Imagery Versus Symbolism
Changing significance as opposed to fixed meaning.
Literature analysis deals by and large with the examination of the interconnection between those
elements as posed within a narrative, their relation to the world, particular conventions tied to a
time frame and the readers understanding of all these various interconnected factors. In this the
question of imagery plays a central role as through the use of images a novel often conveys deeper
layers of meaning related to the large themes discussed within its pages.
Yet, while working on literary analysis, imagery often gets confused with the more popular
term ‘symbolism’. Although both ideas are closely related, they are by no means the same. Where
symbolism is based on the notion that an object, sign or symbol on its own embodies a particular
meaning; a rose being the symbol of love, the dove being one of peace and a physical deficiency
often referring to a character’s flawed character; imagery is based on the reoccurrence of a
particular object, sign or symbol and only in this reoccurrence does it create significance (importance
in meaning. In other words: the idea of imagery is based on meaning of a particular image based on
its relationship to other images used, whereas the idea of symbolism is based on the idea a
particular image has a fixed meaning, no further explanation required.
Therefore, imagery is often a more worthwhile concept when trying to understand and
analyse literature, because it moves past the ‘one image, one meaning’ basis, allowing for an
examination of the interplay between various images and their changing meaning. Seeing the
meaning of the images as being fluid it allows for the meaning of images to change, throughout a
singular narrative, but also between narratives; allowing for an exploration of those relationship and
derive meaning from them as well. The age old ‘is a blue door, not just a blue door’ discussion; which
is held at nauseum between teachers and students everywhere, has in this a very simple resolution;
the meaning of the blue door is based on the meaning of other images within the story; so at times it
is imbued with deeper meaning, and at times a blue door is just a freaking blue door.
Accepting this interpretation brings on, however, a different question: how is the relevance
or significance (or even validity) of a particular image determined, in light of the broader process of
analysing literature? The answer to this question is twofold. On the one hand it is largely a matter of
frequency; and on the other in which way a particular image relates to other elements, of both
fiction and style, within the chosen narrative. Both are of equal importance as they work together to
generate meaning and relevance in the broader context of the novel, play or film.
For example, taking yet another example from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet; when
Romeo spies upon Juliet from his hiding place in the garden right after the feast.
But soft, what light through yonder window breaks? // It is the east, and Juliet is the sun. //
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon, // Who is already sick and pale with grief //That
thou, her maid, art far more fair than she. // The brightness of her cheek would shame those
stars // As daylight doth a lamp; her eye in heaven // Would through the airy region stream
so bright // That birds would sing and think it were not night. (II.i.44-64)
The images used by Romeo to describe the scene, and Juliet, follow a constant juxtaposition of light
against dark. It is night and he observes her window. She is likened to the light when he calls out
“But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?”. The comparison is then continued when he
refers to her as ‘the sun’ and describing the ‘brightness of her cheek’. He goes as far as to say that
her presence would fool the animals to think it is day. The idea of Juliet as the sun, bringer of light
14
Changing significance as opposed to fixed meaning.
Literature analysis deals by and large with the examination of the interconnection between those
elements as posed within a narrative, their relation to the world, particular conventions tied to a
time frame and the readers understanding of all these various interconnected factors. In this the
question of imagery plays a central role as through the use of images a novel often conveys deeper
layers of meaning related to the large themes discussed within its pages.
Yet, while working on literary analysis, imagery often gets confused with the more popular
term ‘symbolism’. Although both ideas are closely related, they are by no means the same. Where
symbolism is based on the notion that an object, sign or symbol on its own embodies a particular
meaning; a rose being the symbol of love, the dove being one of peace and a physical deficiency
often referring to a character’s flawed character; imagery is based on the reoccurrence of a
particular object, sign or symbol and only in this reoccurrence does it create significance (importance
in meaning. In other words: the idea of imagery is based on meaning of a particular image based on
its relationship to other images used, whereas the idea of symbolism is based on the idea a
particular image has a fixed meaning, no further explanation required.
Therefore, imagery is often a more worthwhile concept when trying to understand and
analyse literature, because it moves past the ‘one image, one meaning’ basis, allowing for an
examination of the interplay between various images and their changing meaning. Seeing the
meaning of the images as being fluid it allows for the meaning of images to change, throughout a
singular narrative, but also between narratives; allowing for an exploration of those relationship and
derive meaning from them as well. The age old ‘is a blue door, not just a blue door’ discussion; which
is held at nauseum between teachers and students everywhere, has in this a very simple resolution;
the meaning of the blue door is based on the meaning of other images within the story; so at times it
is imbued with deeper meaning, and at times a blue door is just a freaking blue door.
Accepting this interpretation brings on, however, a different question: how is the relevance
or significance (or even validity) of a particular image determined, in light of the broader process of
analysing literature? The answer to this question is twofold. On the one hand it is largely a matter of
frequency; and on the other in which way a particular image relates to other elements, of both
fiction and style, within the chosen narrative. Both are of equal importance as they work together to
generate meaning and relevance in the broader context of the novel, play or film.
For example, taking yet another example from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet; when
Romeo spies upon Juliet from his hiding place in the garden right after the feast.
But soft, what light through yonder window breaks? // It is the east, and Juliet is the sun. //
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon, // Who is already sick and pale with grief //That
thou, her maid, art far more fair than she. // The brightness of her cheek would shame those
stars // As daylight doth a lamp; her eye in heaven // Would through the airy region stream
so bright // That birds would sing and think it were not night. (II.i.44-64)
The images used by Romeo to describe the scene, and Juliet, follow a constant juxtaposition of light
against dark. It is night and he observes her window. She is likened to the light when he calls out
“But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?”. The comparison is then continued when he
refers to her as ‘the sun’ and describing the ‘brightness of her cheek’. He goes as far as to say that
her presence would fool the animals to think it is day. The idea of Juliet as the sun, bringer of light
14
