I had interminable arguments along these lines
throughout my education.

'Oh, by having the main character going back into the house, the author is illustrating a symbolic withdrawal from the world blah blah blah'

OR, JUST FUCKING POSSIBLY, THE AUTHOR WANTED THEIR FUCKING CHARACTER TO, YOU KNOW, GO BACK INTO THE FUCKING HOUSE?
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Thu 12 Nov 2009, 9:34, 2 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

*high fives*
exactly this
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Thu 12 Nov 2009, 9:35, Reply)

Ancient History is even worse
for unprovable wild speculation - the further back in time you go the worse it gets. Everything has a 'ritual significance' when it could perfectly well be simply a house or a campfire. 'It's all about appeasing the Gods'.

Is it really? And you're certain about that?


OR ARE YOU JUST WILDLY STABBING ABOUT IN THE DARK POSITING THEORIES THAT YOU CANNOT IN ANY WAY SUPPORT, YOU CUNTS?

What's worse is that once you publish this drivel and about 20 years goes by, it becomes *fact*.
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Thu 12 Nov 2009, 9:42, Reply)

You know writers actually do use these *ahem* devices though?
Although was it not John Lennon who said critics pick out random meanings from his songs that are nowhere near accurate.
( whenanimalsattackhumans clad in global hypercolour, Thu 12 Nov 2009, 9:50, Reply)

I fully accept that some people do
but not all, and I'm certain not as much as people think.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Thu 12 Nov 2009, 9:53, Reply)