tbh, i don’t really understand the concept of themes/symbolism in fiction books. aside from the most literal things. how much of this is just people being pretentious and/or reading tea leaves?
PS. Happy to elaborate on this if you or others need a deeper defense rather than just a sense-check! I’d benefit from understanding your concern in more words if so. I can think of several different possible senses of what someone might mean in your parent comment and imo I’m happy to defend “a lot of it is real” for all those senses but it’s possible your objection is a secret fifth sense.
Themes are just things the fiction makes you think about that go beyond the particular events and characters of the book itself. If you’ve read a book where a character is thinking about cheating about her husband and you’re like “well I would never do that… but my marriage is strong, what if we were going through the same thing as them… would I be strong enough?” congrats that’s a theme. Themes can also be perfectly inane, “ha the bad guys in this are not coincidentally just like my real-life political opponents, and the hero just gave the perfect one-line reply that I would give if I was slightly faster on my feet, take that!”
If you want a higher bar for what counts as a theme, a book knows it will have this effect and thus prompts you to view the subject from many angles, disrupting you from being able to accept whatever your first “easy” answer is. This is what literary types tend to find useful and desirable about theme. If you read Crime and Punishment you will likely end up thinking a lot about how you manage and experience guilt, for instance.
Symbolism I personally find to be a rather stilted and inorganic way of doing theme, so someone else can better speak to what some get out of it, but it clearly is a thing that some fiction engages in.
I don’t think it is productive to conflate symbolism and themes. Symbolism is when an element of a story, or the description, correlates to some signifié. Say, “Rosebud” is a symbol of Charles Foster Kane’s youth and innocence. I’m not sure if parody (or inspiration) counts as symbolism—is the protagonist of Zola’s Œuvre a symbol for Paul Cézanne? I don’t know.
I’m loathe to bundle themes together with symbolism. While a selection of symbols throughout a work may comprise a theme. It would be a mistake to say “themes are symbols”. Not all themes need be comprised of symbols. Effective use of themes, at least in dramatic works, don’t rely on symbolism, instead they make the plot events themselves dramatizations of the theme.
In Bergman’s The Silence the theme is… well… silence… or perhaps more correctly: non-communication. They are strangers who don’t speak the language of the country they are in. They are sisters who cannot relate to each other. They are effectively and literally silent. And when they aren’t silent they aren’t communicating a with a whole lot of meaning. And it is a theme essential to the plot of the film, rather than a symbolic add on. Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove has a similar theme [1]and similarly is repeated several times throughout the plot of the film.
These episodes are not symbols for anything, they are the thing itself.
And don’t get me started on Zappa’s Project/Object theory which proposes that they don’t need to symbolize a damn thing to give a theme power!
Rembrandt got his ‘look’ by mixing just a little brown into every other color—he didn’t do ‘red’ unless it had brown in it. The brown itself wasn’t especially fascinating, but the result of its obsessive inclusion was that ‘look.’
In the case of the Project/Object, you may find a little poodle over here, a little blow job over there, etc., etc. I am not obsessed by poodles or blow jobs, however; these words (and others of equal insignificance), along with pictorial images and melodic themes, recur throughout the albums, interviews, films, videos (and this book) for no other reason than to unify the ‘collection.’”
Mamoru Oshii expressed a similar sentiment that it is the repetition of imagery in his films that creates meaning. [2]The theme is the fact there’s a theme at all I suppose.
In the case of Dr. Strangelove is “about Nuclear Apocalypse”—that is the subject, yes. But, as Kubrick himself said to Film critic Michel Ciment ” Failure of communication is a theme which runs through a number of my films” alluding to the plot point of telephone and short-wave radio not working, and transport impossible in the Shining. And Dr. Strangelove’s plot hinges on multiple episodes of, similarly, telephone and radio communication failing. The way this theme is explored in Eyes Wide Shut—a film that concerns itself with (paranoid) fantasies and infidelity—is a continuation of the theme is left as an exercise for the reader. A theme is not always comprised of symbols, nor is the same as a subject. The example I always use, because it relies on cliches, is a photo series about “age”. The series may have subjects as diverse as a budding flower, a newborn baby, a geriatric person, and a wilted flower. All the same theme—age. Four different subjects. The subject of Dr. Strangelove is a Nuclear Apocalypse, the theme is failure of communication.
″ Eventually, I think, by using these elements repeatedly, I add meaning to my final product. I’m still exploring how to express my feelings through these elements. I’ve always felt that in order to portray humans, you should not be shooting humans; you should be shooting something else. And what I’ve used is animals, which are very important in my films.” https://www.avclub.com/mamoru-oshii-1798208379#:~:text=Eventually,films
Depends on the authors. The more famous and classical the author is, the higher your prior should be that every sentence, name and scene serves a purpose to explore a character and thus the main theme of the book. Chekhov / Tolstoy / Shakespeare etc. are definitely on the highest density side of the spectrum. Fanfiction might often be pretentious.
tbh, i don’t really understand the concept of themes/symbolism in fiction books. aside from the most literal things. how much of this is just people being pretentious and/or reading tea leaves?
I think a lot of it is real!
PS. Happy to elaborate on this if you or others need a deeper defense rather than just a sense-check! I’d benefit from understanding your concern in more words if so. I can think of several different possible senses of what someone might mean in your parent comment and imo I’m happy to defend “a lot of it is real” for all those senses but it’s possible your objection is a secret fifth sense.
Themes are just things the fiction makes you think about that go beyond the particular events and characters of the book itself. If you’ve read a book where a character is thinking about cheating about her husband and you’re like “well I would never do that… but my marriage is strong, what if we were going through the same thing as them… would I be strong enough?” congrats that’s a theme. Themes can also be perfectly inane, “ha the bad guys in this are not coincidentally just like my real-life political opponents, and the hero just gave the perfect one-line reply that I would give if I was slightly faster on my feet, take that!”
If you want a higher bar for what counts as a theme, a book knows it will have this effect and thus prompts you to view the subject from many angles, disrupting you from being able to accept whatever your first “easy” answer is. This is what literary types tend to find useful and desirable about theme. If you read Crime and Punishment you will likely end up thinking a lot about how you manage and experience guilt, for instance.
Symbolism I personally find to be a rather stilted and inorganic way of doing theme, so someone else can better speak to what some get out of it, but it clearly is a thing that some fiction engages in.
I don’t think it is productive to conflate symbolism and themes. Symbolism is when an element of a story, or the description, correlates to some signifié. Say, “Rosebud” is a symbol of Charles Foster Kane’s youth and innocence. I’m not sure if parody (or inspiration) counts as symbolism—is the protagonist of Zola’s Œuvre a symbol for Paul Cézanne? I don’t know.
I’m loathe to bundle themes together with symbolism. While a selection of symbols throughout a work may comprise a theme. It would be a mistake to say “themes are symbols”. Not all themes need be comprised of symbols. Effective use of themes, at least in dramatic works, don’t rely on symbolism, instead they make the plot events themselves dramatizations of the theme.
In Bergman’s The Silence the theme is… well… silence… or perhaps more correctly: non-communication. They are strangers who don’t speak the language of the country they are in. They are sisters who cannot relate to each other. They are effectively and literally silent. And when they aren’t silent they aren’t communicating a with a whole lot of meaning. And it is a theme essential to the plot of the film, rather than a symbolic add on. Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove has a similar theme [1]and similarly is repeated several times throughout the plot of the film.
These episodes are not symbols for anything, they are the thing itself.
And don’t get me started on Zappa’s Project/Object theory which proposes that they don’t need to symbolize a damn thing to give a theme power!
— Frank Zappa, The Real Frank Zappa Book.
Mamoru Oshii expressed a similar sentiment that it is the repetition of imagery in his films that creates meaning. [2]The theme is the fact there’s a theme at all I suppose.
In the case of Dr. Strangelove is “about Nuclear Apocalypse”—that is the subject, yes. But, as Kubrick himself said to Film critic Michel Ciment ” Failure of communication is a theme which runs through a number of my films” alluding to the plot point of telephone and short-wave radio not working, and transport impossible in the Shining. And Dr. Strangelove’s plot hinges on multiple episodes of, similarly, telephone and radio communication failing. The way this theme is explored in Eyes Wide Shut—a film that concerns itself with (paranoid) fantasies and infidelity—is a continuation of the theme is left as an exercise for the reader.
A theme is not always comprised of symbols, nor is the same as a subject.
The example I always use, because it relies on cliches, is a photo series about “age”. The series may have subjects as diverse as a budding flower, a newborn baby, a geriatric person, and a wilted flower. All the same theme—age. Four different subjects.
The subject of Dr. Strangelove is a Nuclear Apocalypse, the theme is failure of communication.
″ Eventually, I think, by using these elements repeatedly, I add meaning to my final product. I’m still exploring how to express my feelings through these elements. I’ve always felt that in order to portray humans, you should not be shooting humans; you should be shooting something else. And what I’ve used is animals, which are very important in my films.”
https://www.avclub.com/mamoru-oshii-1798208379#:~:text=Eventually,films
Depends on the authors. The more famous and classical the author is, the higher your prior should be that every sentence, name and scene serves a purpose to explore a character and thus the main theme of the book. Chekhov / Tolstoy / Shakespeare etc. are definitely on the highest density side of the spectrum. Fanfiction might often be pretentious.
I think leogao meant that the readers were being pretentious in their discusions of the book (looking at tea leaves).