Not theoretically...
Posted by Joan, too on July 29, 1998 at 21:17:49:
In response to can of worms...., written by Kate on July 29, 1998 at 09:21:32
] Ooh Joan, now you're taking the argument in a different direction.
Not really - this is a discussion of Stephen Cox's essay on the theory of literary analysis, and in his concluding comments he says:
Ultimately, literary theory is about the human mind and its processes of communication. It is about our ability to understand what people say, write, and mean. Literary theory is a ferociously contested field because it has crucial implications for every other field that is based on the interpretation of words.
It's my own opinion that our ability to discover the intentions of the author of any written material is based on the author's ability to use language in a way that will be understood by the reader with a minimum of ambiguity or outright error. Of course the consequences of poor communication vary a lot in importance depending on the type of written material that one is seeking to understand, but the basic principles of analysis with respect to determining the intent of the author are based on the widely accepted common understandings that were held by the "audience" at the time that the written material was created.
- authorial intent... Kate 09:06:14 7/30/98
(1)
- Not off-topic at all - Authorial intent Joan, too 22:17:09 7/30/98
(0)
- Not off-topic at all - Authorial intent Joan, too 22:17:09 7/30/98
(0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
