"literal" clarity vs. symbolic clarity

[rowens]

I thought of some examples:

"Tyger tyger, burning bright"

A literal critique could be: You have already said Tyger once, so it looks like you are just saying it again to fit a rhythm. And why is the tiger burning? Is it burning from a rash, did someone cook it for too long? I get the sense that there is a story here but you are not telling me enough.

One difference in approaches to writing or speaking is that If words come from one's chattering internal dialog they will usually have a different quality than if the words come from the part of you that dreams. I'm not saying that that is a rule.

I brought up art that makes a point as the type of art that would invite a literal critique.

It would probably be different if you started with a point to make and then built some art around it, then if you had an image that moved you that was about a specific thing like a massacre that you then expressed in art. That is not a rule either.

Do you have a point to make? If you do, you've answered your questions and all you have to do is work.