Sympathetic imagination, or ¿the ability of a person to penetrate the barrier which place puts between him and his object¿to secure a momentary but complete identification with it,¿ was a topic that I initially did not fully grasp (882). The idea of a connection with a character, much like the ones we had been making all first semester, did not seem difficult but nor did they seem deserving of the title ¿sympathetic imagination.¿ After thoroughly learning how to ¿hammer our thoughts into unity,¿ I felt as if I understood the literature to a greater extent than ever before, but I was not sure if my understanding was quite to this level or even the level I wanted it to be.

The poetry by Browning was my first experience with him, and proved to be quite confusing if not downright disturbing. The second poem, ¿Porphyria¿s Lover,¿ was rather shaking thus intriguing me in a way I did not know was possible. The initial reaction I had to the ¿lover¿ was almost indifference as he described her as ¿murmuring how she loved me,¿ and planning to ¿give her self to me forever,¿ but then my judgment changed as he confirmed that he felt she ¿worshiped¿ him (880). He came off as a distinct character, but not as poignant as he did as he described how he, ¿wound three times around her little throat around and strangled her.¿ (880) That twist I was not expecting and when rereading the selection I thus felt I had gained a closer understanding to what sympathetic imagination really is. I had certainly felt a connection with him, strong enough that I knew what I did and did not expect him to do. That took me to the second point on the page titled ¿The sympathetic imagination vs. reason.¿ Did I see the ¿inner truth?¿ Or was I blinded to it or by it? A poet apparently ¿has no character¿no identity.¿ (882) I interpreted this as the poet shows no emotion and therefore speaks as the character, or the narrator such in the case of our current novel. I often feel empathy, but it is hard to distinguish between that and true ¿entering into the imaginative object.¿ (883) What I deduce, however, is that while the sympathetic imagination may be natural it is also something we can will ourselves into doing. While ¿the unconscious attribution¿ is seen, I do not believe that it is as simple as that. Often, especially in a competitive educational environment, we try too hard to see what everyone else does and do not allow ourselves to fully grasp our own imagination.

If I could draw a conclusion (from this collection of my thoughts) I can see it in the interview with Doctorow. The idea of closing a book and then seeing the meaning apply to ourselves is at the top of my new list of goals. I have a small but fulfilling group of books on my shelf that I take everywhere with me. In these books I connect and live the words that Doctorow refers to, ¿In others we see ourself. So fiction really enlarges our humanity.¿ (884) This is what I believe I can allow myself to do as I let other novels, characters, and authors into my personal circle of connections. I look forward to experiencing what he describes at the end of the interview, ¿We may tell more stories and talk less theory. We make take literature to the heart.¿ My personal goal for this new semester and my interpretation to my sympathetic imagination.