Symbolic criticism is easily reduced to an act of translating meaning, remote from the style of rich narratives. Drawing on David Bordwell’s distinction between broad, overlapping functions of style, I argue that we can examine symbolic purposes as secondary to decorative and expressive purposes. I show how a theory on conceptual cognition proposed by psychologist Lawrence Barsalou can let the critic transcend firm distinctions between abstract and concrete features of a narrative. This proves especially helpful when narrative purposes are downplayed, for example in the resonant elements of art cinema, affecting how we construct and experience the storylines. I posit a framework for the analysis of symbolic purposes based on general mechanisms of memory and attentional guidance, letting us see continuity with critics such as Bordwell and Victor F. Perkins. This approach enables the critic to distinguish between degrees of symbolic power in Ruben Östlund’s The Square.