There should not be symbolism versus literality. They should co-exist. A hybrid.
We love the 'ages' thing.
The Steam Age, The Industrial Age, the Knowledge Age. We evolve as a species like this. We go, albeit consciously, for a new era, because it’s new. We flock like lemmings to an unnatural and extreme positioning. Led by a frenzied media or populist chant. A new and acceptable positioning. "I'm so literal." - "I'm truly symbolic." We focus on the extreme of it for a while before eventually moving off towards the next paradigm. Bored.
Literal? Symbolic? Where do you sit?
The symbolic is a more metaphoric, more representative idea. The literal is about a very clear and non-negotiable definition of something. Much less room for interpretation. The issue with this is plain to see.
On the case for the literal: Us humans can go a couple of ways – we either get all caught up when someone is literal and become very defensive – or we would accept it and give thanks for the clarity.
On the case for the symbolic: A purely symbolic position can engender frustration that our translation of someone's symbolism wasn’t in fact what we had expected. Or we might indeed use it deliberately to encourage a different perspective - because we have evoked the creative idea
If we had a somewhat more symbolic or hybrid age would might we develop a more conscious society, more able to accept wider and less definitive/dogmatic literality? If we had a more literal age would we be sure not to have any doubt about everything that was codified as such. I know where I would prefer to live.
When it comes to thinking and making big decisions for our species we are just the same.
In the west we manage things in three main ways. Politics, Media and Business. These are the three big systems we typically work within. You could add religion. They condition us to think either more literally when it suits them or more symbolically when it suits them. Think about it. Whatever suits the argument at the time. But crucially we would have to balance both if we were to get anywhere. There are merits to both. Armed with an acceptance of both, more sane and valuable outcomes would be achieved.
Symbolically Literal A perfect paradox?
The capability of symbolism to convey a deeper idea is hugely valuable. The vital importance of true definition and literality when and where required - all in balance - a supremely valuable tool for the 21st Century. Taking things literally is to see a one dimensional view of the thing. To add a symbolic dimension is to immeasurably broaden the story. Increasing the emotional bond and developing an energetic humanity for the thing.
To have a balance between symbolism and the literal is the holy grail. Get it?
No comments:
Post a Comment