An author is very careful to add depth to nearly every paragraph. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about. Writing a book isn't just jotting down some words: it's the careful study of developing character and expressing ideas by implication mixed with the proper narritive neccesities like foreshadowing. If you don't believe that, then consider this very popular golden rule for writing: "Show, don't tell". The golden rule of writing is to add hidden meaning and depth that the reader consiously or unconsiously picks up over the course of the book.
If I'm writing a memoir, I'm just gonna write down what I want. I'm not gonna waste time putting in stupid easter eggs I don't care about. But you're right for other genres :)
Maybe some people don't considering the development of character and expression of ideas to be 'hidden' meanings? Of course they're not stated outright, but I wonder if sometimes people use the phrase 'hidden meaning' to refer specifically to obscure meanings, or meanings which require a heavy amount of interpretation. (An obscure hidden meaning, to me, is like the statement "JK Rowling used the goblins who worked at the wizard bank to represent Jewish people." I heard someone heavily imply that once, but I never would have thought of it.)
I highly doubt that she did that. Goblins have a well established, and mythical, reputation as traders/barterers especially over precious objects as we see with the Philosopher's Stone. To go into the lore, goblins are a neutral party. They don't care about any particular faction or people, so they are more trustworthy than any ordinary human who can be bribed, tricked, etc. It may also be an extra piece of security because we know that the Polyjuice potion doesn't work on non-humans - which would prevent impersonation as Gringotts staff.
Honestly, it's ironically a racist, or at least shallow, look at Jews as they are comparing goblins to Jews solely because the goblins work at a bank which is a Jewish stereotype.
No, the problem is that by "meaning", teachers always mean some generic moral teachings or ideas contained within the story. But a good story doesn't give a shit about having to be anything more than entertainment, and cares more about utilizing its paragraphs to develop characters and the story, even if the story doesn't have hidden subtext. And yet, any fkn English course is that constant frantic search for subtext overriding everything in an attempt to squeeze out another stupid essay. Having written stuff myself, frankly the last thing I care about is how much techniques or how deep of a hidden implication on the real world it has. Cause no one came here for this, they came to read an interesting and well-established story.
You have a rather... unrealistic view of entertainment. There are only a few things that are solely built for entertainment. We call them cartoons. Adults generally don't find entertainment in such things because they intuitively know how lackluster it is. @vitklim you have no understanding of what makes an interesting and well-established story. You are saying that engineers don't care about designing things and that they only care about building it. An engineer is required to design something before it can be built, and an author is required to add depth before it can be enjoyed.
I'm not saying there can't be depth, i'm saying that not every story needs to be about an overarching philosophical idea. There is a difference. Because while you can always have as much subtext as you want, not every story needs to have a real-life implication, and trying to do that in every case will be a detriment to some stories. Is this viewpoint clear?
Yeah, sorry. But having just completed high school, I'm fed up with the English course in general. And given that I write myself sometimes, it gives perspective on just how ridiculous the search for hidden meaning is. Because before anything, any single scene needs to have a purpose in the story or build a character. Any underlying idea or theme comes later, and if there wasn't meant to be any, the search for them is senseless.
Speaking of which, why doesn;t the English course care about exploring how good characters are built, and how to properly pace the story? Seems like a much better use of your time than writing another essay about the same damn techniques you at this point hate.
Honestly, it's ironically a racist, or at least shallow, look at Jews as they are comparing goblins to Jews solely because the goblins work at a bank which is a Jewish stereotype.
Speaking of which, why doesn;t the English course care about exploring how good characters are built, and how to properly pace the story? Seems like a much better use of your time than writing another essay about the same damn techniques you at this point hate.