The word symbol is used in a variety of ways throughout Thomas C. Foster’s, “Is That a Symbol?”  In the chapter he discusses not only the meaning of the word but the various interpretations that can accompany it.  On page 18 of the text Foster writes, “Here’s the problem with symbols: people expect them to mean something.  Not just any something, but one something in particular.”  In this usage Foster seems to foreshadow a certain discrepancy in the routine definition of a symbol.  He opens the door for a different meaning which is that in reality there can be multiple meanings.  He does this when he states in a sarcastic tone that people expect symbols to mean something, as if they need a concrete answer as to what the symbol represents.  He then presents the realistic subjective 

Further down on page 18 of the text, Foster continues to describe the nature of symbols when he writes, “Symbols, though, generally don’t work so neatly.”  This quote expands on the thought that symbols are not as concrete and obvious as many people see them to be.  I say this because of the fragment of the quote that tells how they, “don’t work so neatly.”  The reason that this part stuck out to me is because when something is considered neat then this generally translates to it being on the surface, however when something is messy then it takes time to recover, and many times that thing is not what it may seem to be because of its mysterious nature.  Using this theory, it can be translated that symbols that are neat would be easily understood while in reality symbols are more frequently complex and their meanings are more subjective, as opposed to an allegory which is the objective counterpart of the symbol which has only one meaning.  

On page 21 of the text, Foster brings a new aspect of the symbol into play when he says, “The problem of symbolic meaning is further compounded when we look at a number of writers emphasizing various, distinct elements for a given symbol.”  This brings an entirely new element into Foster’s depiction of the symbol.  This is that a symbol can have multiple meanings as opposed to the common belief that states that a symbol should have one primary purpose that is stand for one solitary idea.  Foster contradicts this claim when he states that writers factor many various elements into the symbol.  This style that writers have adopted adds more depth as well as more possibilities of the meaning of the given symbol.

The next quote that shapes Foster’s rant about the misinterpretation of symbols is found on page 23 of the text when Foster says, “The other problem with symbols is that many readers expect them to be objects and images rather than events.”  This adds an entirely new dimension to Foster’s point.  It is brought to the reader’s attention that when a symbol is mentioned it is generally assumed that it is an object or image and never believed to be an action or an event.  For example, everyone would notice the elephant as a symbol for the Republican party and the donkey as a symbol for the Democratic party, however no-one would ever assume that the actual actions of the candidates can also be interpreted as symbols repressing the party’s views and themes.

Foster continues to focus on different types of symbols that the scholar least suspects when he writes on page 23 that, “Action can be symbolic.”  This is yet another intriguing statement contributes to the general theme of Foster’s work.  This specific quote is powerful, because it makes a direct claim about how an action can represent much more than just the outcome.  An event that is very relatable to this point occurred during the black rights movement in 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to move to the back of the bus.  Although on its face it may not have seemed like an extraordinary act the symbolism behind the act ignited an entire decade of protest and fighting for equal rights by the African American community.  This event was a perfect example of how an action could act as a symbol; and often times a seemingly insignificant act has the capability of making an immense difference.

Foster then follows his general theme on page 23 when he supports his personal thesis with a real – life example.  He uses the literary device alliteration when he writes, “Robert Frost is probably the champion of the symbolic action, although his uses of it are so sly that resolutely literal readers can miss the symbolic level entirely.”  He also reinforces the previous idea that was discussed that is how symbols are often times not on the surface and are frequently complex when he said that resolute readers, or readers who are not analyzing the deeper possible meaning of the text, will miss the symbolic identity of the action.  Robert Frost uses the power of the symbol possibly better than any poet of his time.  His usage of the symbolic action is exceptionally evident in his poem, “The Road not Taken.”  In this poem Frost discusses two possible roads that a person can travel on.  One of the roads is noticeably worn with footprints while the other is unscathed and somewhat mysterious as if it were uncharted territory.  The symbolism is already clear how the roads symbolize different life paths, however possibly the most powerful as well as most quoted symbolic action in poetic history occurs when he wrote that he took the road less traveled and it made all the difference.

At the end of the piece Foster makes yet another insightful comment about the art of the not only creating a symbol, but reading and analyzing them.  He writes that, “The more you exercise the symbolic imagination, the better and quicker it works.”  Foster emphasizes that the skill of interpreting symbols in text is just like any other in the sense that it must be practiced and honed in order for it to discover the more intricate and hidden symbols.  The skill could also be compared to any physical muscle in one’s body.  If a person desires to make the muscle stronger they must push it to an extent that it is not comfortable with so that it will tear and regrow stronger.

During this stage of the work, Foster focuses on giving readers techniques on how to identify symbols through various processes that he and many other world – renowned poets have used.  He writes, “If we want to figure out what a symbol might mean, we have to use a variety of tools on it: questions, experience, preexisting knowledge.”  Too breakdown the quote even more Foster begins with questions.  When he says this he means question all the possible meanings that an image, word, or action could possibly have.  The next step as Foster says is experience.  He means by this is that context is everything when identifying a symbol and experiencing the tone and key events of the story are crucial to uncovering the symbols.  The final step is using preexisting knowledge.  This is when the reader makes the final connection between the symbol that occurred in the story and associates it with a readers own personal knowledge base in order to give it a real – life meaning.

Throughout the text Foster did an exemplary job of bringing the diversity of the symbol   to his readers and reminded them not to think about them as having a sole purpose or using only a tangible object to express their existence.  He not only gave the reader insight into how famous poets have embedded symbols into their works, but also gave the reader techniques that they could use to detect and dissect the meaning of the symbol more efficiently and at a higher rate. Symbols are extremely powerful tools in a writer’s repertoire and they are used in many ways that can help the writer further their particular view or thought without expressing it directly, and Foster reminds us to always be alert because they can make themselves present in a variety of ways that are often times not expected.  Word Count: 1374

 