An ambiguous text, written in such a way that words can be interpreted with multiple meanings, is used regularly in literature as a means of creating deeper meaning in the passage. This is demonstrated in the memoirs Teaching a Stone to Talk by Annie Dillard and Running in the Family by Michael Ondaatje. Ambiguity in memoir especially enhances the text by giving the reader multiple ways to understand what they are reading, instead of falling into the author's thoughts about his or her past experiences. The way ambiguity enriches the literature in reference to these two memoirs is by allowing the reader to find their own meaning in the text, distinguishing the author through his or her stylistic choices, and distinguishing the memoirs from other types of literature. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay First of all, ambiguity allows for both symbolic and metaphorical interpretation of the text. If an event is explained completely there is no room left for the reader's expression. For example, in Running in the Family one wonders whether or not Michael Ondaatje includes a subtle critique of colonialism. The mannerisms and actions of Ondaatje's grandmother, Lalla, are described as “There was a sense of divine entitlement that she and everyone else felt they had, even if she had to beg for it or steal it. This domineering enchanted flower. (125) There is the possibility that his behavior is written as such because that is how he behaved, but the way Ondaatje chose to present it also brings up the possibility of a greater intention behind his words. The term "divine right of conquest" is often used to describe how colonizers behaved toward newly acquired countries. They felt that they were helping the natives, which can be interpreted through the phrase "This enchanted and domineering flower". (125) Ondaatje's writings about his grandmother in this way can be interpreted as a representation of how colonialist attitudes affected his country. Similarly, in the essay Teaching a Stone to Talk “An Expedition to the Pole” he describes his feelings towards organized religion by comparing them to past expeditions of ship crews to the Pole. Towards the end he states: Many clowns are here; one of them hands out Girl Scout cookies, which are all stuck together. […] Sir John Franklin and crew have come aboard this floe […] The men, whose ancient uniforms arouse envious glances, are hungry. (51)Interpreted literally, the paragraph is difficult to understand, but in context of the interpretation with the rest of the essay it becomes clearer. At the beginning of the piece, the ministers of his church distribute wafers that are also glued together. This is how you see ministers: as clowns. The crew can be seen as the people of the church, hungry for God's understanding. In both of these examples, the ambiguity of the writing allows the reader to discover a deeper meaning for themselves. Furthermore, ambiguity also allows the author to express his own stylistic choices. In the essay “Total Eclipse” Dillard states: “We teach children only one thing, as we were taught: to wake up.” (97) When Dillard writes in this way, his work exists as more than just words on a page. It's art. Reading this sentence, what he probably means is not that the only thing we teach our children is to literally wake up. Instead, he uses “awake” as a metaphor for living, seeing, and experiencing. Dillard uses stylistic choices like this throughout her writing to help the reader.