The implication that I got was that to read these books on ‘a deeper level’ I must read them academically and accept the limits of that academic symbolism as static character traits. If Author Z has written character X as a symbol for Issue 1 then character X cannot be motivated by anything other than that, and that if I view the actions of character X (who can easily be replaced by the label Issue 1 at this point) as motivated or defined by something else (or even if I view him as surpassing Issue 1 or breaking the mould of Issue 1) then my grasp on character X is incomplete/incorrect, as I don’t have Issue 1 on the forefront of my mind when contemplating character X. I cannot reconcile myself to this. It makes me depressed both as a writer and a reader of fiction.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2014-11-26 08:34 pm (UTC)The implication that I got was that to read these books on ‘a deeper level’ I must read them academically and accept the limits of that academic symbolism as static character traits.
If Author Z has written character X as a symbol for Issue 1 then character X cannot be motivated by anything other than that, and that if I view the actions of character X (who can easily be replaced by the label Issue 1 at this point) as motivated or defined by something else (or even if I view him as surpassing Issue 1 or breaking the mould of Issue 1) then my grasp on character X is incomplete/incorrect, as I don’t have Issue 1 on the forefront of my mind when contemplating character X.
I cannot reconcile myself to this. It makes me depressed both as a writer and a reader of fiction.