The Varied Perspectives of Literature

     In How to Read Literature Like a Professor, Foster discusses the intricacies of symbolism and adapting to reading on the "symbolic level". His discussion of symbolism and the interpretation of symbols is indicative of how differently people involved in the literature domain actually read and interpret texts. One of the key points about symbolism that Foster argues is that symbols can never be reduced to a singular, individual meaning. He does state that some symbols have a "limited range" of meanings, but that even those symbols have multiple interpretations. Truly reading literature is not simply about learning the plot, characters, and context (though those details are required as a foundation for understanding). The true process of reading literature is about interpretation and discussion, revealing the inner workings of humanity and its diversity. Every individual may have a unique perspective on any one symbol of any one piece of literature, and that is what makes the study of literature so fresh and interesting for those who are willing to not only participate in deep introspection involving the dark topics that literature tends to follow (such as death, grief, or illness)- but also to consider the other perspectives of others and how their experiences may have led to that outlook. Literature does not necessarily have to be a strictly academic experience, it can and has been telling of the diversity of humanity itself.
     There was a short story that I had read in the tenth grade that a few people on this blog may remember from class. I cannot recall the name of the story, but it centered around a young child and her adventures through the woods near her house. One of the central symbols came towards the end. It was a noose near the corpse of a person that had presumably killed themselves with the noose, and there was a rose (which was almost universally accepted as a symbol of either life or hope, at least in my discussions) growing inside of the loop of the rope. Morbid yes, but there were a variety of interpretations as to what a specifically placed symbol could mean. As I recall, there were three primary perspectives that the people in my group gravitated towards. There was the school of thought that I fell under that the noose being a full circle around the rose symbolized the inevitability of death and mortality, while others saw the rose as a more positive symbol- life rising from death itself. A few individuals saw the rose simply there to contrast the noose, and vise versa.
     While these perspectives are obviously quite different from each other, Foster and others like him would not view any of these observations as false. Nearly all literature minded people would see this as a symbol, but the dispute over what the symbol actually means is another issue entirely. In truth, symbols do not have a "right" meaning, and that's what makes literature so engaging and interesting for so many people who study it as a career. Instead of what many people see in literature (generic plot themes, basic symbols, etc), individuals that participate in literature oriented programs learn how to apply those symbols to very "human" problems, such as morality, death, religion, and any other significant issue. All it takes to create deep thought around a deep issue is for an author to write about it, and allow not only academics involved in literature, but everyday people to interpret the issue and discuss it. Literature can be far more than reading to simply read, it can and should be treated as a gateway to philosophical and moral-oriented discussion.