Grasping Shadows

Okay, "Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow." I'm sure many of you know this line comes from Aesop's Fables. I'm writing a story where a girl first becomes interested in one band member for the simple reason that he's very good looking. That relationship doesn't work out--its over almost before it begins. Lack of interest on both their parts.

Well, fast forward a few weeks, and she finds herself now attracted to another member of this same band. He's mysterious, quiet, reserved, and gives off an unapproachable air. She's finally gotten him to start talking to her, after some effort to pull him out of his shell. She finds herself truly attracted to this guy, not on just a superficial level like with the first guy.

Later, she is talking to her best friend, who is involved with yet another member of this band, and she just blurts out, "Am I grasping at shadows?" She is asking, of course, about the guy she's interested in. She has no idea if he's interested in her. I like the sound of "grasping at shadows," so I looked it up online and found out what it really means.

Now... should I use the real meaning of that line, or can I have the character interpret it in a different way? What I mean is, the guy is genuinely a nice guy underneath--you just have to get through his tough exterior. But the line means the opposite of what is really on the table here. He is, in fact, the substance, not the shadow. How do I explain this in the story? If you have any idea of what I'm saying (and believe me, this is very, very difficult to explain), I'd love to hear your opinion about how to handle my dilemma. I want to end the chapter where she asks if she's grasping at shadows. I'd love to hear as many points of view as possible. Thanks!

Yes, its where the dog looks at his reflection. Well, you've both given me food for thought. For some reason, the line "grasping at shadows" just came to me as I was writing the story. I have no idea why, and I liked the sound of it. Maybe I can have a little discussion about it between the woman and her girlfriend. You know, "modify" it to fit the story?

The biggest problem is with the first guy. He's a great guy, and there's nothing shallow about him. Its just that she went for him on looks and charisma alone. So at all costs, I don't want to belittle him in any way. He's just plain not her type, to put it simply. I don't want him to be the "shadow" because he's certainly not.

Any others want to touch on this? I'd like to have as many opinions as I can.

Okay, Sticks, that's exactly what I was trying to say! Thank you for posting this, as I've been going over and over it in my head. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I need to "tailor" it to fit the story. Now I don't know if that's possible.

I can totally see what you are saying about using the meaning correctly. I truly want to do that. She isn't with the first guy--it didn't work out, so this quote wouldn't apply. It would only apply if she and the first guy were together, and at least fairly compatible. Even so, the second guy is to be the substance, not the first guy. So I've really gotten myself in a pickle here, haven't I? I plan on her being afraid that the object of her desire won't bring them happiness, so that part fits. But the first guy has already been in her life briefly, and currently she has nothing in her life that is bringing her happiness. Not as far as a relationship goes, that is.

Yes, Salairawns, I agree with you that I'm overthinking it! I'm not worried about copying Aesop, I just don't want to interpret the saying incorrectly. Out of respect. And yes, I'm not using the exact phrasing. Thank you for the vote of confidence--I think I needed that little shove. You've convinced me that it's alright to use it. I've decided to go ahead with it. I can't thank you guys enough for the support! It's just what I needed.