I'll try to narrow my inquiry to identifiable questions. I don't expect any sort of full explanation; I'm just looking for some general guidance, really. I really appreciate any helpful input - whether 3 words or 3 paragraphs, and whether or not it relates to the specific examples below. I realize that my questions may reveal ignorance about which I am unaware; I appreciate any identification of my misconceptions.
I'm finding myself uncertain about how to use walls, thickness, and influence. I also realize there are differences between influence (as the term is often used) and thickness. I know there is a difference between "thick" and "heavy," and sometimes I feel like my thickness becomes heavy without me realizing it until it is too late. My questions are related because I've tried to use thickness in creative ways (well, to me anyway) recently, and I find myself struggling to save a group of heavy stones
.I was reading Kageyama's Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go , and he says something like "don't use thickness to surround territory." This really hit me, and it makes sense for the same reasons a 29kyu learns not to start the game by extending one stone after another to surround territory; it is inefficient. But it seems to me that using walls to create/strengthen a framework can be effective; that is, have a nice wall should enable further extensions. Considering this, I guess it is sort of a balancing act. Since reading that, I played a few games in which I determined not to use a wall too surround territory, and I think I went too far in the other direction, which is why I ended up with heavy groups, but maybe I'm wrong.
Using the variations on a 3-3 invasion joseki, here are some questions:
(1) Neutralizing walls: Asumming the marked stones were there before the invasion, was it a good idea for black to build the wall that direction with an aim to attack
, should black have built up the other direction in order to create a framework, or are both strategies roughly equal? My feeling is to build up the other direction to create a framework, especially if black had a stone at b, making an invasion by white look pretty bleak. If black had a stone at 'a', though, this would seem to really put some pressure on . Finally, if white had a stone at 'a', then the wall seems less effective to me, other than for eeking out a little more territory on top. Wrong?(2) I know this is contrived for several reasons (way early for a 3-3 invasion, and there are other big points on the board), but assume black decides to approach
. Given the wall on the left, should he approach from a or b, using his significant back-up? Or from the other side to attempt to push white toward the wall? I feel like 'b' is best, because it uses the influence on the left, and black can play at 'e' for a nice moyo. Am I wrong here? Could white just pincer an approach and neutralize the black wall?Thanks again for any suggestions or guidance.
. Also, I realize black ends in gote, I just grabbed the first example of a wall I came across for illustration-admittedly not the best idea.
is further away from the wall, and 
. What is the proper way to utilize black's influence - 'a' or 'b'?
, 
leaves room for a play at "a", if White needs it. 
(The same is true of many English adjectives, but to a lesser extent than Japanese. And in English, good is higher praise than better.