Susan Sontag's views in the essay, "Against Interpretation", coincide with Schopenhauer's idea of the Veil of Mâyâ.  Sontag expresses her points through providing the explanation of society's interpretation of art.  Sontag includes examples of Greek and Macedonian  philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, whom suggested art as mere "imitation" (Sontag 755).  She admits, "the fact is, all Western consciousness of and reflection upon art have remained within the confines staked out by the Greek theory of art as mimesis or representation" (Sontag 755).  The writer moves on to portray how people actually analyze the art, or otherwise known as "representation."  She mentions the conflict between art's content and form.  Society considers "content essential and form accessory" (Sontag 755).  She arouses the precise problem in today's society which is the fact that everyone views art as a representation in content, rather than being in itself an art form.  Sontag writes concerning how society analyzes and comments on only the content, as if it were the sole purpose behind the work of art.  She belives people concentrate on the content and deform it into their own presentation of thoughts; they rearrange the purpose of the piece into one which they see fit for it.  In other words, the essay proves society shapes the art to exemplify their own viewpoints, rather than the artists'.  In Sontag's essay, paragraph 11, she explains how the audience picks apart the art to conform to their wants or needs.  For example, the audience stresses their interpretations of "X" as "really mean[ing]-A" (Sontag 756).
    The following image of Zeus from Janson's book, History of Art, symbolizes Sontag's example of interpretation.  She writes regarding the "ancient texts" and explains in depth their modifications for "modern demands" (Sontag 757).  Sontag states in "Against Interpretation", "thus the Stoics, to accord with their view that the gods had to be moral, allegorized away the rude features of Zeus and his boisterous clan in Homer's epics.  What Homer really designated by the adultery of Zeus with Leto, they explained, was the Union between power and wisdom" (Sontag 757).  Sontag's example reinstates society's need to change meanings to abide by it's social standards.  Society's standards cannot accept the work of art as it is beaming with unconformity; therefore, society provides an "interpretation" which "makes art manageable, conformable" (Sontag 759).  Society bounds the work of art, which in this case is Homer's epics, in the shackles of it's own standards. 
   Sontag proceeds in the essay to express how society's interpretations cloud the senses.  Interpretations pertaining to the content of art solely exist as hinderances to our abilities "to see more, to hear more, to feel more" (Sontag 765).  Sontag brings to mind that in order to open people's eyes to their senses, artists obligate themselves to make it virtually impossible for the audience to see anything but their senses.  Sontag suggests artists produce art in an "abstract" or "decorative" manner so that they may "avoid interpretation" (Sontag 761).  In her essay, Sontag urges society to cease the interpretations and rather analyze the form.  She joins Schopenhauer in the like that they each suggest of perceiving works in a different manner instead of using  the usual interpretation of art which we so often turn to.  Sontag offers a look at form rather than content, while Schopenhauer holds up the how and why rather than the what.