During a conversation with my friend recently, a question was deftly met with an analogy. I was so dazzled by the brilliance of the analogy, I convinced myself that the answer needed only unwrapping to reveal itself. I had an inkling of what the answer might have been but I chose to dwell, instead, on the beauty of the wrapping. What the answer was really, I can't say I know. But who cares anymore...

It has been my long-standing observation that literary devices such as thee devices often charm the reader into illusory understanding, an understanding that is really poorly disguised appreciation (rapture).

Aesthetic has always enjoyed primacy among the lay audience for it's simple ability to appeal immediately to one's sensibilities. When reading book, or watching a movie, or listening to a sppech we often forgive ambiguous content for unambiguous appeal. Of course, like everything else, I would be wrong to generalize here. But, I am sure you will agree that when discussing exalted works of writing you are more likely to discuss the form than the content and the rationale of its presentation. Take Shakespeare, for instance, an easy example of form over matter for the uninitiated (as most of us are). I have tried to very hard to find merit in his celebrated works, but I find none beyond the clever disguises for his thoughts that he alone knows. I don't understand his works, plain and simple and his distracting language far from helps me. Well, if his purpose was a fancy dress party of his imagination, I suppose I need look no further. But I am most certain behind those connotations lay some astounding insights, that unfortunately I will never be privy to.

Now one may argue that there are different nature of writing itself lends itself to interpretation and therefore exploitation. I heartily agree. It is only an observation that perhaps we have been rather swooning at the beauty of verse and not with the message. I do believe its time both writers and readers paid due homage to message, while dutifully acknowledging the messenger.

If you don't understand any of what I had to say, you will now understand perfectly will what I mean. This is a case in point. And I can't think of any analogy that can illustrate it as well. Can you?

-Swathi