Why does symbolism need to exist? Is there anything wrong with

the problem with books is that they say exactly what they say.

>>8719771

There's nothing wrong with it if you're a shitty writer.

File: le reddit.png (30KB, 296x406px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 296x406px

>>8719793
>it le has to have le deeper meaning xD

It is impossible not to use symbols.

There's nothing wrong with a book that can be taken at face value, but it doesn't mean that symbolism doesn't need to exist. What a fucking retarded thread.

Metaphor and symbolism can be used to take a specific situation and make it a universal one. That's what poetic language is for, really. You take a specific feeling at a specific time and translate it into something applicable to humanity on the whole.

>>8719873

Way to show your buttmad there, OP.

>>8719771
brainlet spotted

>>8719771
Convention. No.

>>8719771
No theres nothing wrong with it but is there anything wrong with a book that has something more than its face value? And doesn't a book that has greater meaning to be discerned from it deserve better recognition.

Another person traumatized by reading the Great Gatsby in school?

To be serious over-analysis is more of a problem than symbolism. I don't mean the book shouldn't be analyzed, but appreciating it at face value is fine.
I would say almost all books can be taken at face value and there's nothing wrong with that.