How to Read Literature Like a Professor: Chapter 4 Summary & Analysis

Foster claims that one of the delightful things about being an English professor is being able to recognize recurring characters and archetypes within literature, which he compares to “meeting old friends.” As a beginner reader, it can be hard to identify the connections between different texts, authors, characters, genres, and tropes. Although some people might be particularly gifted when it comes to the ability to find these connections and patterns, this ability mostly comes as a result of practice. Reading widely and often allows people to learn how to look for patterns within and between books.

The literary critic Northrop Frye claimed that literature always grows out of other literature; in a similar vein, Foster emphasizes that “there is no such thing as a wholly original work literature.” To demonstrate this point, Foster cites Tim O’Brien’s Going After Cacciato (1978), a novel about the Vietnam War which consists entirely of material borrowed from other sources. O’Brien uses multiple narrative frames to draw attention to this patchwork process of assembling a central story from many different fragments.

At one point, a character in Going After Cacciato falls down a hole in the road, an episode Foster links to Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1865). Meanwhile, the protagonist’s love interest, Sarkin Aung Wan, can be viewed as a Vietnamese version of Sacajawea. The fact that Sacajawea was a real historical figure and not a literary character is not important; history is, after all, also a story, and thus the connection between Sarkin Aung Wan and Sacajawea is part of a network of intertextuality.

Foster claims that the reason this network of intertextuality exists is because “there is only one story.” This universal story has always been happening all over the world, and thus connects works of literature from ancient epics to fairy tales to 20th century memoir to contemporary TV. All stories grow out of one another, crossing boundaries of genre as well as time and place.

Connections between stories can be explicit, but more often they are subtle and will only be detectable by the reader who is well-practiced in pattern recognition. As a result, many readers will fail to identify intertextual references within a literary work. There is nothing wrong with this, as almost all works of literature can be enjoyed in their own right. Identification of patterns and archetypes can thus be thought of as a “bonus.” Understanding intertextual gestures, parallels, and archetypes enriches our reading of a text, adding layers of meaning that make the narrative more vibrant and complex.

Contemporary writers in particular are known to deliberately play around with intertextuality, and the results can be difficult to untangle. Angela Carter’s novel Wise Children (1992) portrays a family of Shakespearean actors whose lives imitate, parallel, and at times pervert narratives from Shakespeare’s plays. Carter anticipates the reader’s reactions and expectations in order to subvert them and catch the reader by surprise. Crucially, Carter’s tricks are effective regardless of whether or not the reader is a Shakespeare buff.

This brings Foster back to the earlier point that recognizing intertextual features is not necessary to understanding and enjoying a book; rather, it is a “bonus” technique that will deepen and complicate the reader’s understanding of the book. Although finding intertextual references can be difficult at first, part of developing the ability to recognize these patterns consists of simply having the confidence of knowing that they are there. In this way, literature professors can help readers identify intertextual features without necessarily pointing them out directly.