Allusions and Technicalities in Literature

[FoghornBellows]

I like to relax when I read literature. Is it necessary to look up every allusion and unknown word when reading a book? My bank of allusions and my vocabulary don't stretch very far, so I don't want to miss out on too much. However, it becomes more of a school-like task when I begin looking things up. In short, I'm ambivalent and need to embody the advice of someone wiser. Any warranted advice will be greatly appreciated.
Even when I'm reading Kerouac, there are still words like "lugubrious" and "choleric" that I need to look up, and it pulls me out of my zone.

[DanielBenoit]

Don't worry, your vocabulary will build-up the more you read. I remember back in the day when I first started reading Nietzsche and was utterly oblivious most of the time (for I had no experience in philosophy at the time) but soon eased my way into it eventually. A good dictionary is useful to have at hand, but you need not look up every word you come across. If you don't know a certain word but don't want to loose consetration, just put it in context and let it flow along.

As for allusions and references, enjoy the art of ambiguity while you have it. I loved T.S. Eliot when I first started reading him because there was a kind of mysterious elegance to his allusions which I believe made me appretiate him more, rather had I known all of the references everything would've been reduced to a crossword puzzle. You don't always have to know the words, just the music.

EDIT: That said, it is important to understand the underlying meaning of the poem. But as a begining reader, you shouldn't worry yourself too much about that. An understanding of the allusions behind the text is important. Sorry for any misunderstanding

[mayneverhave]

Often times finding the sources of allusions might not be as simple as simply looking them up. Most of the time, you probably won't even know that an allusion is being made, let alone what it is referring to.

It really is an issue of interest. You bring up the idea of not making reading into a school project, but if this is euphemistic for close reading, then you must make a choice. It might be possible to maintain a mix of close and casual reading - lord knows I don't always read with a pencil in hand - but ultimately a work only gives what you put into it. If you really want to appreciate the nuance and technical aspects of literature, you have to put some work in.

As for allusions and references, enjoy the art of ambiguity while you have it. I loved T.S. Eliot when I first started reading him because there was a kind of mysterious elegance to his allusions which I believe made me appretiate him more, rather had I known all of the references everything would've been reduced to a crossword puzzle. You don't always have to know the words, just the music.

This is the example I would use as well, though I disagree with you. Take the numerous allusions tied into the opening of The Waste Land -

April is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory with desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.

I believe there are (at least) allusions to Whitman's When Lilacs Last in the Door-yard Bloom'd, along with the Prologue of The Canterbury Tales. With these allusions (and without going into a long analysis of the poem), Eliot summons up the mood and themes of both these works - the elegy of Whitman and vibrancy of Chaucer - and ironically juxtaposes his modern poem, which is deficiant in the vitality of those two alluded to poems.

The point being: although one can simply enjoy the music of The Waste Land, you pretty much entirely miss the point if you don't get at least some of what Eliot is referencing. He's not just referencing other works to be a snob, but because the poem would be entirely different without them. Not realizing Eliot is quoting Tristan und Isolde, for instance, means that Wagner's opera - with its mood of loss and failed love - is lost to the reader. An incomplete poem is presented.

[DanielBenoit]

This is the example I would use as well, though I disagree with you. Take the numerous allusions tied into the opening of The Waste Land -

April is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory with desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.

I believe there are (at least) allusions to Whitman's When Lilacs Last in the Door-yard Bloom'd, along with the Prologue of The Canterbury Tales. With these allusions (and without going into a long analysis of the poem), Eliot summons up the mood and themes of both these works - the elegy of Whitman and vibrancy of Chaucer - and ironically juxtaposes his modern poem, which is deficiant in the vitality of those two alluded to poems.

The point being: although one can simply enjoy the music of The Waste Land, you pretty much entirely miss the point if you don't get at least some of what Eliot is referencing. He's not just referencing other works to be a snob, but because the poem would be entirely different without them. Not realizing Eliot is quoting Tristan und Isolde, for instance, means that Wagner's opera - with its mood of loss and failed love - is lost to the reader. An incomplete poem is presented.

Well, maybe what I said was out of carelessness. I do think it benefits even more knowing the hidden meaning behind a work, but it's not something you should strain yourself over, for a poem can still be appretiated out of context, though incompletely.

[Dinkleberry2010]

I love it when I come across an unfamiliar word, because in looking it up and finding the meaning, I expand my vocabulary.

[stlukesguild]

I usually looked up any word that I was uncertain of... and still do. I would do the same with allusions to mythological or historical figures (and with the internet and Wikipedia its far easier to find such knowledge today). If I found that I was continually confronted with allusions and vocabulary beyond my scope I would probably put the work on hold until later as the flow of the work is quite important to me. Speaking of the issue of difficult or challenging reading I should note that for some readers there is a definite pleasure to be gleaned from such... perhaps not unlike that afforded by solving a crossword puzzle.

To me reading great books is like spending time in conversation with some of the most interesting and brilliant minds across time and space. Indeed... I am one who will often write in my books... responding or arguing with Plato, Hugo, Dickens, etc... I don't expect to agree with every writer any more than I expect to agree with every person in real life on every occasion. Neither do I expect to find that I fully grasp what each author has to offer upon the first time reading him or her. I recognize, however, that what I seek is a fascinating discussion... not a mere reinforcement of my own values, beliefs, thoughts, and prejudices.

I agree that one misses a lot and doesn't fully understand the intentions of an artist if one misses out upon the various allusions, symbols, metaphors, etc... These are all equally part of the writer's vocabulary and are just as much learned as vocabulary itself. Having said this much... I would not negate the experience of appreciating and understanding a work of art upon our own terms and limitations. Currently I am listening to some beautiful, angelic music composed by Orlando Lassus:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-75Cd...eature=related

I was surprised... as I would assume many others would be... to discover that this music was seen as dissonant, shocking, even "evil" and the "devil's music" by the church at the time it was composed (more detail on this can be found in my posting on the "classical listening" thread over on the General Chat). This knowledge leads me to appreciate the work in a new... and perhaps fuller way... but it does not inherently invalidate the appreciation of those who only appreciate the beautiful sounds of the music. of course this is the role of a good critic and good teacher: to act as a guide in leading us to a fuller appreciation of literature... but never suggesting that theirs is the sole "correct" interpretation... and certainly not wasting time arguing that A is better than B and so you shouldn't read B (let alone C).

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yes, I would also add to the OP that it is very important not to ruin the flow of a text with looking up unfamiliar words constantly. With this in mind why not use a pencil and mark words to look up later? This is my mainly my approach when met with a difficult texts and has worked for me over the years. I have a similar approach with spelling, if I spell a word wrongly, (which really pains me) I make sure learn it so as never to spell it wrong again.

[mal4mac]

Decide to spend some time expecting to work hard at literature! Who said literature should always be relaxing?

For your relaxing time always choose the easiest good book you can think of and just guess what the hard words might mean -- only look up essential words.

If the work is hard then look for good footnotes! Try reading a few scenes of Shakespeare every day, that will soon build your vocabulary! A good version with footnotes is the RSC Complete Shakespeare. You will lose the flow slightly by having to repeatedly glance at the footnotes. When that becomes wearing turn to an easy novel.

When 'working at' reading a novel without footnotes look up the words and jot down a quick definition in the margin. Second time through you may not need the marginal notes, but they are there if you do need them.

I recently read a version of Joyce's "Portrait" that had 500 endnotes! I read them all (many I needed to!) but I took notes on the notes so the next read through should be easier. I'll probably read the book several times, the last time, hopefully, I will be able to "go with the flow" and not need notes. Some works are worth this kind of effort When it flowered, it really blooming flowed, and when I had to stop and luck things up it was sstillinteresting...

[kelby_lake]

You should definitely look up words. Some words always pop up in books.
Allusions will come with more reading. They are quite good in that they prompt you to read other books. Until you've read the book and the book/poem/whatever is being alluded to, you cannot fully appreciate the allusion.

[JBI]

I get joy out of using my copy of the OED - you learn so much about language. As for allusions - I get many of them, but obscure ones require footnoting - that is where a good edition always comes into play - there is nothing more useful than, for instance, the A. C. Hamilton Spenser, or the annotated copies of Ulysses, or other such novelty items - the Signet Shakespeare's Sonnets to me doesn't read anywhere as well as the Booth, so I gave away my old book.

[nathank]

Does not knowing those things make your reading less enjoyable? Or is it just the expectation that you are "supposed" to do those things that's making you feel like you should do them? Does the book revolve around those words you don't know or can you get by without them? Would you still be able to read the book through and enjoy it without knowing what these words or allusions refer to?

For me, I want to ENJOY the book. If that means I need to look something up to help pull it all together, then I do. Otherwise I just enjoy the book for what I can get out of it and don't sweat the rest.

I really believe a great work should work on multiple levels and that there is no one "correct" reading of a book. If you read a book and enjoy it as just a story, great. If you want a crossword puzzle, that's fine too. Just remember to do what YOU enjoy, not what everyone else (a teacher perhaps) thinks you should do.

[mal4mac]

Does not knowing those things make your reading less enjoyable? Or is it just the expectation that you are "supposed" to do those things that's making you feel like you should do them? Does the book revolve around those words you don't know or can you get by without them? Would you still be able to read the book through and enjoy it without knowing what these words or allusions refer to?

Depends on the words. Try reading Dante's Inferno without knowing who Virgil is! But many editions err in the other direction -- too many notes. I try and look for one with just enough notes -- Look Inside really helps here, or looking through several editions in your favourite bookshop. For instance, a footnote saying "Virgil - most famous Latin poet" is likely to be enough to be going on with -- some editions feel the need to give a two page potted biography -- that'll definitely interrupt the flow... Note, I'm not knocking scholarly editions, scholars need them, but for the general reader less is often more...

[nathank]

Depends on the words. Try reading Dante's Inferno without knowing who Virgil is! But many editions err in the other direction -- too many notes. I try and look for one with just enough notes -- Look Inside really helps here, or looking through several editions in your favourite bookshop. For instance, a footnote saying "Virgil - most famous Latin poet" is likely to be enough to be going on with -- some editions feel the need to give a two page potted biography -- that'll definitely interrupt the flow... Note, I'm not knocking scholarly editions, scholars need them, but for the general reader less is often more...

Sounds reasonable to me. Sometimes the missing words really can make a difference. However, someone could still read the Inferno without knowing who Virgil was, or even that he was a real person :0 , and still enjoy it and get a lot out of it. But your point is reasonable enough, that some words/allusions do help to tie a work together and can be helpful to know about.

[dfloyd]

the hardest thing for me to do was to read Homer and Virgil. Using reference books, I finally got through The Iliad, The Odyssey, and The Aeneid. I wore out The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature the first time through these. Was it worth it? Undoubtedly it was. I can now read these and many other books without looking up allusions. The Iliad is like a Micky Spillane novel to me now. If you want to read and enjoy the beauty of literature, you must pay the price of admission. If everyone could pick up a classical work, or a work of Joyce, they wouldn't have the thrill of elitism that one gets from reading a complex work of literature.

[mal4mac]

Sounds reasonable to me. Sometimes the missing words really can make a difference. However, someone could still read the Inferno without knowing who Virgil was, or even that he was a real person :0 , and still enjoy it and get a lot out of it. But your point is reasonable enough, that some words/allusions do help to tie a work together and can be helpful to know about.

I'm reading the Divine Comedy at the moment and I would be really confused without having some idea who Virgil & Homer were. For instance Dante refers at one point to the five great poets, a note points out that he means the four greatest classical poets and himself. Dante also mentions "the greatest poet". I guessed Homer, which was a good enough guess, but a note pointed out it's ambiguous (Homer or Virgil).

I *could* battle through without the notes, but just a few notes can really enhance learning, reduce confusion, and actually increase flow rather than decrease it.

I also have the Oxford Companion to Classical Literature, and it's a great book in an emergency, but footnotes make the going a *lot* easier.