Monday, June 18, 2012
Active Reading - Chapter 29
We'd read a passage in our Backpack Literature textbook on active reading, and while it was admittedly dry (it is a textbook, after all), I feel like it was somewhat informative. I've already been doing a lot of these procedures and I often feel like digging too far into something can tend to strip the soul and meaning out of the art. I'm not saying we shouldn't analyze what we read at all, but I also don't necessarily believe that every thought or character in a story needs to be a symbol for something.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree completely! If I analyze stuff too much it loses the meaning or takes the joy out of it.
ReplyDeleteI'll try to be careful with how I respond to the theme emerging here.
ReplyDeleteFirst, Lonny is absolutely correct, in that not everything needs to be (nor is) a symbol. However, there is a lot of significance in details that have nothing to do with symbol (e.g., diction, characterization, theme,...all of the stuff we're learning about in terms of fiction).
Second, a whole lot depends upon one's interest and curiosity. Let me work by way of analogy. Let me pick, say, automobiles. (One could also choose television, or music, or the human body, or most anything as an appropriate analogy.)
Almost all of us can have an interest--at some level--in cars. We like a particular make or model because it is stylish, or fast, or powerful, or green, or whatever. Now, consider a mechanic. Would a mechanic say that knowing too much about a car--the engine specs, how it functions, how it achieves its speed/power/fuel efficiency--takes the joy out of the car? I suspect not. Most of the folks who get the *most* joy out of cars are folks who are mechanically inclined and knowledgeable.
I think the same thing tends to be true with literature. Certainly, there are those who drive (or read) and like a fast car (or plot) or a sophisticated car (or character) and have no inclination to understand anything about the car (or the literature) other than where to fill the gas and perhaps change the oil. They just like the feeling of driving (or reading) with the windows down, etc. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't think we'd go so far as to argue that knowing too much about how the car functions takes the joy out of it. The same is true with literature. It can be enjoyed at multiple levels. It can be enjoyed "just for the story," just as one can enjoy driving. If that's where an individual chooses to stop in terms of his or her enjoyment, that is his or her choice, I think. But I would assert--and I recognize that I'm obviously biased--that by not understanding how literature functions, we're missing out on a fuller, greater appreciation/joy, just as the mechanic has a fuller, more informed joy when he's driving his car down the road.
Does that make any sense? It's not that there's anything wrong with the joy of "just driving," but we should recognize that by limiting our knowledge of how something is crafted, or how it works, we're limiting the range of joy that is available to us, also.
Dr. Dyer