Succinct Definition
| In looking up the part in Granger's first book quickly (the part on lightning as an example of "signal" for the previous post of the lightning struck tower) I lighted on a really good succinct definition he has of what is meant by "symbols" and "symbolist literature". (symbols are things ...) "Corresponding to greater realities than themselves by virtue of some quality or virtue they possess" I have that last in bold to emphasize that this is not allegory, where the correspondence lies solely in the mechanics of external actions characteristic of the higher reality and arbitrarily assigned to the lower reality. In authentic Symbolism there is some quality in the very nature of the symbol that makes it an apt representative of the higher reality and its core meaning ... the symbol somehow has a real participation in the meaning of the higher reality, not just an arbitrarily assigned or conventionally set correlation. I just thought that definition might help clarify when Pauli or I refer to HP as "symbolic/symbolist literature". |
Comments on "Succinct Definition"
-
Pauli said ... (November 01, 2005 10:17 AM)
:
post a commentMy biased opinion here, but another big difference between symbolism and allegory is that a lot of energy must be spent in keeping the elements of the allegory analogous - that's why the phrase is often heard "well, that analogy breaks down". There's only so many points of comparison available, whereas in symbolist literature the story stands out as good/beautiful/true whether you "get" everything or not. An over simplification might be this: symbols <=> heart, allegory <=> head.