In 1963, Ray Bradbury sent this letter to explain symbolism in his work

Illustration for article titled In 1963, Ray Bradbury sent this letter to explain symbolism in his work

In 1963, science fiction writer Bruce McAllister was 16, taking high school English courses where he was told about a mysterious thing called "symbolism" in literature. Trying to get a grip on what his teacher was talking about, the enterprising McAllister wrote to 150 of the most famous writers of the day asking them about symbolism in their work. Surprisingly, nearly half of them answered, including Ayn Rand, Ralph Ellison, Isaac Asimov, John Updike, and Ray Bradbury.

Advertisement

Now McAllister has dug up their replies, scanned them, and put them online. Paris Review has a fascinating article about what the authors said, and what McAllister thinks about the project decades later. One interesting detail is that the science fiction authors were apparently the most lengthy and detailed in their replies.

According to Sarah Funke Butler in Paris Review:

Science-fiction writers-most notably Fritz Leiber, Lloyd Biggle Jr., Judith Merril, and A. J. Budrys-were the most expansive. Biggle sent a lengthy letter and then, nearly a year later, sent further thoughts. In the second letter, he advised McAllister to read an essay by Mary McCarthy, "Settling the Colonel's Hash," saying, "You will not want to do any kind of article on symbolism until you have read [this] … You will find much good material there, as well as an emphatic reinforcement for your viewpoint." (McCarthy sent the same advice herself.) Judith Merril's response is heavily mired in linguistics; she offers McAllister a chart to illustrate her semantic overview. . . . The question remains: Why did they answer? McAllister claims no credit, describing his survey form as "barely literate." He recalls that in his cover letter (no examples of which exist) he misused the word precocious-he meant presumptuous-and in hindsight he sees that he was both, though few writers seemed to mind. "The conclusion I came to was that nobody had asked them. New Criticism was about the scholars and the text; writers were cut out of the equation. Scholars would talk about symbolism in writing, but no one had asked the writers."

Advertisement

Here are Ray Bradbury's responses to McAllister (click images to expand).

Illustration for article titled In 1963, Ray Bradbury sent this letter to explain symbolism in his work
Illustration for article titled In 1963, Ray Bradbury sent this letter to explain symbolism in his work

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

My senior year AP English teacher had conversed over the... phone I think?... with Bradbury once to discuss F451 and also the movie. I think a lot of authors would be willing to discuss the symbolism in their books because they know what they wanted to say and often times would like to see what others can interpret from it.

Heck, in an interview we watched while reading Catch-22, Heller said people were coming forward with symbolism he never even noticed before, but admitted they were right in interpreting things that way.

Plus if a kid is asking and is also providing some form of his own musings then I think an author is more likely to respond. One, it shows the kid actually read and two, the kid isn't a presumptuous critic who thinks he/she knows everything. That way it's more likely to be a true conversation than an interview/gush session.