Allusions

[JRoberts 0]

One of the "hallmarks" of great literature, supposedly, is its inclusion of many different allusions, especially to other "great" works from Classical literature, The Bible, and from Renaissance/Enlightenment literature. I was wondering what people thought about the practical or objective use of allusions in writing?

For example, I have read Moby Dick and found it to be extremely boring. The plot is horribly simple, but the "brilliance" of the novel lies in its inclusion of allusions to Classical and Biblical stories. I would call this an insufficient reason to label a work of art as "brilliant".

On the other hand, I see nothing wrong-in and of itself-with allusions in writing, and actually have found some allusions pretty entertaining.

What do you all think?

[ewv 0]

One of the "hallmarks" of great literature, supposedly, is its inclusion of many different allusions, especially to other "great" works from Classical literature, The Bible, and from Renaissance/Enlightenment literature. I was wondering what people thought about the practical or objective use of allusions in writing?

For example, I have read Moby Dick and found it to be extremely boring. The plot is horribly simple, but the "brilliance" of the novel lies in its inclusion of allusions to Classical and Biblical stories. I would call this an insufficient reason to label a work of art as "brilliant".

On the other hand, I see nothing wrong-in and of itself-with allusions in writing, and actually have found some allusions pretty entertaining.

What do you all think?

It is a minor issue in assessing literature, only one of many tools available for a writer to make or emphasize a point. There is a lot more to Moby Dick than literary allusions, but whether you find it boring for reasons of your own is another matter (think how the whales felt ).

[JRoberts 0]

It is a minor issue in assessing literature, only one of many tools available for a writer to make or emphasize a point.

Oh, I understand this. But I ask so not from the perspective of a reader, but as a writer. Why would a writer include allusions, and what value do they serve?

There is a lot more to Moby Dick than literary allusions, but whether you find it boring for reasons of your own is another matter (think how the whales felt ).

Actually, parts of Moby Dick I really enjoyed. The story was, at parts, very interesting, even though action wise, it was very simple. I have always admired this ability, though prefer Dostoevsky (you could write the action contained in Crime and Punishment probably into a medium-sized paragraph, but what went on behind the action is what forms his entire novel). But the best explanation I have ever heard of Moby Dick consists of this visual:

A teacher I had went up to the chalk board. He wrote "Call me Ishmael" at the top of the chalk-board, then immediately drew a line to the bottom. They drew this line for three chalk-boards, until they went back up and wrote "kills the whale". All of the bottom line he entitled, "Blubber".

[piz 0]

(think how the whales felt ).

Seems ironic to me that you of all FORUM members would say that.

[Free Capitalist 0]

I think in general, what people call 'great literature' is what massages their intellectual muscle. "He took this from that book, ohh..." "Indirectly he's referring to that other great book I read..." etc.

I personally think that's insufficient to make the literature great, but this is one hallmark by which many people judge it. If it makes them think, or create intellectual connections, it is supposedly made better by it.

[JRoberts 0]

I think in general, what people call 'great literature' is what massages their intellectual muscle. "He took this from that book, ohh..." "Indirectly he's referring to that other great book I read..." etc.

I personally think that's insufficient to make the literature great, but this is one hallmark by which many people judge it. If it makes them think, or create intellectual connections, it is supposedly made better by it.

This was my line of thinking for why allusions would not be a part of good writing.

However, on the other hand, is it possible that allusions could be "fictional foot-notes"? For example: Let's say that you were trying to describe a person who lived the under the Christian morality without being Christian. Could you say: "He loved speaking with others, even those considered to be the lowest lifeforms of the human social society, favoring the woman at the well over the proud tennis player." (I wrote this in a rush, don't judge! )

The "woman at the well" would be an allusion to the Samaritan Woman to whom Jesus spoke, even though it was "not customary" to speak to her. The proud tennis player, on the other hand, refers to the "proud" who will not "inherit the earth". Thus the Christian/Biblical allusions could serve as mental footnotes by drawing reference to something very familiar , saying more in one line than one could in a few paragraphs.

What do you guys think of this?

[Stussy88 0]

It is a minor issue in assessing literature, only one of many tools available for a writer to make or emphasize a point.

Oh, I understand this. But I ask so not from the perspective of a reader, but as a writer. Why would a writer include allusions, and what value do they serve?

There is a lot more to Moby Dick than literary allusions, but whether you find it boring for reasons of your own is another matter (think how the whales felt ).

Actually, parts of Moby Dick I really enjoyed. The story was, at parts, very interesting, even though action wise, it was very simple. I have always admired this ability, though prefer Dostoevsky (you could write the action contained in Crime and Punishment probably into a medium-sized paragraph, but what went on behind the action is what forms his entire novel). But the best explanation I have ever heard of Moby Dick consists of this visual:

A teacher I had went up to the chalk board. He wrote "Call me Ishmael" at the top of the chalk-board, then immediately drew a line to the bottom. They drew this line for three chalk-boards, until they went back up and wrote "kills the whale". All of the bottom line he entitled, "Blubber".

You are a batter man than me, I can't even get through "Crime and Punishment" on talking book when I'm stuck in congestion in the car ! This is the only novel I've ever stopped listening to, due to the sheer desperate monotony. You feel like screaming at the CD "Yes, I get it, you are poor, the situation is crappy, now can we please move on?"

but no, it's more and more and more "woe is me" stuff. I even listened to Northhanger Abbey which is tiresome in the extreme, but this was the only one ever to defeat me.

[ewv 0]

It is a minor issue in assessing literature, only one of many tools available for a writer to make or emphasize a point.

Oh, I understand this. But I ask so not from the perspective of a reader, but as a writer. Why would a writer include allusions, and what value do they serve?

It is not a matter of the perspective of a reader vs. writer; a book is written to be read. A literary allusion invokes a theme and a mood without having to hit the reader over the head with a literal description or providing an explicit construction to reproduce the same effect as the allusion. It is a relatively minor issue and doesn't save a bad book.

[PrimeMover 0]

One of the "hallmarks" of great literature, supposedly, is its inclusion of many different allusions, especially to other "great" works from Classical literature, The Bible, and from Renaissance/Enlightenment literature. I was wondering what people thought about the practical or objective use of allusions in writing?

For example, I have read Moby Dick and found it to be extremely boring. The plot is horribly simple, but the "brilliance" of the novel lies in its inclusion of allusions to Classical and Biblical stories. I would call this an insufficient reason to label a work of art as "brilliant".

On the other hand, I see nothing wrong-in and of itself-with allusions in writing, and actually have found some allusions pretty entertaining.

What do you all think?

If you can put a allusion in the right context, then I think that's a really good literary tool. But I do not think it should even be included on a list of the defining features of a great work of literature.