Analyzing Literary Analyses

        So I’ve always wondered, as I went through school and being faced with literary analysis, if the authors of such acclaimed works purposefully inject these ‘symbols’ and ‘motifs’ and ‘themes’ that these analyzers delve so deep into? Do they mean for their writings to be dissected and read between the lines? I don’t know about the general public, but whenever I got a hair up my ass and decided to write for ‘fun’, I just wrote…I didn’t intend on having double meanings or metaphors. I suppose that could be why I’m not an acclaimed writer…Maybe I just answered my own question ha!

        But, honestly, what is the point of literary analysis? Excuses for intellectuals to banter back and forth, just like holidays are an excuse to overeat? But then again, how could any interpretation be wrong when backed by valid arguments? I find writing to be very subjective…as is art (I suppose writing is, indeed, a form of art). So we could apply this same logic to art and artists. Although I feel art is more of an expression and the artists can argue meaning a bit better. Then again, this too could be protested. I recant that statement…I suppose there is always a way to interpret anything really. I digress…but isn’t that the point of a random-thoughts blog?! Anyway, back to the analysis of analyzing a subjective medium…

        A friend mentioned that the arts are ‘the mind exploded into an external product’ (seriously check out her blog, she’s pretty witty and has mad Paint skills). This I thought to be a perfect explanation. It fully supports the subjective nature of such a thing. Do you suppose, then, it makes so much sense that something is interpreted and analyzed to such a degree. If it were deemed objective then it would be much more straight forward, there would be a right and a wrong side to the argument. But, and a big butt, do these authors bash their heads into the wall when they come across all of these college critiques of their work? I wonder how I would feel if one of my ramblings were the subject of a literary analysis...honestly, I'd probably be amused at the depth of meaning that was reached. Aren't your best works written in a slightly incoherent manner? I can't imagine that these literary geniuses sit at their keyboards (typewriters for you old school lovers) and come up with hidden meanings and symbols to hide in their works. 

        I'd love to see a famous writer whose work is constantly analyzed finally step up and say, "Seriously? You thought the plant was a symbol for family? No, she just had a damn plant that wouldn't grow." And that's a reference to A Raisin in the Sun in case you were wondering.  But, of course this is maybe why the majority of writers whose works are chosen happen to be six feet under...so that they can't tell these intellectuals how wrong they are and have an all out ego-fest.

        But then maybe it comes down to a psychological situation.  Do we inadvertently incorporate symbols and metaphors by our own accord? I'm sure Dr. Freud has a chapter on this somewhere.  And I think ending with a shout out to the famous sexual psychologist is a good place to say good night!