« What are your intentions? | Main | american classic by accident? »

February 4, 2007

words = a sentence that represents a thought

Hirsch, ''Objective Interpretation'' -- Jerz EL312 (Literary Criticism)

"...that the text automatically has a meaning simply because it represents an unalteralbe sequence of words" (19).

Thank you.
I think that critics have to stop looking at an author's background to figure out what their work meant. Because there are paragraphs on a page that contain sentences that include words and punctuation, that leads one to think that there was some sort of thought process that was needed to get this point across.

In Vanessa's blog she couldn't have explained this any better.
"It is not what the author ate for breakfast when they wrote it, but what words they used to get their meaning across. Without analyzing this important factor, we can understand nothing."

Posted by Denamarie at February 4, 2007 9:19 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.setonhill.edu/mt/mt-tb.cgi/8717

Comments

After reading the majority of the blogs and comments regarding author intent I think it would certainly be fair to say something my dad always tells me: "Moderation is the key...even too much of a good thing is bad for you." This stuff about author intent versus studying just the text seems to be no exception.

Posted by: Lorin at February 8, 2007 9:24 AM

Post a comment




Remember Me?