< EL312: I don't think my brain hibernates: a portfolio | Main | EL312: But there isn't one true meaning... >

April 7, 2007

EL312: Tempted to insist on a paradox in the "Tempest"

Miko's argument deals with the "loose ends" in Shakespeare's play. He explains how these unresolutions drive the meaning of the text. (Keesey calls this the deManian paradox in the little intro. before the text--I thought that was interesting since I'll be presenting on deMan this Thursday).

Miko says, "The neatness of this (and possibly any) work of art largely depends on how strongly one insists on details that seem to violate a defined, usually conventional pattern" (375).

Interesting that we're responsible for the ultimate "neatness" of art. In the same way that we have a myriad of interpretations (and means by which we interpret), we have the same number or more of ways to tie up the loose ends Miko introduces us to in the "Tempest."

The paradox, however, comes into play with any kind of summation we try to draw from a work. (I realize that I'm totally screwing the idea that this text was about one work--and I appreciated that for the time I was reading it since most of what we're read lately have been theory and no substance, especially postmodernism... eek.) If we draw a conclusion, the only thing we can conclude is that there is inconclusiveness and that the meaning is in the inconclusiveness. (Kind of like the rhetorical question's meaning being its lack of direction towards a conclusion of its ability to question. What a mouthful.)

Miko, ''Tempest'' -- Jerz EL312 (Literary Criticism)

Posted by KarissaKilgore at April 7, 2007 11:33 AM


Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)