Theory of Symbols Review of Related Theory

7

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter consists of two parts, namely: review of related theories and theoretical framework. The review of related theories contains the theory of symbols and the theory of formalist approach. Meanwhile, the theoretical framework presents the relationship of the theories discussed in the research problem and how the theories function in answering research problem.

A. Review of Related Theory

This subchapter includes the theory of symbols and the theory of formalist approach. Here, the theory of symbols, in succession, reveals the basic theories of symbols.

1. Theory of Symbols

According to Wellek and Warren in the Theory of Literature 1956, symbol is “a specific literary movement” which “appears in widely different contexts and very different purposes” p. 188. In literature, symbol is “an object which refers to another object but which demands attention also in its own right, as a presentation” p. 189. Similarly, Roberts and Jacobs 1987 in Fiction: An Introduction to Reading and Writing state that symbol is “...the thing may be understood to mean something beyond itself, something bigger than itself” p. 69. It is also explained that symbolism is “mode of literary expression that is designed PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI to extend meaning” p. 279. A symbol, according to Roberts and Jacobs 1987 connects “1 a specific thing with 2 ideas, values, persons, or ways of life, in a direct relationship that otherwise would not be apparent” p. 279. However, a symbol can also substitute “the elements being signified” p. 279. There are reasons why writers put certain details in the story as symbols instead of telling the readers straight out. According to Arp and Johnson 2009 in Perrine’s Literature: Structure, Sound, and Sense , a talented writer says “as much as possible as briefly as possible” p. 284 while a successful story does not waste anything and that each word and detail are chosen effectively. Symbol is one of the ways in creating successful stories: Three of many resources available to writers for achieving compression are symbol, allegory, and fantasy. To varying degrees, each of these techniques is a way to depart from the strict adherence to factual language and representation of the kind a journalist uses, for instance, in writing a newspaper story. By modifying, enhancing and at times even abandoning such a factual or realistic approach to storytelling, an author can increase the emotional force and resonance of a story, suggesting a much larger and richer meaning than might be achieved with a strictly realistic approach. But such narrative strategies also require close attention on the reader’s part. p. 284 Reaske and Knott 1988 explain that symbol is used when the writer “cannot convey” the meaning “in other ways”. They also state that the meaning of literary symbol is not “fixed” and depends on the “context” established by the writer p. 224. Here, Kennedy and Gioia 1999 advise, “One advantage of a symbol is that it is so compact, and yet so fully laden” p. 218. Its function, according to Ogden and Richards 1923 is to “help us and hinder us in reflecting on things” p. 9. While, in his book An Introduction to Fiction , Stanton 1965 explained that in literature, the function of symbols is to PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI help writers give the ideas and emotions “vividness of reality” when they seem “invisible” and “intangible” p. 31. In other words the purpose of symbols in literature is to enable readers to catch the writer’s meaning. He continues that based on how it is used, symbolism has three common effects which include: 1 emphasizing the significance of certain moment through a symbol that appears during that crucial moment; 2 warning the readers of “some constant element in the story’s world” through a symbol that is repeated several times; 3 defining and clarifying the theme of the story through a symbol that appears repeatedly in various contexts p. 31. Symbols, according to Roberts and Jacobs 1987, consist of two types. Symbols which are “generally or universally recognized, and authors referring to them rely on this common understanding” usually known as cultural or universal symbols. Meanwhile, “objects and descriptions” that “gain their symbolic meaning within the context of the specific work of fiction” and derived not from common historical, cultural, or religious ground may be called private, authorial, or contextual symbols p. 280. Roberts and Jacobs 1987 add that “a symbol is usually a person, thing, place, action, situation, or even thought” which has “its own reality and meaning and may function at the normal level of reality within a story” p. 279. Similarly, Arp and Johnson 2009 describe symbol may be an object, a person, a situation, an action, or some other elements in the story that may bring other meaning besides its literal meaning. Meanwhile, Kennedy and Gioia 1999 explain that symbols “...are likely to be perceptible objects” p. 218. Oftentimes, the symbols PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI are “inanimate objects”, characters which appear rarely “but are seen fleetingly and remain slightly mysterious”, “parts of a character’s body or an attribute”, and also “gesture with larger significance than usual” p. 218. Stanton 1965 reminds that symbols can be found in anything. Unfortunately, their existence is probably difficult to recognize. It is because symbols appear mostly as “plausible facts” and “express meanings for which no conventional symbols exist” p. 32. Breaking symbols, according to Stanton 1965, “can be a pleasure in itself, like solving a complex puzzle” but as soon as it is broken, the symbol will “add reality to the story by letting us perceive directly, through the senses, some ideas or attitude which are part of the experience the author describes” p. 33. According to Kennedy and Gioia 1999 certain detail cannot be considered as a symbol if “it points clearly and unmistakably toward some one meaning” p. 219. They also advise, “But an object, an act, or a character is surely symbolic...if, when we finish the story, we realize that it was that item...which led us to the author’s theme, the essential meaning” p. 219. Stanton 1965 also suggests some clues to recognize certain details as symbols. First, if certain detail is truly symbol, it will “repeat or resemble certain other details” that makes the detail itself conspicuous p. 32. Second, if certain details are obviously contrast to each other, it can also be a clue to symbolism. Third, symbols also appear through details which are linked together and forms certain pattern as long as “the facts of the story do not fully account for the pattern” p. 32. Fourth, when certain details are described more than they should be, it can also lead to PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI symbolism. Fifth, when details are made “unusual for no apparent reason” or when it is mentioned in the title, they may be considered as symbols p. 32. Likewise, Barnet, Berman, and Burto 1993 explain that writers help readers to feel the symbols used in the story “by emphasizing them—for instance, by describing them at some length, or by introducing them at times when they might not seem strictly necessary, or by calling attention to them repeatedly” p. 70. The clues above are just the initial step of interpreting symbols. The next step is to find what it symbolizes. Stanton 1965 has suggested some methods of interpreting symbols in literary works. It can be done by connecting the detail with its “familiar connotations” for example, “flowers suggest love, girls, and Nature” p. 32. Unfortunately, using connotations as a method can be misleading because certain details may suggest more than one meaning. Another way of interpreting symbol is “to compare the detail to its context” p. 32. However, comparing detail to its context is not enough. It is important for readers to see “how these contexts are related to one another” p. 32. Those all methods can be used to interpret symbols in literary works. However, the best method of interpreting symbols, according to him is still “close attention and thought” p. 32. In order to be able to recognize certain details as symbols and to find out the meanings, readers should be thorough. Those all methods must be supported by readers’ previous personal knowledge with the author’s works, and “knowledge about the plot, characters, and theme” p. 32. Roberts and Jacobs 1987 also suggest, “in determining whether a particular object or person in a story is a symbol, you need to make decisions based on your judgement of its total PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI signficance” p. 281. Here, readers can claim that certain object or person is symbolic as long as “its scope and sustained reference beyond itself” are shown p. 281. In interpreting symbols, Arp and Johnson 2009 suggest readers to be aware of some cautions including: 1 the story itself has to provide a clue that a detail should be taken symbolically; 2 the entire context of the story must support the meaning of a literary symbol; 3 the meaning of an item must be different from its literal meaning; 4 and a symbol may have more than one meaning. In recognizing and writing about symbols in literature, Kennedy and Gioia 1999 remind “avoid far-fetched interpretations” p. 242. They also remind that “not every image or event...is symbolic”p. 242. In recognizing symbols, they suggest the readers not to look for symbols because the symbols will reveal themselves as readers read or reread the story: An image that has acquired symbolic resonance in the course of a story will feel different to the reader. It has acquired enough associations to suggest something else. A genuine symbol has an emotional or intellectual power beyond its literal importance. You will recognize its power intuitively, even if you don’t initially understand why p. 242. It is very much important to avoid “vagueness” and subjectivity in writing about symbolism p. 242.

2. Theory of Formalist Approach