/lit/ on poetry


Why do authors say things through symbols? Especially people who are good at using the English language, I mean, if they want to say something, if they actually want to convey a specific message, then why don´t they just say it plainly? When you use a symbol to convey a message then people are going to interpret in all kinds of ways. People aren´t going to be sure of what you mean. Seems rather impractical to me. I guess it would be understandable if they thought the message would take to long to say and people would get bored before hearing all of it and it´s possible to sum the message up with a symbol. But when you´ve got a whole book to say it, an entire fucking book, and you´re assuming people will read all of it, then the length of a message becomes irrelevant.


Heres how it works OP

Authors don’t really care about the symbols and they don’t set out to put the symbols in from the beginning they just throw them in to give their work the illusion of depth that isn’t really there.

Most authors who are not also philosophers don’t really say anything deep or important or profound with their symbols at all because they are much too dumb. Basically they want to pretend they are smart.

If they had anything real to say, they would just say it.


This is the reason I hate poetry. If they wanted to tell me something, they should use understandable language.

Of course, if they just want to play around with language etc., then poetry is fine. Just keep me out of it, don’t force me to read it.

Leave a Reply