Way back in 2010, my high school English teacher informed us that we were going to read and critically analyze one of Khaled Hosseini's celebrated works, “The Kite Runner” or “A Thousand Splendid Suns.” Which one was up to us.
After recovering from the shock of being allowed to choose which book I was to read, I still felt dismay at the prospect of scrutinizing novels I had previously read and enjoyed — because of course everyone knows that analyzing the symbolism, metaphors or plot of your favorite novel will render you unable to enjoy the act of reading.
Recently, I have started to read books with a more critical eye. I’ve read books and analyzed character development, plot, symbolism, the use of clichés, dialogue, setting, plot twists and writing style.
Taking an in-depth look at to what works in a novel and what doesn’t while finding a deeper meaning in the symbolism and figurative language allows a reader to have greater insight and appreciation for the storytelling. It not only allows readers to discover what kind of books they like or dislike, but also why they feel that way.
Instead of saying that I hate one book or another, I can now articulate why it is that I feel this way and discuss what books I believe to be better.
Maybe you can begin to see where it is only partially incorrect that analyzing books makes reading less enjoyable. I’ve recently crossed that thin line and stepped into the territory of being overly critical of books I enjoy. I still have “guilty pleasure” books (such as "The Spiderwick Chronicles"), but I can’t enjoy a lot of books because I’m constantly overanalyzing them.
Novels featuring the brooding, mysterious “bad boy” who meets the shy new girl? I've seen it many times. Child-with-magical-pet plot were they have to hide it from everyone? I wonder what could go wrong.
Is the book full of "Mary Sues" — more or less perfect female characters, usually the main ones, where everything works out perfectly for them and there are no serious repercussions for poor decisions — or the male equivalent, "Gary Stu?" Does the author overuse symbols or colors to describe a character that doesn’t lead to anything? Does that symbol really represent anything substantial at all?
Over the past year of digging a bit deeper into novels, I’ve slowly gravitated to books and authors with a more elegant or sophisticated writing style, such as G.R.R. Martin’s "A Song of Ice and Fire" series or the classic Agatha Christie novel, “And Then There Were None.”
Martin and Christie, among others, are far more creative than the Jodi Picoults and the James Pattersons of the fiction-writing world. They take risks with their stories. They don’t write cookie-cutter, mass-produced pulp novels, which make up the majority of the fiction market right now.
So as my family and friends continually attempt to tell me that maybe I just need to chill out a little, to turn my brain off and just enjoy the book. But then I think back to all of the those "teen paranormal romance" novels on the shelves of Barnes & Noble and wonder, “Why should I read the same story over and over when there are more creative books out there?”
Analyzing books can be fun and is a good way to gain a deeper appreciation for a story. If I hadn’t learned to dissect books and recognize elements of an interesting, well-written story, I would never have discovered some truly capital-G Great novels.
Reach the columnist at kcbennet@asu.edu or follow her at @Kasey_Bennett
