I read Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and I didn't find a deeper meaning in the story. Am I dumb?

Submitted by -greek_user_06- t3_zzuspm in books

The other day I finished reading Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and it's safe to say that it has become one of my most favourite books. I really enjoyed the nonsensical nature of the book and I had so much fun while I was reading it. Not to mention that Lewis Carroll's writing was very clever! I can't write a full review about the book now, but I simply loved it.

While I was reading about Alice's adventures, for some reason, I didn't attempt to find a deeper meaning behind them. Sure, I understood that the book explored some themes like growing up, but other than that, I didn't worry myself about the hidden symbolisms. Does that make me dumb?

I enjoyed the book as it was: a bizarre, intriguing read, without an actual plot. I am sure that many readers interpreted the story differently. But I didn't try to analyze every situation and character and I just enjoyed the absurd nature of the novel.

I'd like to see your opinion about this matter and in case you approached the story differently, feel free to share your opinion about it.

159

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Gemmabeta t1_j2drtpz wrote

There is a term for this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_nonsense

Alice as much as there is supposed to be a "point" to the books, the main one seems to be riffing of the endless number of po-faced didactic moralistic poetry that Victorian children were force-fed as part of their education.

All of the poetry in the two books are nonsense parodies of those poems.

292

Slowky11 t1_j2fuq8w wrote

This is the correct answer, but the inception of Alice was to entertain the Liddell sisters, most affectionately, Alice Liddell. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Liddell

It sort of grossed me out that such an impacting text in children’s literature was created with the likely intention of grooming a child. Yet Carroll’s quirky and nonsensical methods worked and the imagination of Wonderland has lasted a century and a half.

26

Seismech t1_j2dz0sm wrote

I wonder if this remark of Tolkien's about The Lord of the Rings is relevant?

>I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history – true or feigned– with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.

110

praeqsheria t1_j2dpxg8 wrote

I don’t believe Alice in Wonderland really was written with much deeper meaning intended, it’s just a wild, entertaining children story that veers into absurdity.

I would say, if I were forced to look for some deeper interpretation, that it kind of subverts a lot of the expectations that people tended to have for children stories. Compare it to something like Stevenson’s Treasure Island, that has an easy-to-digest plot, lots of upfront, easy to understand symbolism, and all the different songs and poems and conversations work together thematically to build the same excited, romantic feeling in the reader. Everything which feels like it should be significant, is. At the end of the day, we all learn a valuable lesson about loyalty and greed and bravery and stuff.

Then you have Alice and Through the Looking Glass, in which the plot just abruptly does whatever it wants, the characters confidently use a lot of clever sounding symbolism and idioms but it’s all intentionally made-up and nonsensical, and there isn’t really any rhyme or reason to what is significant and what isn’t, it’s just a fun chaotic ride.

101

Jay_Louis t1_j2etwpn wrote

Whether or not an author intends a specific meaning, that does not mean that the meaning isn't there. Roland Barthes discussed this in the 1960s. We always assume author/artist intent is the only proper way to understand something. That discounts how meaning is generated contextually - by the way in which the text is received and reflects the cultural context in which it is produced and consumed. Many artists can barely verbalize why they make art. Relying on them to tell you how to understand something is restrictive and simplistic.

14

Kataphractoi t1_j2frxyg wrote

> I don’t believe Alice in Wonderland really was written with much deeper meaning intended, it’s just a wild, entertaining children story that veers into absurdity.

We can thank it for inventing the concept of imaginary numbers, so it has that going for it.

5

NeverLickATazer t1_j2dqfdk wrote

You enjoyed the book as it was meant to be enjoyed. That does not make you dumb. Finding deeper meanings is something you hunt for on multiple readings. Enjoy the stories, and only find deeper meanings if you enjoy doing so.

71

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2drxoy wrote

I completely agree with you. I thought that I missed something but at the end of day, everyone can interpret anything however they feel like.

13

NeverLickATazer t1_j2dt3cw wrote

Many deeper meanings people find in literature are forced at are not what the author meant to have in.

19

sophiewritesuk t1_j2evxr0 wrote

I can vouch for this. I study English Literature and Creative Writing at degree level and my latest piece was praised for including military symbolism which hinted at the conclusion of the story. I did no such thing, it was entirely coincidence. But thanks for the high marks!

9

PotterAndPitties t1_j2dtcn1 wrote

Normalize enjoying things just to enjoy them and not always having to analyze or find deeper meaning.

32

throwaway-clonewars t1_j2fbqkz wrote

Honestly, I read this way- I HATE when I'm asked to take things apart for "deeper meaning" and plan to write very straightforward with no hidden meaning because of it. (As in whatever I put is just cause I think it'll be cool for the story and not some fancy meaningful thing to analyze- like red curtains are red because i like red)

11

ThisVicariousLife t1_j2fin2m wrote

I can tell you, though, as an English teacher, that when you just read for reading’s sake, you often do miss the very clever and wildly entertaining deeper meanings and Easter eggs built into classic literature! But admittedly, some texts are beaten to death and people are truly reaching past the intended meaning because, yes, sometimes a red curtain is just a red curtain!! But there are so many books I love teaching because I know when I read them in school, I had no clue that the author buried this little nugget in there because of the time period and inability to be blunt about certain subjects, so they’d obfuscate! The Great Gatsby!! The Yellow Wallpaper! Of Mice and Men! The Hour! The Lottery! The Tell-Tale Heart! So many greats that deserve a deeper analysis or else we miss some really important aspects of them.

11

throwaway-clonewars t1_j2fnkcl wrote

I suppose, though I usually don't partake in classics (unless scifi like Frankenstein or fantasy-esque like Dracula) because they don't peek my interest too much.

I think its mainly for me, I'm surface level when it comes to reading because I want an escape and only have my mind working on creative ideas for other works. I've never really felt drawn for deeper meaning or connection to like the outside world or philosophies or such and deep analysis to get to those always felt like homework to me. Something which is a minor stressor for me because of high absence as a child in school, I would end up with piles of homework when I got back.

I mean, I do enjoy researching (specific topics) but breaking things down was never one of the activities I enjoyed, even pre-absence issue

3

ThisVicariousLife t1_j2ftm5z wrote

Yes, I can definitely see the aversion to it. And most students carry that aversion their entire lives, which breaks my heart. If I could read a book with my students without making them think more deeply, I would (except for the fun ones with Easter eggs and such), but all of this analysis for analysis’s sake aggravates me, too, and why I also got away from reading for many years. I only started reading for pleasure again about a decade ago. Being forced to read something sucks the fun out of reading, which is why I hate that we do it in school, but I understand why we do it so it’s a dichotomy for me. However, you don’t even need to do a deep analysis to see some of the hidden gems that are in literature (not even classics, but I read Stephen King and he has hidden gems everywhere in his books!). I read easy books when I just want to take my mind off something but when I want a good story or something to really think about, I go with more complex material.

3

PotterAndPitties t1_j2fkjyw wrote

True. And some books definitely are better that way. I think my issue was the Profs tried to push political views into the analysis.

2

ThisVicariousLife t1_j2fkxk1 wrote

Oh, yeah… I guess that can depend on the professor. My literature professors were pretty awesome! And so were my high school English teachers. I enjoyed them… probably why I do what I do now.

3

PotterAndPitties t1_j2fcez8 wrote

University English classes almost broke my love of reading. They would break down literature and offer some ridiculous viewpoints on it.

7

throwaway-clonewars t1_j2ff58a wrote

I HATED those classes. Thankfully the books we analyzed weren't ones I acutely liked to read so it didn't have a strong effect. They were mainly nonfiction or "realistic fiction" and I'm mainly a fantasy and scifi reader

6

PotterAndPitties t1_j2finjv wrote

Not a book but I had am English prof who claimed Top Gun was a "homosexual fantasy" movie and I checked out for the rest of the semester.

4

ThisVicariousLife t1_j2fiu6k wrote

Oops, I think I meant to reply to your comment but I replied to the tier above yours.

1

Kinbote808 t1_j2e92bq wrote

The main point of the book is not the hidden meanings of it, whether intended or unintended, and the most sure fire way to ruin a good book is to view it through the lens of other people’s bullshit.

15

Passname357 t1_j2etbny wrote

I like seeing other people’s analyses after reading but not during. Sometimes things stick out to me that I think are fun, but I think it’s stupid to let it be the sole focus while reading. David Foster Wallace talked about when writers talk about their work later on a lot of it is Monday morning quarter backing; the author is trying to have good answers (and they tend to be valid) but usually the process of writing is just more “does this feel real or right” than anything. I think literary analysis should be the same way. Read it and analyze later. Leaf by leaf on YouTube says that when you’re reading and analyzing at the same time it’s like being a bad partner in a conversation. Talk when it’s your turn to talk sure, but listen when it’s your turn to listen. Reading is the listening end. Don’t talk over the author.

7

geaux88 t1_j2dx3n9 wrote

The "deeper" meaning was Caroll's way to ridicule the direction mathematics was headed. There were alot or new theories that relied on untestable and unobservable reality. He thought this trend, one using ungrounded references, was driving mathematics into absurdity instead of progressing it.

10

CourtneyCuriosity t1_j2f10hd wrote

I was coming here to say this. Charles Dodgson was a maths professor who was probably in love with his 12 year old neighbour, Alice, for whom he wrote the stories. The whole nonsense of things changing sizes and stuff was thought to be a bit of piss-taking at some of the "wild new math theories" happening. But also, yeah....sorta inappropriate feelings to young Alice, probably.

That being said, it's one of my all-time favourite books and I'm a big believer in just enjoying it for what it is - a fun, wild, silly adventure.

6

geaux88 t1_j2frltl wrote

Wow, I was unaware of the Alice-Neighbor thing. Adds a new layer to the story now.

2

trisdacunha t1_j2dzkc4 wrote

It’s a nonsense book so, no, you read it just fine 😂

10

Badroadrash101 t1_j2e7h5y wrote

Always thought the story was a work of satire directed towards the monarchy and the attitudes of people in the Victorian age.

9

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2fput9 wrote

Oh, yes! I could totally see that, especially with the Queen and the King of hearts!

3

SirZacharia t1_j2exxbp wrote

I would invite you, if you like, to take moments from the story and turn them into relevant allegory to either your life or society at large.

Like take the Jabberwocky, you could think of it as the ideal hero, someone who takes the magic sword and slays the beast, but based on the nonsense you can figure out that all heroic stories of vanquishing monsters are quite nonsensical as well. Take the glut of superhero movies we have, they are in large part propaganda to get us to root for powerful individuals against a monstrous other. This kind of thinking can be incredibly harmful if we don’t pay attention to the important fact that superheroes are nonsense.

Idk that Carrol intended for that or not but it doesn’t really matter what his intentions are. You can use literature however you like.

8

jjburroughs t1_j2dyegd wrote

You are not dumb. You read for pleasure, not for study. In studying a work of literature, you read first for yourself and then read multiple times for others.

7

overnyte23 t1_j2e4qll wrote

You’re not dumb at all. You enjoyed the book the way YOU wanted to enjoy it. Books can be interpreted so many ways to different people. Some like to just enjoy the story on a surface level, and that’s totally valid!

7

Anacalagon t1_j2eswb4 wrote

I think it is a Rorschach Blot of a Book. You see what you are looking for. For me , It talks of how logic can be a flawed tool for problem solving. Sometimes it is just better to wing it and have a good time.

5

Saymypieceanddone t1_j2f4wtj wrote

I think you do have to look at the story through one of the lenses of literary criticism in order to find deeper meaning. In many ways, it is just a funny story to tell children, and it's more than fine to leave it at that. Personally, I think a lot of "meaning" found in it comes from viewing it in it's historical context; the narrative completely subverts the style of children's stories at the time. There's no moral truth demonstrated or revealed, no lesson to be learned, no characters who function as paragons for admirable/detestable qualities, and so forth. Historically, it's a marked departure and new direction for children's literature, and derives importance from that. Past that, Alice in Wonderland (to me, anyway), does an incredible job of reflecting the absurdity of real life in a way that literature often doesn't. Who are the heroes/villains and why is it so hard to tell? Why does it seem that no matter how hard I try, I'm still stuck where I am? Why did I decide to chase this rabbit in the first place, and where is it taking me? These sorts of questions have real-life parallels, and when taken in that regard, the story becomes a fantasy retelling of real life.

5

mellohands t1_j2fbs2k wrote

It was written by a mathematician for a little girl.

5

joetophat t1_j2e81ql wrote

Nothing wrong with simply enjoying a story. I've grown to despise literary snobs who look down at folks for not understanding deeper meanings in certain books. That turns so many people off from reading. Reading a book should be for pleasure not for study.

In the case of Alice in Wonderland, it's just meant to be a crazy adventure. If you're interesting in delving deeper into the story, try reading the Annotated Alice in Wonderland by Martin Gardner. It talks about the history of the book and what influenced Lewis Carroll, like how most if not al the poems were actually parodies of popular poems of the day. It's just that most have been forgotten.

4

DeborahJeanne1 t1_j2f56kb wrote

I’m on the Stephen King sub, and initially I felt inadequate because I seemed to be missing the “deeper meaning” of his books. People would write about what “the book really means” and I would think, “they got all that out of this book?” I was perplexed.

Then I decided if they want to look for these deeper meanings, more power to them. I don’t read a lot of fiction, but I don’t try to analyze them either. I read superficially - for entertainment- and no longer apologize for it.

3

CC-5576-03 t1_j2em02b wrote

It's a children's story. Then it became a classic children's story and literature professors started falling over themselves to infer a deeper meaning into it.

3

ashoka_akira t1_j2etvb1 wrote

My favourite line is when Alice comments sometimes she feels like she has to run as fast as she can just stay in place.

3

PartyPorpoise t1_j2fjxi0 wrote

Nah. Sometimes a book doesn't have an intended deeper meaning. (though I maintain that you can always find some kind of meaning, some reflection of what the author believes or feels even if they're not actively trying to send a message)

But even for the books that do, finding that meaning can take not only a certain mindset, it often requires a certain set of knowledge. What do you know about the time period and culture that Alice was written in? What do certain aspects of the book mean within the context of that time and place? How does it compare to other children's books from that time? What does it do differently from those books? What was the author's life like and how might that have influenced the book?

3

Bored_N_Wired69 t1_j2eas5d wrote

You can enjoy a book without trying or having to find a deeper meaning. A good book can just be a good book

2

matthias-helvar t1_j2ecmq2 wrote

Alice was originally written specifically for children that the author knew, and much of the humor in the book is absurdist / designed to be funny and nonsensical, as well as specific inside references only the girls and their family would understand. There’s a few editions annotated with explanations of the jokes and it makes it much more enjoyable to read, IMO

2

Pudding_Hero t1_j2ef9h3 wrote

It’s satirical of upper English culture so it’s basically just taking a piss at how serious adults take themselves. They try so hard to be proper and follow social etiquette but it’s all nonsense despite how somber they get sometimes. I think my critique in understanding with your point was that the book just “ends” all of a sudden and there’s not necessarily a meaningful conclusion or narrative knot that ties itself at the end.

2

darrelc5 t1_j2eo8gw wrote

"it's a story about a guy and a fish. Period." - Ernest Hemingway

2

PrettyInWeed t1_j2f042j wrote

Sabian.org has wonderful commentary that gives a deeper understanding of the lessons in Alice in Wonderland. It’s a fantastic read.

2

DeborahJeanne1 t1_j2f3ogc wrote

No, you’re not dumb. I read for fun, and I read superficially. Stephen King is my favorite author. I have every book he published. I’m also on a SK sub on Reddit. I read people’s reviews about his books, and I think to myself, “They got all that outta that book??

I used to worry about it, but not anymore. If they want to pick apart his books looking for hidden meanings, then by all means, go ahead. I read for pleasure and I will continue to do so. So the only thing I get out of it is nothing but pure entertainment.

I don’t try to analyze, or interpret, I just superficially read. If you’re reading for yourself for fun, don’t worry about deeper meanings.

2

sthedragon t1_j2f5q9w wrote

Not every book has A Deeper Meaning™️ sitting behind the text—this is a simplification employed by high school English classes to make literary analysis easier. Some books (IMO the best books) have no one meaning, and instead allow the reader to freely interpret the story as they wish, and therefore gain/take away different things.

Alice is one of my favorite books—what I took away from it is a sentiment about storytelling and childhood. Another person could read it and find something completely different.

2

Spamel334347 t1_j2f6kmd wrote

I loved this book so much, it’s also one of my favourites. I haven’t even thought about a deeper meaning, I just like the crazy, all over the place plot. You should try some of his nonsense poetry, like Phantasmagoria or The Hunting of the Snark.

2

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2fpgnl wrote

His poetry sounds interesting, I'll definitely check it out. And I agree with you, I loved the nonsensical plot of the book and it was really charming.

1

monsterosaleviosa t1_j2f72w5 wrote

The deeper meaning was that Carroll wanted to spend more time obsessing over a little girl that he painted nude portraits of.

2

ihavenoidea1001 t1_j2frfi8 wrote

Wtf? Do you have any source for this? Never heard of anything of the sorts before...

1

prjindigo t1_j2f7cjr wrote

most people who do are so self-important they can't see beyond their own drug addictions

simple parable: "one's own self be true" don't let the drugs change YOU

2

DrunkOnRedCordial t1_j2fkvxr wrote

I don't believe there was a deeper meaning. There were superficial private jokes, based on the children's names being worked into the story as animals (real life Alice's sisters). But basically, it's a witty nonsense story invented to amuse a group of children on a day out and then it was written down and expanded later.

2

Kataphractoi t1_j2fru3e wrote

One can enjoy a book or story, whether a classic or not, and not need to find some deeper meaning in it or some revelation of the human experience. There's nothing wrong with just enjoying a story.

2

Standard-Counter-422 t1_j2ee700 wrote

When I read it for a Victorian fiction class in uni, we talked a lot about the motif of scientific advancement and Darwin, and how Victorian society was struggling to come to terms with some of those ideas. But never in a million years would I have picked that up on my own.

1

yumi_has_sweetrolls t1_j2efj0s wrote

Literature is to be enjoyed, not always to be studied. Stories such as Alice's are a pleasure to read for their peculiar yet still unique demonstration. I remember reading it for the first time and just enjoying imagining the incidents and creating wonderland as I have interpreted it in my head. You might be able to interpret a meaning to the story if you revisit it again, but it's totally fine if you don't reach a conclusion. Just read for joy when you need or want to. It's always a good boost for imagination ☁️

1

TheKinginLemonyellow t1_j2egf11 wrote

There's not really a "point" to Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, although I have read an annotated copy with some interesting facts about it: apparently the story was partly inspired by Lewis Carroll's hatred of modern algebra, which was new at the time. Most of the stuff about Alice changing size was him poking fun at how ridiculous the idea of things like imaginary numbers, multiplying negative numbers, etc.

1

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2fr41l wrote

This is so funny to hear! I could totally see that with all these maths references throughout the book.

2

I_slay_all_day t1_j2ensg9 wrote

If there HAD to be a deeper meaning I think it might be wild imagination or hallucinations, or digging deep into your brain. But I don't think there was one to be intended, I think it'd just meant to be a foolish tale. Yk?

1

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2fqy56 wrote

Interesting take! At the end of the day, it's just a nonsensical tale. However, anyone can interpret it differently!

1

Mister_Sosotris t1_j2ep7kk wrote

As a former English teacher, I can confidently say that there doesn’t have to be a deeper meaning. You can always apply different branches of critical theory to find different layers to a story if you want, but you can also just get swept up in the story and enjoy it for what it is. It doesn’t matter what the author INTENDED you to get out of a story, but rather what elements speak to you specifically. Don’t feel bad! It’s okay to just enjoy things! ^_^

1

davidw_- t1_j2fd1y4 wrote

It’s literally a dream. It makes as much sense as a dream. Which is what is beautiful to me.

1

ughlacrossereally t1_j2fq0it wrote

no that doesn't make you dumb at all. Looking for symbolism is a skill but it can also be a curse. If you look for it everywhere it becomes more difficult to enjoy some stories where you don t find it. Be happy that you can enjoy the story for what it is and what resonates with you. If you want to learn to find symbolism, just start reading a few academic papers after you finish each novel... you 'll quickly come to be able to draw similar comparisons in other works. happy New years

1

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2fqep3 wrote

Happy new year and thank you for this comment! I actually enjoy trying to find hidden symbolisms in films, series or books, but while I was reading this particular book, I didn't try to find a deeper meaning in its story. However, I'd like to reread it and see if I'll interpret it differently!

1

ughlacrossereally t1_j2fr5zi wrote

well, then I wish you the best with it. be kind to yourself tho and don t get discouraged if it isn't satisfying right away :)

2

LonelyEar42 t1_j2ebsws wrote

Deeper meaning is drugs are bad. Also funny, and entertaining, but bad.

0

[deleted] t1_j2edd4l wrote

[deleted]

0

bofh000 t1_j2eeeql wrote

But other times a story is a vessel for more meaning the author tries to convey. Source: also have literature degree.

The trick I suppose is to know which ones are just stories and which ones are telling you more through that story. In some cases you can see through the story to the deeper meaning, other times you need the author’s words about that story, and other times you don’t have their words, but their lives and context.

It’s ok to look for a deeper meaning and it’s cool if you don’t see anything else there. I find life is a lot more enjoyable when I don’t lion down on other people, be they simple readers or professors over-analyzing.

4

dpdxguy t1_j2f7xj9 wrote

Is it not possible for a story to be just a story to one person while holding deeper meaning for another person, and for both people to be correct? Maybe that's what you meant by your last sentence.

3

[deleted] t1_j2dsxb2 wrote

[deleted]

−12

seattle_architect t1_j2dy3qi wrote

“Charles Lutwidge Dodgson better known by his pen name Lewis Carroll, was an English author, poet and mathematician. “

I am not sure where you get this information about the author.

6

Gemmabeta t1_j2dt8re wrote

Jesus, you people are a tedious bunch, eh.

4

[deleted] t1_j2dtnej wrote

[deleted]

−17

CassTroy t1_j2dxj1s wrote

Yes. Many drug addicts live productive lives. A writer for the Guardian used to be a heroin user. So you are showing your ignorance. Which is tedious these days.

7

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2dt51i wrote

I get your point. I by no means support the author, but the book was really entertaining and clever written.

1

MediumLong2 t1_j2e45u5 wrote

Fiction books never have a deeper meaning, IMHO.

−13

QuothTheRaven713 t1_j2e84am wrote

You are a sad person who lacks any sense of imagination if you think that.

5

Jeheh t1_j2e5kb3 wrote

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a man wanted a smoke.

1

BaldosaAzul t1_j2e9ibp wrote

And sometimes a cigar works a subtle metaphor for erectile disfunction (like in La Regenta).

Some fiction books are simply are a series of actions and dialogues, with maybe some world building. Others are way deeper than that and have layers upon layers of meaning. A statement such as “fiction books NEVER have deeper meaning” is way too categorical and absolutely untrue.

1

seattle_architect t1_j2dycig wrote

This is a children book. How old are you?

If you are looking for a deeper meaning read Dostoevsky.

−16

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2e0ipd wrote

  1. I really want to dive into Russian literature!
6

seattle_architect t1_j2ei4jv wrote

Before you will drown in Russian literature I would recommend to start with classic French literature.

Alexandre Dumas

Honoré de Balzac

Victor Hugo

Emile Zola

George Sand

Guy de Maupassant

Gustave Flaubert

−1

-greek_user_06- OP t1_j2fr15z wrote

Thank you! I'll keep that in mind. I'm actually planning to read Les Miserables this year

1

Tilikon t1_j2erb8k wrote

Why is this getting downvoted? It IS a children's book. Doesn't mean all age ranges can't enjoy it but it was written specifically for children the author knew.

−1

seattle_architect t1_j2erwv1 wrote

I am not sure but points don’t mean anything. But I think when OP replied that he/she is 16 Redditors were offended because he is still a child.

People looking for deeper meaning in a books that specifically were written for kids to understand good and bad in more straightforward forms.

−3