Symbolism

[dfbreezy]

Recently, I've been having powerful ideas for certain elements that are symbolic to the stories i am writing. Sometimes they're as subtle as a name which is tied to a different meaning or to a historical event that directly pertains to the current events. Sometimes it's as big as whole scenarios that key in to the title of the story in a slightly distant way.

I want to know from my writing peers as to how to effectively use symbolism, how you yourselves use it if you do and how you perceive such usages when reading.

Naturally the general mentality is that "Why use symbolism when more than 90% of casual readers won't pick it up?". I have been battling with this notion. I want to gain some form of closure on the topic through the help of other writers. Thank you.

[Mammon]

Personally I don't really like relevant symbolism in a game (the kind you either have to get or which the writer will point out to you to ensure you'll get it), but I like nuanced symbolism and history in a game. If I'm reading a story or watching something and suddenly see a faint hint to something I know or where the plot is very subtlely hinting at something deeper, I can say 'Hey, that's fun or really deep, the story just got more interesting to me.', however once the story actively points it out to me it immediately loses all those interest points and usually even loses points on top of that. If only 10% of your readers pick up on your symbolism, then you've just made this a more interesting story for those 10%. And I may hope the other 90% like the story enough without that symbolism.

As a writer, I tend to add a lot of symbolism and deeper meanings to pretty much everything I do, but most of that just either gets written out or will not be seen by the audience. (I told the audience a few of these in the bonus room of my previous project, but I now realise I shouldn't have done that. Still a lot that I didn't explain or point out though.) It allows the audience to make their own interpretations or explanations for something. However, most of my symbolism is either because it kinda just went that way while going with the flow (best kind of symbolism) or because it helped me with avoiding a writer's block. When I hit a scene I can't write, I tend to look for some deep symbolic meaning, write that one down, select the fun parts and scrap all the rest to obliterate the symbolism.

But what does and doesn't count as symbolism is a really vague concept, which differs per person.

[chickandnugget]

I use symbolism pretty sparingly and when I do, always make sure it's subtle enough that it can either be picked up or not. A story should make sense even without any symbolic meaning; the symbolic aspect is just one facet of interpretation for a text.

I think using symbolism is tricky because it can very easily make a story sound amateurish, and shoving it down readers' throats feels obnoxious. But when used well, it can be very meaningful. The best types of symbolism to me are those that are incorporated into and interact with the rest of the story, and don't seem like it's just been placed there for its own sake.

The struggle is kind of similar to writing a mystery. You can't make the answer too easy because then it's not interesting. You can't make it too hard because then it seems random. It should be just enough for a reader to be capable of getting the answer on their own if they put all the clues together, and let them feel smart.

[Taranee]

I think the good use of symbolism will happen naturally when the writer really enjoys telling the story for the sake of itself, and doesn't only want to explain some real-world event to the readers. The story should be interesting and meaningful even for readers who don't understand the symbolism. The characters should be likable even for readers who don't notice that they might be stand-ins for real people or don't care a lot about what happens in the real world. Focus on telling the story, and don't stress too much about people not getting the symbolism. Those who like analyzing stories will probably get it even if it's a little cryptic, and those who prefer to take stories at face value would probably just get annoyed if the symbolism was too overt.

Some of the characters and events in the story I'm currently writing are symbolic, and some are meant to be interpreted in a literal fashion. I like to mix symbolic, real world related things with completely fictional things to give the story more depth and uniqueness and to somewhat obscure the symbolism. Some of my symbolic scenes are what-if scenarios about some pretty heavy and political topics. Some are somewhat like satire. I try to avoid making symbolic elements too preachy by making all characters flawed and relatable (although it's easier said than done). Nobody should be just a vessel for delivering a message. I also don't let the symbolic elements take the entire focus of the story, but instead I make them support and enhance the plot. If the symbolic parts become the main focus of the story, it might be better to play it straight.

Also I don't want to hammer the reader on the head with my symbolism. Pushing a message too much might make the reader become defensive and outright reject the message, just because it's annoying. For example, characters having "deep" symbolic monologues in scenes where it doesn't fit at all is much less effective than showing scenes that deliver the message in a subtle and logical way.

[Katy133]

I want to know from my writing peers as to how to effectively use symbolism, how you yourselves use it if you do and how you perceive such usages when reading.

I find it incredibly important. It needs to be done well, however. But if you look at works you like (and works you don't) and dissect how it uses symbolism well (or uses it badly), then you will develop a sense of style and learn what makes effective symbolism.

Naturally the general mentality is that "Why use symbolism when more than 90% of casual readers won't pick it up?". I have been battling with this notion. I want to gain some form of closure on the topic through the help of other writers. Thank you.

I believe that viewers who say that they either a) don't pick up symbolism, or b) say that they don't like symbolism, actually do pick up on symbolism. They just do so on a subconscious level.

We are conditioned to pick up on symbols. For example, colour: We see red as danger (stop signs) and blue as relaxing (the sky and water).

If symbolism is done poorly or too unsubtly, it tends to not go down well with the audience, coming off as too pretentious. Remember that a audience member should be able to view the entire work and still make sense of it, even if they never pick up on a single piece of symbolism (for an extreme example: You can still read Wells' "Animal Farm" and explain its plot from beginning to end without noting any of its symbolism). That's what makes it symbolism, and not a statement: Symbolism is up to interpretation. A statement is not.

Also remember that when you use symbolism, you are keeping things vague and up to interpretation. Since people have different lives, cultures, and experiences, they will come up with varying interpretations of your work.

For example, the Disney film "Zootopia" has been regarded as an allegory on racial prejudice, replacing people with animals. However, some viewers have made video essays that interpret the film as a metaphor for sexism, as well as LGBTQ tolerance. Children have described the film as being about "don't judge a book by its cover," and, "You can do anything if you put your mind to it." Note how even the children could come up with an interpretation of the metaphors and symbolism used in the film.

As someone who works in children's animation, I know that the designers for shows often have an amazing level of symbolism in their work. They look at things like colour, shape, and wording and use it to help tell their story or to convey an idea. Which is what symbolism is basically used for.

[Parataxis]

I think it all really depends on your definition of symbolism. By my own definition--an aspect of the story that uses cultural resonances provided by the audience to add meaning--I tend to generate quite a bit of symbolism organically just as a byproduct of how I construct stories. Early in the idea process I tend to focus on finding interesting and resonant terminology for the stuff going on in the world. For instance, in Shadow City where I wanted to invoke both the action oriented Magical Girl genre and also simultaneously the smooth callousness of Noir fiction, my main characters use "Virtues" to fight "Sins"--bringing in both a good vs evil vibe but also a very particular type of cultural baggage straight off the bat. Not only that though, but just the idea of assigning characters a specific virtue has a lot of weight. When you talk about a character losing her powers, it has a very different meaning when her magical weapon is named Faith. Same with Hope, or Courage, or Kindness--it gives magical events in the story an obvious character parallel. By the same token, the use of particular colors in a design often has symbolic weight--a person whose virtue is Justice dresses in black and white; the two people who use the same virtue have subtly similar color palettes; the magical city on the border between two dimensions is drawn in twilight colors. These aren't really what I would call subtle, but ultimately none of them are in your face, nor are they required to understand the story.

I think symbolism is at its most useful when it's added like seasoning at the end, to enhance the natural flavors of the story--though this just might be my opinion on the matter. External references can add a lot, but 90% of the time they come off as cute jokes in the end in a value neutral sort of way. I have a character named Luke Solomon who is both a hero who struggles with "the Dark side" and a child torn apart between conflicting loyalties, but neither of these symbolic resonances were intentional (He was sort of begrudgingly named Luke after 4 months of being known as "NotSam", and the name Solomon was actually transferred from another character) nor do they even really tell you anything important about his story. That's not to say that there won't be anyone who'll pick up on the similarities and have fun with it, but it ultimately feels sort of like a parlor trick.

Symbols more relevant to the story come naturally out of the way his actions spirals in on themselves. For instance, the fact that he is literally magically destroying himself in pursuit of the power he believes he needs to protect people delightfully mirrors the ways in which he has compromised his moral beliefs in pursuit of a security of mind. This is ultimately symbolized in his weapon: the literal sword he has chosen to live or die by (that is killing him). The treatment of this sword, and its symbolic relationship to his desire for revenge, rejection of powerlessness in a way that is ultimately making him weaker and also the main character's conflicting desires for revenge and control, is used multiple times to transition between different parts of their joint arc, culminating in him deciding to give the sword--and thus his suicidal quest--up at the "good" end of his arc.

I think that the most important thing for me though is that all of these things happen organically while I am writing and are at most strengthened after the fact. I think setting out to write a symbol can backfire majorly, but that as writers we use symbols all the time without meaning to and readers respond to them without even realizing it. Symbols are just such a varied and important part of our toolbox as writers

[RotGtIE]

Don't bother. Just have a quiet chuckle to yourself when your audience finds a hidden meaning where you never concealed any.

[nekobara]

If the ideas are so very powerful as you say, you may just have to face up to the fact that if it isn't included in your stories, you might just drown in the deep, dark abyss of regret. You will regret the greatness that could've been. Sure it is a wonderful thing when a reader discovers the hidden meaning behind an element in one of your masterpieces, but what about you? What about your well-being? What if your use of symbolism could create a greater bond between you and your child(your literary work) and cause it to grow into that much more of an extraordinary human being(literary creation)?

If you are more in touch with your ideas, your works-in-progress, your blooming flower buds of written beauty, and your connection is significantly more strong, you are more likely to touch hearts, grasp minds, take hold of the readers' very souls, and complete a masterpiece capable of taking over the world. If there are only a few who can spot the symbols, only a few who have light bulbs go off and gasp, "Oh!" in delightful recognition of what you have done, then they are the special chosen ones who will cherish your stories and worship your greatness. You must be thankful for those few, and you must follow your heart.

If your heart tells you that using symbolism is the way to go, then do not doubt it, writer of beauty, artist of tour de force, my radiant starshine. Follow the light(but don't die)!

Best wishes to you and all your precious children(your soon-to-be masterpieces).~

[Kuiper]

For an example, I'd like to compare two films that are similar in concept, but different in execution: District 9 and Avatar (the James Cameron film about the blue aliens, not the M. Night Syamalan film about the airbender). They're both similar in terms of premise (they're both sci-fi movies about aliens that are being relocated), and they have political themes, but the similarities mostly end there.

District 9's aliens (the prawns) are "ugly" in a lot of ways. They're bipedal bugs with facial tendrils (not all that dissimilar from some portrayals of Lovecraftian beasties, actually). They don't speak our language, they eat raw (sometimes rotting) meat, they live in a dilapidated shantytown, and many of them are literally living on piles of garbage. The prawns are not "pretty" in any sense of the word. But over the course of the film, we see the miserable lives that they're forced to lead, and we see how they experience pain and fear and concern, and how they can even exhibit moments of compassion. They are ugly and gross and alien both to the human characters and to the viewers, and yet over the course of the film, we come to sympathize with them.

Avatar takes the exact opposite approach. Where District 9 tries to make it's aliens look ugly and rough, Avatar tries to make its aliens beautiful and majestic. Avatar's Na'vi have facial features modeled after cats, and they're also intended to be sexy as well. When District 9 has it's moment where the alien says, "Come, human, let me show you my land," we get a tour of a dump filled with garbage. When Avatar has it's "let me show you my world, human" moment, it's gorgeous and dazzling and full of beauty and vivid colors and scenic vistas. It's not hard to sympathize with the Na'vi, which is exactly what the filmmakers intended.

There's also the fact that Avatar doesn't have the least bit of subtlety when it comes to painting its villains (and heroes). The Na'vi are a beautiful and flawless indigenous race that led perfect harmonious lives before the evil humans came and started ruining things. Meanwhile, the human company in Avatar is represented by two main villains, one of which is a corporate tie-wearing greed-head who constantly talks about how they need to get rid of the Na'vi in order to reap enormous profits by harvesting the planet's resources, and our other is a military guy who uses phrases like "shock and awe" to evoke the sort of interventionist military policy of the US during the 00's under George W. Bush. See how relevant and allegorical we're being? It's like a commentary on the modern military industrial complex!

Of these two films, I enjoyed District 9 immensely, while Avatar left a bad taste in my mouth. District 9 had political themes, but it was subtle about them, and it also didn't present them as this simple good vs evil thing where there was one or two human characters that were intended to be the manifestation of pure evil and villainy. Avatar, meanwhile, is incredibly one-note, with villains that are either motivated 100% by corporate greed or supremacist notions of manifest destiny. It feels like Avatar is really beating you over the head to say, "Look, these guys are really bad, okay?" I dislike this for several reasons. One, I feel like it insults my intelligence. (Though, I also feel like the movie insults my intelligence by calling the super rare planetary mineral "unobtainium.") Two, Avatar could have been a much more interesting story if the villains had been given even a slightly more convincing reason for what they were doing. If the motivations had been, "Look, we need to harvest this planet's resources because Earth is running out of resources, and the people back home are relying on us," that would have been way more interesting than the simple explanation of, "We need to commit this act of genocide so that we can show quarterly profits to keep our shareholders happy!"

Note, however, that Avatar was one of the most commercially successful films of all time, grossing over 2.5 billion dollars. (For comparison, District 9 made 210 million at the box office, quite a success given that it had a pretty modest budget compared to Avatar, but still only a fraction of James Cameron's commercial juggernaut.) So take that for what it's worth.


To provide a more specific example of how I think symbolism can be done wrong, suppose you're designing a character who is a selfish corporate greed-head. He's a stereotypical "fat cat." Hey, wouldn't it be fitting to make him literally fat? Well, maybe. But I bet there are literally thousands of people who thought the exact same thing when designing their version of that character, and honestly it gets really tired and predictable when you see an overweight character walk on screen and you know at a glance that they're either going to be a greedy villain or a comic relief character. If you get an idea like, "Hey, I'm going to make the conflict in my fantasy world an allegory for Israeli-Palestinian relations," be aware that you are far from being the first person to do so. That's not to say that you can't write that story, and in fact I'd actually probably enjoy a story that approached the topic in a respectful manner, but please don't shoe-horn in a reference just so you can yell to the audience and say, "Yeah, it's like current events!"

Like a lot of people have already expressed in this thread, I think symbolism is at its best when it's subtle, something in the background that can be missed or ignored by those who aren't familiar with it, or maybe even something that people will only pick up subconsciously without realizing it. Names can be a good way to do this, although how "subtle" a name comes across often depends on how common the name is. Naming an ambitious character "Alexander" as a reference to Alexander the Great is something could be done subtly, but a name like "Napoleon" is more likely to draw attention to itself.

[Mammon]

And don't forget the 'subtle' symbolism that the Na'vi are actually native Americans in a story that pretty much comes down to a sci-fi rehash of 'dances with wolves' or 'the last Mohejian(?)'. European colonists bad. Nature tribes good. It's the kind of symbolism that those 90% get, and that's more important to Hollywood because they're looking at the box office rather than the rating of the film. Who cares if the story ended with terribly stupid plot conveniences that everyone saw coming miles away and a scene that was almost directly ripped from Tarzan? Memorability only lends itself well for reboots that'll need the brand-recognition as far as those producers are concerned.

So yes, this is a very good example of your preferred symbolism is spoon-fed or subtle. Do you want to make a good game downloaded a 100 times or a mediocre game downloaded a 1000 times?'

And District 9, that is a good example of subtle symbolism for immigration and seggregation cruelty, hidden behind the idea of humanity suddenly being confronted by a race that can easily outcompete them in the long run. If they don't contain these quickly reproducing beings with the tech and strength to wipe us out, humanity may soon be gone. I was distracted by this same 'competition for humanity' thing that HunterxHunter had in their best arc.

[Sonomi]

Recently, I've been having powerful ideas for certain elements that are symbolic to the stories i am writing.
...
Naturally the general mentality is that "Why use symbolism when more than 90% of casual readers won't pick it up?". I have been battling with this notion.

You may be thinking about symbolism in too broad a sense. Let me explain what I mean by this...

Symbolism: the use of symbols to represent ideas or qualities.
Symbol: a thing that represents or stands for something else, especially a material object representing something abstract.

To me, symbolism is supposed to be used to convey meaning that the readers should either already be aware of or easily recognize (not always the case, but this is the idea). That understanding is how it can enhance your work. Yes, some writers do use more vague and sweeping symbols, but I personally prefer more lucid writing.

So...what message are you trying to get across with your story? You may have to ask yourself: If 90% of your audience does not pick up the ideas that you are trying to represent, have you truly expressed that message? If not, can you rewrite the story in a way that does?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that you probably want others to be able to comprehend your point in the end. If it's too vague or complex, a majority of your readers will miss out, and your narrative may not have the impact it should as a result. Good luck!

[rak0nt0ur]

I am a big fan of symbolism and use it in my writing often. I don't think that every reader necessarily, needs to pick up on it, but it is really exciting when they do. I also think it's important to think about what kind of people will be reading your story. Like other literature, some are in it just for fun, so as others have mentioned its important to make sure the narrative works even without someone noticing the symbolism - or alternatively, making the symbolism so clear that anyone can see it. Other readers might approach your work with a more critical mind and be delighted to find something symbolic.

[YossarianIII]

"Why use symbolism when more than 90% of casual readers won't pick it up?"

I believe that viewers who say that they either a) don't pick up symbolism, or b) say that they don't like symbolism, actually do pick up on symbolism. They just do so on a subconscious level.

Just wanted to add, I definitely agree more with this second quote than the first.

You don't have to be a genius to pick up on symbolism -- human brains are naturally just super good at recognizing patterns and symbols. Words themselves are just symbols that stand in for ideas.

Maybe less than 10% of viewers catch all the references to Fritz Lang in Star Wars, but I'd bet that nearly 100% of viewers understand the most basic symbolism on some subconscious level. I mean when Luke's adoptive parents die and he has to go off on his own, it's not just moving the plot forward -- it's a metaphor for the process of growing up and becoming your own person. Maybe that sounds a little English-major-y, but it's not really that complex. People say they like stories that are "relatable," and symbols are just a way of representing big ideas that all humans relate to.

It's worth noting that extremely popular stuff like Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, Fury Road, etc. has very deliberate symbolism that probably only 10% of the audience picks up on. You could argue that this obscure symbolism is "wasted" on casual audiences, but I'd argue that the 10% of readers who do get it are likely to be your most engaged audience (i.e., people who will become long-term fans and spread the word about your stuff.) I'd also argue that the 10% is more likely to include "tastemakers" like reviewers, editors, culture bloggers, etc.

[Kuiper]

For some great concrete examples of how films are often embedded with meaning that audiences pick up on subconciously (even if they don't consciously recognize it), check out some of Tony Zhou's videos on cinematic technique. For example, this analysis of a famous scene from Silence of the Lambs. It's pretty obvious that Hannibal is the character that is postured as more physically dominant and in control of the scene, and most people people will understand the visual language of the scene and internalize the power dynamic even if they're not aware of the cinematic techniques that are being used. They might not be able to watch that scene and make an observation like, "the shots focused on Hannibal had a lower camera angle than the ones focused on Clarice," but their inability to point these things out doesn't mean that they didn't "get" the scene.

Think of symbolism like other aesthetic properties. Most people will look at a character like Pixar's Wall-E and say, "That's cute." If you ask them to explain why Wall-E is a cute character, they might mention that he has big, round eyes, and small, almost human-like mannerisms that seem to express emotions like excitement or nervousness or relief, and they might also mention that his lack of speech, and lack of a bipedal (humanoid) frame make him "abstract" enough that he avoids the "uncanny valley" effect. But most people, if asked to explain why Wall-E is a cute character, will just shrug their shoulders and say, "I dunno. He just is." Does their inability to articulate the specific features of his cuteness in any way detract from the impact of those features? No, not at all, and in fact I'd argue that people's inability to articulate what makes Wall-E cute is a big part of what makes him cute. He has the "it". People just know the way that they feel about things, and don't always understand why thy have those feelings. So just because someone says, "I didn't notice any of the symbolism" doesn't mean that the symbolism didn't affect their enjoyment of a work in any way. In fact, sometimes that's the best kind of symbolism, because symbolism is often best when done with subtlety, and the nature of subtlety is that it often goes undetected.

[Mammon]

I don't think your examples are symbolism, Kuiper. You're describing instinctive emotions with a biological nature that developers can use to their advantage. While indeed being a good trick to improve something unconsciously, it can't really be called symbolism as it's nature-made rather than a human construction. I do think it's a good addition to the thread however to aid the developer in their arsenal of subconscious maipulation.

Wall-E 's eyes just like the current anime and a lot of advertisement go by a very simple rule: round is good. Humans seem to prefer circular shapes, especially at the eyes. While a human with giant round eyes is creepy, people have found ways to circumvent these limits by making the rest of the character also less human. This touches upon the instinctive urge to care for a baby, caused by evolution not really working out for these humans unable to care for themselves. In order to keep the parents taking care of the baby even after two months of sleep-deprived hell they need this stimulance to keep it alive and well fed even superceding their own well-being. As such, the round head and big eyes of a baby that adults don't have (as much) is considered 'cute' with the instinctive urge to protect and care for. Many models have such baby-face and puppies and kittens have so as well. It's an instinctive process taken advantage of.

The angles as well, Hannibal's lower angle makes the people feel like Hannibal is larger than them and thus dominant, while people on the same level as the camera are not. If the camera wouldn't be placed so that Tom Cruise seems like a normal-sized person we wouldn't be able to take him seriously as an action hero. And the Dutch angle (Don't ask me what we Dutch have to do with this), gives discomfort because we suddenly feel like the horizon has shifted while still having the feeling that we're standing straight, much like on ships.

These aren't symbolism though, but biological traits that a visual director uses to trick the human mind. Something like adding white doves flying up (freedom), circling crows (looming danger/death) or a dog in a 16-19th century painting (loyalty) is symbolism though because it's a message created by humans.