Literature differs from other writing in that its worth is not judged by its usefulness, but rather by the enjoyment we get out of it. But like a game which takes a while to learn, often the most enjoyable literary works are those which take a while to get into--so give them a chance. And don't be surprised if you are at times at a loss as to what's going on: remember how much kids need to know about baseball before they can understand the infield fly rule or a pitcher's ERA. I think I can guarantee that most of the "rules" of literature are easier to grasp than the balk rule. But don't expect to get it all on one quick reading. Most of us have to reread these things, occasionally several times.
Start with the obvious: what kind of work are you looking at? to what genre does it belong--fiction, poetry, drama, or essay? Often, recognizing the subgenre is useful, too; a poem may be a lyric, a narrative, a dramatic monologue (etc).
Next, does it restate some familiar truths ("what oft was thought, but ne'er so well expressed") or does it challenge your view of the world?
Is it intellectually stimulating and difficult, or easy to grasp and reassuring?
In plays and fiction especially, look for the conflict--no conflict, no drama.
Poetry often needs to be read aloud. See what happens to your understanding of the poem when you read it aloud to yourself or to a classmate or friend, or someone else reads it to you.
If it is a narrative, do you understand the plot--the action and sequence of events, and the way the story moves through exposition to conflict to climax and resolution? Is the plot the most important element in the work?
Who is the protagonist? Is there an antagonist? Who are the major characters, and why are they there--what functions do they serve? Are the characters realistic and three-dimensional, or two-dimensional "types"? How do you learn about the characters: from what they say, from their actions, or from what others say about them? Do these three approaches confirm each other, or is this where the dramatic conflict lies? Is the work essentially a character study?
How important is the setting? If it is specified, is it realistic? fantastic? How does it relate to the other elements of the work?
What is the story's, or poem's, point of view? (It is unusual for point of view to be important in drama.) First-person (I) or third-person (he or she)? All-knowing (omniscient) or restricted? Is there any reason to mistrust the narrator? Do you sense any great difference between the narrator's view of things and the author's?
Especially in poetry, consider the imagery: does the work appeal to or make use of your senses of sight, sound, touch, or smell? Is there one image or a pattern of imagery?
How important are figures of speech, and which ones are employed? Personification? Hyperbole? Understatement? Methods of analogy, like simile and metaphor?
Do allusions to other literary works, to myths, or to contemporary events seem especially important? If so, see if you can identify the allusions. What is the effect on you, after you understand them?
Does the writer seem to be employing symbols? If so, do you understand their significance? Again, what is the intended effect?
Finally, how does all this work toward the theme of the work? What is it about, and does the writer have a message to drive home? Very important: is the work straightforward and direct, or ironic?
There are very few right answers in literature--in fact, we might argue that great works are those which remain open, century after century, to new interpretations. This does
Send comments or suggestions to the author of this page, Glenn Everett.
geverett@utm.edu