The weakness of the book is that the author doesn't really delve deeply enough into other important aspects such as Character development, Plot devices, structure of the novel among other things. He's thematic discussions, too, are at times somewhat shallow,

Nonetheless, it is a worthwhile book that certainly deserves to read.


He didn't just "make it all up"...   August 28, 2005
 21 out of 21 found this review helpful

If you're a voracious reader of novels or stories, but not an English Literature Major, and often find yourself thinking "there's more going on in this story, but I can't figure out what" then this book will provide a great starting point for expanding your reading. Foster takes the uninitiated on an easy to follow quest through literary symbology, allusion, and theory. It focuses almost exclusively on reading, not on writing (though one can vastly improve one's writing by becoming a better reader). And the intended audience is the beginner (though someone who has never read a novel might not fare too well).

Foster's ideas may strike some as "out there". He reads stories and symbols on a very mythological level. And this leads to his easy to misunderstand notion of "there's only one story". By this he doesn't mean "there's only one plot" or "all stories are the same story" but something more philosophical such as "all stories belong to and feed off of the one big story" (something ineffably akin to existence and history). Thus stories and symbols take on recognizable meanings over time. They get embedded in culture and interact with other stories. The best examples he discusses involve the Bible ("Christ figures", floods, etc), Shakespeare, Fairy Tales, and Greek Mythology. Stories have the ability to tap into these culturally embedded notions and heighten the meaning of a plot or a character. This only works because "we're all part of the same story" and, subsequently, because "there's only one story". Originality, then, becomes a measure of how well a story taps into this wellspring of meaning and exploits it for purposes of its own meaning.

Foster presents this idea of one story as the source of literary allusion. He gives numerous examples to support this theory with various symbols, including: quests, vampirism, eating, rain and snow, violence, flight, disease, the seasons, and geography. His approach isn't a tyrannical one, either. He doesn't, for instance, say "rain is ALWAYS cleansing!!" Foster accepts the notion that symbols only suggest meaning, they don't dictate it. Symbols have fluidity. Different people may interpret "snow" in different ways (though bad interpretations do exist, as Foster also recognizes). And irony also throws a wrench into the narrative machine.

Other topics that receive mention include politics and sex. Foster points out that many covert political stories exist (in defiance of the "don't put politics into your fiction!" dictum). He uses Dicken's "A Christmas Carol" to eludcidate this. As for sex, Foster finds symbolic literary sex far more satsifying than outright portrayals of intimacy in stories. Why? Because sexual intimacy typically carries symbolic meaning for a story. It carries the plot forward.

Foster's book most of all encourages the questioning of a story. Why is the main character short or tall? Why is the story set in winter rather than spring or summer? Why do references to birds keep appearing in a story? Such questions lead a reader down the path of reading a story in a more broad way. Which should heighten the experience of reading.

The book's final chapter presents a "test case" in the form of Katherine Mansfield's short story "The Garden Party". After reading the story (included as a whole), Foster asks the reader to consider some questions and return to the text. He then gives interpretations of some of his students and finally his own reading of the story. For those that have never taken a literature course, this chapter probably provides the most benefit, especially regarding the "tools" introduced in the preceding chapters. Here he puts theory to practice.

In the end, Foster claims that this book doesn't represent the only, or even necessarily the best, way to read and analyze a story. So those who already have a literary background may take issue with his approach. But for the beginner this book presents a possible new dimension for reading, understanding, and judging stories. It should help to dispell the notion that literary teachers and professors just "make it all up." Most of all, it should provide a good launching pad, not a landing pad, for further reading.


So-So   November 19, 2004
 20 out of 29 found this review helpful

Who in their right mind wants to read a book like a professor? It is said that a bumblebee only flies because he doesn't know that he can't (aerodynamically speaking). Likewise, professors are notorious for destroying good reads in what I would call a paralysis by analysis. That said, this book plays a role in educating those who choose to analyze literature, but spare me the superlatives. The book is not "engaging" or overtly "humorous," as the publishers would have you believe.

I must admit however, that the book did open my eyes to some fairly obvious elements of literature that I knew intuitively, but had never consciously applied or analyzed. For example, literature is full of symbolism, motifs, archetypes, heroism, etc. Most avid readers are aware of this, but reading about it and learning how to recognize it in some of its more subtle forms was enlightening. Foster also postulates that a writer is impacted by everything he/she reads or learns, as it is "impossible to write in a vacuum." I thought that was fairly obvious, but I suppose it was good to hear.

On the more negative side of things, I disliked Foster's attempts to be conversational. For some reason it just didn't come off. This book is about learning how to analyze and interpret literature, not trying to become my friend, or convince me that the author is a nice guy. I was also bothered by some of the repetition of examples. In a world replete with outstanding literature, Foster seems to be fixated on Toni Morrison. Call it personal, but I can't stand her writing. Also, if one more jokester tells me to practice to get to Carnegie Hall, I think I'll puke.



One Reader's Futile Quest   June 26, 2004
 15 out of 25 found this review helpful

I set out on my journey through this book with great trepidation and anticipation - trepidation that I would be forever lost in the mazes of literary notions heretofore only alluded to in the occasional book review, such that I might never be able to read fiction again for the crowds of overarching ideas that would envelop me. Anticipation that I would now be able to spot nuances that had previously flown right over my head like the birds and butterflies in the test case short story at the end of this book.

I needn't have worried my pretty little head. Foster belabors the obvious again and again throughout this book (Spring? Rebirth? Gasp!), while attempting to pepper it with humor that creaks like the bones of a Shakespearean ghost and evidently proud references to popular music from 30 years or more in the past that marks him as rather hopelessly out of date instead of with the coolness he seems to think it evinces. I had to keep referring to the title page to be absolutely certain he didn't write this book (more forgivebly) in 1974. It is to cringe.

This book was a waste of money, even at the used price.


The Game and How to Read It   December 29, 2006
 15 out of 18 found this review helpful

There comes a time in every honest conversation about literature
between students and professors when the students' willingness to
accept the academic way of looking at things fails. Foster, having
no doubt been on the receiving end of this skepticism, cites it:
"A moment occurs in this exchange between professor and student
when each of us adopts a look," Foster explains. "My look says,
'What, you don't get it?' Theirs says, 'We don't get it. And we
think you're making it up.'"

Fair enough. In fact, there's a legitimate question in the accusation.
Are they making it up? There are two answers to the question.

*Yes. Absolutely. Very few writers begin with symbols and go to
stories. We actually dream our stories or allow them to pop into
our heads while we're walking in the woods or the streets or
pumping the elipto-cycle at the gym. The layers of symbol that
Foster's talking about represent the creativity of readers, not
the creativity of writers.
We should, by the way, be grateful to them for making this stuff
up. Reading in a professorial way requires a great deal of attention.
It actually forces the reader to be aware, and awareness as you
probably know is the basic stuff of life. Read like a professor and
you will have a lot more fun with your reading. Guaranteed.

*The second answer is 'No'. No, they're not making it up. Writers
live in the world of symbols just like everybody else and
when a writer chooses to post (let's say) a dog at the entrance
to a dark lane, it's possible that that author is either
connecting with or just unconsciously replicating the Classical
image of Cerebus guarding the gates of Hell.

Most people intuitively understand both these answers, but
the trouble begins when we pay too much attention to writers'
intentions. What does Murakami mean when Kafka's mentally feeble
guide is able to talk to cats? Wrong question. We'll never
know what he meant (even if he tried to tell us).What we can
'know' is what it means to us and what pieces of the universal
gold mine of meaning it brings to the surface for our attention.

Now it seems like this kind of attention to literature could
be an interesting game to play-you get to participate in a
book, not just read it. In actual fact, most of the writing on
the topic is achingly, profoundly, set-the-house-on-fire-to-
escape-it dull. Gigantic egos praying to our Lady of the
Unwarranted Assumption and offering definitive answers where
what is needed are artful suggestions.

Foster's book is brilliant because he is appropriately humble
in the face of his topic. He seems like a fellow who enjoys
his reading, a helpful waiter who tells you which of tonight's
specials would really go with your favorite wine. He has
certainly made my reading more fun and I have no doubt that
he will do the same for you.


--Lynn Hoffman, author of THE NEW SHORT COURSE IN WINE and
the forthcoming novel bang BANG from Kunati Books.ISBN 9781601640005