« Word up: Intertextuality defined | Main | Kent enjoys a quickie »

February 15, 2007

McDonald's interpretation: Not-so-fast food for thought

He confidently starts out with his formalistic style of paying closer attention to the text. His argument opposes Yachnin’s in a manner of first attacking other critic’s readings and then filling in the blanks with his own. He encourages the reader not to see just from the view those interested in the political climate at the time, but he expresses the necessity of looking at the work in a way that can link both text and the topic of politics.
“The tendency of words and phrases to repeat themselves may be linked to reproduction, in various senses from the biological to the political (101)."” Besides providing a balanced way of approaching both approaches to the text, he also gives substantial evidence of why he feels so passionately. He gives examples of text that contain repetition and phonetic duplication. He even explains how the repetition is “a staple of Shakespearean dramatic structure (104).” He concludes strongly and relates his own feelings with our own interpretations that we make today. He wants the readers to be skeptical about the “…poetic, political and critical too (108).” The only complaint I have is that he might be a poor speller (I could be wrong, because I constantly make errors on my blogs).
Overall, I appreciated his argument because it wasn’t one-sided and acknowledged the need to look at a poem from many perspectives and I think it will help me as I cruise through the drive-thru to pick up more critical skills that may be healthy for once.

Posted by ErinWaite at February 15, 2007 5:45 PM


Haha I love how we're all making references to McDonald's last name in our blogs...

Anyway, this was truly a formalist reading if I ever saw one, and an excellent example of it at that. It was nice to see him seperating the historical elements often (overly) applied when reading Shakespeare and just focus on his text. He showed that it can be done- texts don't always need a historical background to be read and understood well.

Posted by: Nessa at February 19, 2007 3:27 PM

This is one reading I think we can all agree with, it has a very a good balance.

Posted by: Erin at February 20, 2007 11:53 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?