"Poets' misinterpretations or poems" may be "more drastic than critics" misinterpretations or criticism" (Keesey 198).
Really, because to me I felt like she was taking all these critics (Bloom) (un)intentional void of women pretty personal. I was (am) afraid of misinterpreting Ms. Kolodny. But I felt that she was taking this omission pretty personal and I just want to know why? By her thought would a black reader be able to relate to a white author or vice versa? Then what about the Spanish/Oriental/whatever other type of reader out there. How can they relate. I think that she was reading too much into it for my own taste. I was not buying her argument against these theories(Bloom). I really don't think it's valid, hell two of my favorite authors is Plath and Ellison-ones a female the other is gay. How does this work for me, am I secretly a female which then would come out as a gay persona deep inside, which would allow me to realte to these writers. Maybe.
Comments (1)
I know this doesn't enhance the reading any more, but I loved your title.
I think Kolodny simply just took an extreme stance as a means of finding the middle through comparison with the other extremes. I really don't think she believed what she wrote in the essay. I don't even know if I believe that "she" is a "she." I even, for a moment, thought it was a man writing under the guise of a woman. We don't know for certain.
Posted by Kevin | February 22, 2007 5:13 PM
Posted on February 22, 2007 17:13