How do complicated, ambiguous stories work? What role does literal interpretation play in a story laced in metaphor? They’re good questions to ask, and especially good questions to ask about io9-favorite Alex Garland’s Annihilation.
In a video essay about the very topic, Folding Ideas, aka Dan Olson, dives into the questions with gusto and critical clarity, exploring the limitations of literal plot readings in a story like this. It’s a topic that intersects with a lot of modern online film criticism, which is obsessed with “solving” films that are meant to be felt, and interpreted, as much as they are to be understood.
Olson’s work is smart and fun, and his videos are worth checking out if you need a good think this weekend. And let me know how you interpret Annihilation. I feel like trauma isn’t the only way of looking at that metaphor, particularly in the novel. Sound off!