Literature as Implication: Literary composition is an act of implication, a word that comes from the Latin plicare “to fold.” With literature, an author twists together and folds up ideas in words, entwining and entangling thought in speech.
Interpretation as Explication: Literary interpretation is the explication of a text’s implications. The duty of an interpreter is to make explicit what is implicit in a passage or work, to unfold for others what an author has folded up in in the text.
Explication Beyond Literary Studies: It's certainly possible to do explication outside literary studies. Any text - any human creation - is, like a literary text, created by folding up ideas into things (whether it's a painting, a building, a sub-culture, a historical episode, etc.). The key to doing explication is to attend to the formal features of a text. In literary studies, those might be things like characters, metaphors, and themes. In a discipline like, say, museum studies, those formal features would be things like architecture, landscaping, docents, objects, exhibits, guest behavior, executive board, funding, etc. To do explication, figure out the formal concerns of the discipline you're working in.
The Two Meanings of "Explication": There are two activities commonly called “explication.” One is a certain kind of reading, while the other is a certain kind of writing.
Explication as Reading vs. Writing: What is often referred to as an “explication of a text,” which refers to the French phrase explication de texte, is a method of reading literature involving detailed commentary on and analysis of each aspect of the text in question. What is simply called “an explication” is a short argumentative essay that includes a close reading of a small section or aspect of a text (as in the kind of papers published in the journal The Explicator). If “the explication of a text” is an act of detailed reading, “an explication” is an act of writing.
Explication from Reading to Writing: Behind every explication (the written product) is hours of reading and several pages of explication (the reading process). In “the explication of a text,” you ought to identify and discuss every literary form and figure that appears in a text, but in “an explication” you will not be able to address them all. You should pick the form(s) and figure(s) that best epitomize your understanding of the text.
An Explication as Instantiation: Thus, to write an explication, one must first have established an interpretation of the entire text. With that interpretation in mind, the analyst then reads through the text to find the passage(s) that could instantiate his/her interpretation.
From Explication to Interpretation: In literary studies, the goal of an “explication of a text” is to articulate with technical language and in painstaking detail what a text says and how an author said it. The goal of literary interpretation (which follows hard on the heels of explication) is to explain why the author said what he/she said in the way that he/she said it. Before one considers why an author uses language in a certain way, however, one must first grasp what an author says and how he or she says it.
A Roadmap for Explication: What follows is concerned with the “explication of a text” in literary studies. It is designed to walk you through an explication of a passage that you have identified. This kind of explication slows down the reading process and describes everything that would go through the mind of an ideal reader if he or she were to read a given text.
Language: Identify and define any words that you are not familiar with or that you are a little uncertain about. Identify and write down the words that jump out to you, whether it’s because they seem important or because they seem strange. For all of these words, what is the dictionary definition? What do the words imply (connote as opposed to denote)? Looking at the Oxford English Dictionary, are there any historical definitions that are no longer common? What is the etymology?
Paraphrase: Paraphrase your text in order to understand it semantically (that is, to understand the ideas that are expressed). Begin by paraphrasing simple phrases, then sentences, then paragraphs or entire passages. This paraphrase serves as the “content” of the text, content to which the “form” of the language makes constant reference. That is, in literature, how the author says something (the form) always exists in some relationship to what the author says (the content). Look at the original and your paraphrase side-by-side: what is gained and lost in your paraphrase? Note the differences between the way the author said something in the text and the way that you said it in your paraphrase. Why didn’t the author just say it like you did? What is interesting or strange about the way the author said it?
Plot, Action, Genre: In literary criticism, there is a difference between plot (the order in which a story is told), action (the order in which the events of a story occurred), and genre (the conventions associated with certain plotlines). For your text, is the plot the same as the action? What is the relationship between the two? Describe the action that is represented in the text itself (if the text is narrative or dramatic) or suggested by the text (if the text is lyric). Then create an outline of the action. Divide it into sections (beginning, middle, and end, or stages of argument, discussion, or action). Now describe the plot. Create an outline of the plot. For a short passage, locate the logical adverbs (for, then, so, but, yet, lest, thus, therefore, since, etc.), and then map the logical progression of the text. What causes what to happen, and can one locate a first cause for it all? For a longer work, map the development of the plot according to Freytag’s pyramid (exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, denouement). Note whether the plot is unified (a single argument, action, or idea) or episodic (multiple arguments, actions, or ideas). Finally, articulate the genre of the text, most importantly whether it is comic or tragic. Are there any generic conventions that are there but shouldn’t be, or that should be there but aren’t?
Characters: List the characters of the text (including, if necessary, “the speaker”), and describe the characteristics of each. If there is a “speaker,” is he/she the same as the author? What is the persona of the speaker? What are the motivations, commitments, and desires of each character? Which characters are virtuous, and which vicious? Which characters are heroes, and which weaklings? Which characters are villains, and which victims? Which characters are fun, and which boring? Which characters are smart, and which dumb? Which characters are simple, and which complicated? Which characters are realistic, and which imaginary? Are there any similarities to other literary characters or historical figures? If so, do these similarities seem to be intentional? That is, are the references (made by the author) or resemblances (noted by the reader)? For references, how does the author use them to influence the reader’s interpretation? For resemblances, how does the reader’s knowledge of them influence his or her interpretation?
Grammar and Syntax: Using the formal terms of linguistics, describe the grammar and syntax of the passage. Mark all verbs, all nouns, all adjectives, all adverbs, etc. Are sentences simple or complex? Periodic or loose? In verse, are lines end-stopped or run-on?
Rhetoric: Using the technical vocabulary of classical rhetoric and literary studies, note any significant aspects of figurative language. Any puns? Any allusions, similes, metaphors? For each convention, does the author imitate or transgress against tradition? Look for patterns, polarities, and problems. For a good handbook for literary studies terminology, try M.H. Abrams’s A Glossary of Literary Terms. For a good resource for rhetorical terminology, use Silvae Rhetorica: http://rhetoric.byu.edu.
Sound: Read the text aloud, and then describe the sounds of the text. Describe the rhythm. Note rising rhythms (iambs and anapests), falling rhythms (trochees and dactyls), and level stress (spondees and pyrrhic). Describe the rhyme scheme of the text. Describe the sonic patterns of the text. Note end rhymes and internal rhymes. Note assonance, consonance, alliteration, onomatopoeia. Is the tone formal or informal?
Theme: Note the key words of the text. Using these key words, establish some categories to help you discuss the theme. What is the topic under consideration? What are the traditional attitudes about this topic (and which of these attitudes would the author have been familiar with)? What is the tension in this theme (i.e. why does it need to be addressed at all)? Note impossibilities and implausibilities.
Mode: Articulate the mode of the text. What is the author’s attitude toward the theme of the text? Is the author being didactic (telling us what to think) or ironic (not telling us what to think)?
Form and Content: To arrive at your interpretation of a text, articulate how the author comments upon – imitates or transgresses against – the content of his/her poem in the form of its language. Does the author thematize any kind of linguistic feature or rhetorical device?