# Are you good at analyzing literature and poetry? N vs S?



## Tonimiko (Oct 16, 2011)

Back in high school...we were told to analyze a piece of literature or a poem. Most of the time...I end up missing the point completely. Other students end up with very interesting analyses, sometimes hitting the original point the author intended, sometimes coming up with their own worthy interpretations. But not me. Why? I once wrote a very deep short story filled with meaning, but yet, when it came to analyzing somebody else's work, I just miss the mark.

Anyone else like this? :sad:


----------



## aelium (Jan 13, 2013)

I'm pretty good at it. I love the complexity authors sometimes achieve with their symbolism.


----------



## TheProcrastinatingMaster (Jun 4, 2012)

Too limited, I'm not sure I was good or bad, just average. But I'll just vote good to satisfy my rising ego.


----------



## Nekomata (May 26, 2012)

I think I'm pretty bad at it. In fact, when I was in high school, I don't really think analyzing poetry kept my attention all that much.


----------



## KateMarie999 (Dec 20, 2011)

I'm not bad at analyzing literature. But I'm beyond terrible at analyzing poetry. I feel like all the creativity I possess doesn't cover that particular area of art and so I find poetry annoying and tiresome. Any poetry units in school made me want to pull my hair out in frustration. Especially if I have to write one.


----------



## Tetsonot (Nov 22, 2012)

I'm in the poetry unit right now. We've been doing an awful lot of analysis and I can never come up with anything. We took a practice quiz today (thankfully not graded) and I managed to answer that the poem was a sonnet and that there was an example of alliteration in it. Other than that, the rest of my paper was completely blank. The words didn't seem to have any cohesive meaning whatsoever. 

In short, I'm terrible at it and it makes me want to climb out the window and flee from the room.


----------



## Mammon (Jul 12, 2012)

I lack pride to not admit I suck balls at it. More than not it is random jibberish to me. All my life reading bored me. Especially things that didn't made sense, like poems. Basicly I would be doing something which bored me plus it didn't even make any sense :S

Eversince I was very young I was very physical. I wanted to touch stuff, get exhausted, get dirty, get faster, jump higher, get stronger, more agillity, get lost in role playing fantasies in PHYSICAL reality, play out pranks in the neighbourhood, do stuff that wasn't allowed and ofcourse, be awesome 
These were the things I excelled in and enjoyed doing more than anything. If I had to do something that wasn't fun, I would rebel. Why? Because it was fun! Especially if I could drag others along with me and win of the 'oppressors' lol

I have to add; people who could find hidden meaning in things fascinated me to no end. Still does actually. 
Like on TV (Destination Truth, I think?) how this dude went into a chruch with nice paintings all over and started naming potential meanings of all of them and how they relate to eachother or might mean this or that. While I would be in and out onto the next pretty looking thing!


----------



## soya (Jun 29, 2010)

I was always rather proud of the fact that I could skim a book or poem and easily extract its themes. Looking back, being a slacker is nothing to be proud of, but I guess a clever slacker has an edge over a duller one.

I feel like poetry is a langauge of its own. I have always been attracted to that kind of expressive writing style, but apparently many people find it to be little more than nonsense.

I never felt too arrogant that I seem to "get" that shit, because I have always been a horrible mathematician. Things even out.


----------



## Morpheus83 (Oct 17, 2008)

I'm not sure what it means to be 'good' at analyzing literature and poetry; anybody is able to have an opinion as long as they're able to justify their interpretation/s. Maybe it's more a matter of accumulated life experience, confidence and self-awareness to make 'sense' of any text on your own terms? IMO, 'making meaning' is not an end in itself -- but an evolving process as texts aren't closed entities. Sure -- as a child/'neophyte' you're 'supposed' to take everything at face value (including what you read from textbooks). But nothing is stopping you from 'revisiting', 'questioning' and eventually 'reinterpreting' anything you read once you acquire more knowledge and life experience.

I think the "author's intention" isn't too important nowadays: 'the' author is simply another 'reader' with an opinion just like anybody else (go read Roland Barthes' "Death of the Author" if you haven't already done so -- it's pretty enlightening!).

If I have 'problems' analyzing any piece of literature and poetry, it's generally because my interpretation doesn't accord with a teacher's views. That's about it. It's the *teacher* who often presumes that s/he 'knows' what an author 'really' intended. Who cares?


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

I'm good at analysing characters but overall I hate literature analysis and don't really 'get' it at all. Like...I never really 'clicked' with all the terminology. I think I may pick up on things without knowing what it's called so I can't properly write about it. It also often strikes me as a lot of snobbish rubbish just made up to sound 'deep' or 'profound' or 'intellectual'. 

Part of the issue, to me, is that it seems like to do literary analysis you have to remain aware that this is a book that you are reading, rather than getting lost in the world of the story - it feels like one must be slightly removed, and that's just not how I like to read. 

Generally, if you ask me about a book I will tell you whether or not I liked the characters, I'll tell you about the emotions going on in the book between characters or the mood it creates overall, I'll tell you what happened in it, I'll tell you that I liked the author's turn of phrase, I'll tell you about the setting the author created. 

I don't really care what the 'point' of a story was, I don't care about the social context in which it was written. I enjoy the mental pictures, I enjoy the characters, I enjoy the events, I enjoy a satisfying well tied up ending. So, that's what I focus on when I read. I might notice things that indicate an author's perspective on life but I sort of brush that aside and don't care whether I agree or not as long as I like the characters or setting. I don't generally look for a deeper meaning while reading, although there are certainly moments when something in a book will spark my thoughts about deeper things and I'll pause and contemplate a while. 

I like vivid descriptions and long complex sentenses, but I don't like things that seem too 'abstract'.


I could be totally wrong, but somehow it feeeeels to me like literature analysis, and especially poetry, are the realm of Ni - perhaps?


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

Literary analysis is not my forte. I frequently think one thing is happening when it's entirely another. Poetry is also not enjoyable for me. I like a good story, but I don't necessarily appreciate a lot of beautiful metaphors and flowery prose.


----------



## vikingbitch (Jul 17, 2012)

I started doing this in middle school and now it's second nature to me.


----------



## LordDarthMoominKirby (Nov 2, 2013)

Not to boast, but I really am goo at it.
Sry for poor grammar, writing on phone.


----------



## Judson Joist (Oct 25, 2013)

I'm so good at conceptualizing the abstract that I could probably make a living at it. Oftentimes, I'm able to predict the outcome of a story (especially movies), even if it's my first time experiencing it, due to my ability to intuitively tune in to the storyteller's symbolic clues. Sometimes I wonder if I, myself, am just a character in some grandmaster's story just like in 'In the Mouth of Madness'. But of course, I know that's crazy talk.

Also, no one can hide propaganda from me, no matter how subtle. So if there's a "hidden" political agenda in a story, I'll pick up on it.


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

I'm an N and I love analyzing literature


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I took a degree in this kind of analysis, though not literature so I suppose yes, I'm good at it and I love doing it. I honestly think reading meaning in this kind of way is mostly limited to an Ni understanding of the world.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Judson Joist said:


> I'm so good at conceptualizing the abstract that I could probably make a living at it. Oftentimes, I'm able to predict the outcome of a story (especially movies), even if it's my first time experiencing it, due to my ability to intuitively tune in to the storyteller's symbolic clues. Sometimes I wonder if I, myself, am just a character in some grandmaster's story just like in 'In the Mouth of Madness'. But of course, I know that's crazy talk.


Hm, I can predict the outcome of some stories but that's because a lot of them are similar.

When it comes to analyzing the meaning/symbolism, I can enjoy doing that but I don't know if I'm _good _at it. A lot of the time I end up reading other people's analysis instead of just coming up with my own first. =P It can be interesting to read other people's interpretation.

(Anyway, I'm probably an S.)


----------



## zazara (Nov 28, 2013)

I don't know exactly if I am good or not, but I do find it interesting.

Sometimes there are so many different meanings the words are trying to convey. I like to discover all the possibilities.


----------



## dulcinea (Aug 22, 2011)

I'm good at analyzing literature if I can empathize with any of the characters or with the poetry in any way. If I can't find myself empathizing with it, then it becomes a challenge.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

Heck, I was probably the only kid in sixth grade at church that could read the KJV Bible and understand what the text meant. Everyone else in my class (and some of the adults) had a "WTF" look on their faces.


----------

