on reread the same selection at which time I'll find different meanings for things and a different overall mood upon completion.

~lucky

 

[destinie21]

I'd say both as a writer it's impossible for me not to put some of myself (and my belief systems) into a story intentionally or not, on the other hand I've gotten comments on my story telling me to leave politics out of it to which I say if you don't like it don't read it. In the story that evoked that comment i wasn't being purposefully political but it was read as such by the reader. Interpretation always leaves room for misconception.

 

[Liar]

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

What you described happens all the time to me. Especially reactions to my stageplays seems to head in that direction. They are comedys or comeddy thrillers and dramas. The main purpose of them is to make people laugh, but of course I incorporate some of my own opinions and values into the mix. If the hero in a story at some points decides to "do the right thing", then the only version of the right thing that I can comprehend enough to write about is the one that my own values wouuld dictate in that situation.

When I see that I am over analysed I always jump in to defend my semi-fluff.

#L

 

[CharleyH]

It left me wondering do we put these things into our works subconciously? Or do people who read them find their own meaning within our words?

I am, no doubt, the antithesis to you. I cannot, not observe the symbolism in what I read and see in literature, art, film, and the packaging of CD's for christ sake.

There is an element of the unconscious, yet I believe it can't be viewed in one work of art, but rather reveals itself through a body of work and typically reflects a number of consistent themes.

Personally, I am very careful with each story I write, and am constantly asking myself does this symbolically fit into the story. It's the way 'I' write, and I believe that writing this way adds depth to both character and theme.

I feel that if something is significant enough to be there instead of something else, then it must be there for a reason, and I think as a person who analyses constantly, I can tell the difference between convenience and purpose. Of course one has to be careful of reading 'into' a piece. Hopefully, you extrapolate and interpret in the context of how the symbol appears.

Watching Mystic River last night, as example only, I found it exceptionally telling when the three boys were writing their names in the cement, Jimmy, Sean and Da . . . , Dave unable to finish his name. Their fates sealed, etched permanently in a particular order. Was this scene there for a reason, or none at all?

We communicate with symbols and so as writers we must choose our words so that our readers will understand both their literal meaning and symbolic significance.

If I stay on this topic much longer, I will start droning about semiotics, and then Perdita will have my ass, lol, so I won't.

Liar says sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Is it? Imagine the implications if Abs were to smoke a cigarette, a joint, a carrot stick instead.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think that when we write something, we put in what seems dramatically or emotionally right to us. We don’t think, “I’ll make it snow when she walks out on him because the snow will be symbolic of her tears and the cold will remind people of his own emotional coldness.” No. It just strikes us that when we think about the weather during this scene, we see it snowing. It feels right. We can’t always say why.

The golden age of literary interpretation in terms of symbology was probably the 50’s, which coincided with the heyday of Freudian interpetation. I have a quote from Coleridge’s “Kulai Khan” in my sig line because I got very involved back in school in rebutting a Freudian analysis of the poem, which saw the stately pleasure dome as being a breast, and Alph the Sacred River as being a river of milk or semen, I forget which. Anyhow, that whole method of understanding poetry struck me as just being so pedantic and sophomoric. It didn’t help you understand the beauty of the poem or really give you any insight into its music and power, but it was a game anyone could play, and so most English departments did.

Of course, I was a sophmore too at one time, and I tried writing things that made conscious use of hidden symbolism, and they stunk without exception. Symbolic interpretation may have some use as an analytical tool, but in my opinion it’s pretty worthless as a creative one. You can invariably see the author smirking at his own cleverness, and it makes for a very clumsy story.

---dr.M.

 

[Guest]

Colly, what a wonderful observation and question from you. Thank you!

I've always believed in the connection between the unconscious and language. I see it in certain dreams I've had, and in how I write. We do have intents in the stories/poems we write, and that directs us to an extent, but we carry our whole being and life experiences with us, and that directs us too, whether sub- or un-consciously.

It's what makes literature so fascinating to me. I love reading 'just' the story at times, but if I pay attention to the language (and I love to do that), then more meaning seeps out. Whether it was the author's 'meaning' or not, makes no difference. I am "the reader" and I choose, or even need, to glean what I can from the work. Academics are more deliberate (it's their job).

It's not as simple as symbolism or signs (that's where the academics come in again). Subtexts are always there, the author's and the reader's. I've had the experience of a reader showing me something in my poems that I know was not consciously put there, but through that reader's eyes I saw it as clearly as if I had. It can be nuanced or not, but with a good reader there is proof that it's there.

We dream in images mostly, and it is "us" creating those narratives, no matter how indecipherable they might seem, or read. When I think of that it makes my judgment of my language skills seem quite inadequate, but it's what I work with, and I know it's me.

Perdita

 

[Lisa Denton]

I get that feelin lots, ya know, the one where you ask yourself "have I heard this, read this, seen this before?" and kinda wonder if I'm stealing somethin. Then I realize we are each what we've heard, read, learned in our lives. My sig is based on something Einstien once said, I don't remember it exact and wouldn't credit him with something I'm not even sure I remembered correctly before I added a pun on.
My feedbacks always have something they noticed. Most of it I wouldn't repeat but they say they know me. Some are close, some way off. Lots ask me if it was a true story, on both my stories, that I went to look if I actually stuck it in some true story category.
One guy is so sure I was telling him something, he tried to explain and I feel kinda lucky I have no idea what he was talking about. He is searching for me, luckily in the wrong city, whacko!!
I put something of me in a story, I see it when I'm done and read it, not while I'm writing. Of course when I write I can go anywhere and do anything so those things are way off what I would do myself.

 

[matriarch]

It left me wondering do we put these things into our works subconciously? Or do people who read them find their own meaning within our words?

-Colly

One of the modules I felt compelled to undertake as part of my degree course was an 8-month load of bollocks (I discovered this too late to back out), called 'Philosophy of Art'.

The overall point of the course was to discuss and try and answer the question, 'What is art?', an impossibility.

One thing that did stick with me, was the almost overwhelming agreement (I'm still out on this one), that once a work of art, be it a painting, a piece of music, a piece of text, a poem, is 'in the public doman', it ceases to be the property of the artist, and loses all relation to the original intention of the creator. At that point, the piece of art becomes the property of the viewer, and they will then make of it what they will. They will see in it what they wish. They will interpret it according to their own mind set.

I didn't necessarily agree with it, but I can see more and more, that this frequently is the case.

The viewer/listener/reader will interpret a piece totally according to their own experiences, upbringing, background, biaises. And nothing you can say, in most cases, will persuade them otherwise.

That said, I think its almost impossible to create something without giving a piece of ourselves into that piece. Particularly in writing.

'Said me bit, going back to me tea and cake.'

Mat

 

[CharleyH]

Symbolic interpretation may have some use as an analytical tool, but in my opinion it’s pretty worthless as a creative one. You can invariably see the author smirking at his own cleverness, and it makes for a very clumsy story.

---dr.M.

Well, I don't know about this. We make use (some more than others) of symbolic language in metaphor, simile, icons, indexes, symbols, and you can't possibly do this without giving some thought to the context of your theme and the meaning that will be imparted. Symbols (and I don't mean to use this word because it is limited) are a part of culture and ideology both from where we write, from where we read and a tool by which we interpret.

Whether it snows or not in a particular scene may take precendence or not, it depends, but if it does hold particular significance you can sure as hell bet an author thought about why.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Little set up there for something I have noticed in my works. People sometimes see a whole lot more in them than I intended. Political & social commentary I never even considered, but that do appear to be there. By and large it isn't intentional, but it is there.

It left me wondering do we put these things into our works subconciously? Or do people who read them find their own meaning within our words?

-Colly

Perhaps you answered your own question.

As far as finding hidden meanings of symbols, I was never good at that either, I tend to miss the point.
I just had a crash couse in semiotics ) ) that helped me out. I'm a more visual person, I need to see things clearly.

I have found myself being more concious of words and meanings more so since I've begun writing again and reading posts here.

I have no idea what I just wrote.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: More than I meant to say

I have no idea what I just wrote.

No problemo, Abby. Perhaps Sher will do a poll and we'll all vote and tell you what you meant.

Perdita

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Re: Re: Re: More than I meant to say

No problemo, Abby. Perhaps Sher will do a poll and we'll all vote and tell you what you meant.

Perdita

LOL...that would make it easier on me.

 

[wishfulthinking]

why did he have to couch it in terms only a theologian of the time would understand? [/B]

I would have to say is some circumstances - Ego.

I hated English class. I hated writing reviews. I only saw the themes/ideas that reached out to me when I read something, and not all 1000 possible different meanings other people had attributed to the piece of work, and this frustrated me, not because I didn't see them, but because of the way class was structured, I would be penalised for it in the way of marks etc. And I thought, really, you think the author really intended to put all that in? It was to the point that I wouldn't bother to read the book, and would just go around and ask 10-15 students what they thought of the book/article and then write my review.

But as to people seeing things in my writing that I didn't realise was there - sometimes scary, because they discover something about me that I didn't even know. That people would interpret my writing based on their own experiences - it is amazing and interesting to see. And then I wonder, why do the people who like my writing like it, and why do the people who don't like my writing don't?

Ramble over What was the question?

 

[rgraham666]

I'm far too literal minded to deliberately put symbolism in any of my writing.

I'm sure it will be there, but I don't set out to put it in.

I'm more concerned with the characters and setting. I'm always asking "Am I describing the characters well? Can the setting be seen?" I want emotion to be communicated, not some high falutin' deep meaning.

But that's just me.

 

[Lisa Denton]

Re: Re: More than I meant to say

Perhaps you answered your own question.

As far as finding hidden meanings of symbols, I was never good at that either, I tend to miss the point.
I just had a crash couse in semiotics ) ) that helped me out. I'm a more visual person, I need to see things clearly.

I have found myself being more concious of words and meanings more so since I've begun writing again and reading posts here.

I have no idea what I just wrote.

I felt myself trasported to a higher plain of abstract ideals and meanings, but then you crashed and burned and took me with you. Smoke another Lite cigar Abs, and try again.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

What everbody else said, I agree with, honest.

And that's the trick with any "interpretation." What we create, whether consciously or un, is a type of literary inkblot test. The way we write it says something about us, perhaps something we didn't realize, just as how the reader views the work is a reflection of their personality and background.

The chief culprits in the interpretation game are academics. Let's face it, how many Eng Lit Ph.d theses could be cranked out if Moby Dick were "just" a story about hunting a whale? The problem is when lesser acadmeic minds insist they have the "true" interpretation of some work. Then to pass, students must turn-off their critical ability and resort to the GI-GO (garbage in-garbage out) approach to scholarship.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Whether it snows or not in a particular scene may take precendence or not, it depends, but if it does hold particular significance you can sure as hell bet an author thought about why.

I can't speak for other writers or artists, but that's not the way it works with me at all. I put stuff in because it appeals to my sense of what's right in the story. I never think "Oh yeah, it needs to be snowing here as a way of showing loneliness and silence. Good symbol." I have tried to work like that, and it just never works for me.

When I write I feel more than I think. I try to paint an emotional picture or mood in my stuff, and I try and tell a story. I make no effort to understand what I've done in terms of hidden meanings and symbolism. It may be there, but it's never consciously put there. Once you see something as a symbol, it becomes intellectualized and loses its emotional impact.

---dr.M.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I hope nobody sees anything in my writing because I don't really put anything there but smut, which I hope will make people hard or wet. However, George Boxlicker, my main protag, does express an occasional opinion, which also represents my opinion. I believe in safe sex and so my characters always practice it. A TS appears in some of my stories and I strongly express the opinion that she is a woman, even though she has a cock. I believe that sex is best when all participants are enjoying themselves and all the participants in my stories do, especially the women, with a very few exceptions. However, these expressions are not the least bit hidden.

 

[Edward Teach]

It left me wondering do we put these things into our works subconciously? Or do people who read them find their own meaning within our words?

-Colly

Isn’t subconsciously putting things into your work part of the creative process?

As Dr. M said, you may simply think a snow storm fits without going into a big conscious examination as to why. But somehow you knew.

Of course readers often find their own meanings in what they read. Bob Dylan once said that he never explained his work because he looked much smarter leaving the interpretation to others.

Ed

 

[wishfulthinking]

Same, any symbolism in my work is not there consciously. And I find that when people strive to do it, it often comes of sounding cliche [unless they are a pro]. Sort of like focusing on getting the reader into the write mood with sybolism - it was a dark and stormy night - rather than the telling the actual story and letting the reader figure out it was a dismal, spooky night.

Again I catch myself rambling.

 

[Lord DragonsWing]

Damn, you've made me sit and think of my stories. The way I write is to let the story flow. It takes on it's own life and creates itself. If there is a meaning that is subconscious then it's there because the story wants it. After re-reading some stories I do see meanings there.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: More than I meant to say

Bob Dylan once said that he never explained his work because he looked much smarter leaving the interpretation to others.

When director Alan Schneider asked Samuel Beckett who Godot was, the playwright answered, ''If I knew, I would have said so in the play.''

Perdita

 

[Guest]

.

 

[Edward Teach]

Originally posted by perdita Hobbes Strip
.

I literally Laughed Out Loud!

Ed