"But to say that a text might represent several structures of meaning does not imply that it does in face represent all the meanings which a particular word sequence can legally convey" (21).
I have to admit, this was not the easiest text for me to get through. I'm sure E.D. Hirsch, Jr. had a lovely meaning in "Objective Interpretation", but I'm not sure I understood it as I should. Then again, isn't that like literature in general? We know there is meaning behind it, but sometimes we fail to understand it correctly, or at all. It's the eternal struggle for English majors. The elusive meaning.
Throughout the essay, Hirsch was stressing the actual words of the text, rather than the author's intentions (I think). We need to stop reading between the lines for a look at the background of the author but take the works as their words and make meanings just from them. That's what literature is- the words. 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.
Hirsch, ''Objective Interpretation'' -- Jerz EL312 (Literary Criticism)
Posted by VanessaKolberg at February 3, 2007 6:43 PM | TrackBackYou summed it up for me, Vanessa! I was bored with this text a little, but when you brought up the fact that the wording is very important, that got me thinking. It is the complete opposite of what we've been reading about author intent and how we need to know about their personal lives to understand them, so I like that mentioned the need for more of an emphasis on the words.
Posted by: Erin at February 5, 2007 10:56 AMI think the struggle for finding the intention and the meaning(s) of a work is what English majors love. We enjoy picking a part pieces of the story and analyzing it to find what it means to us, the reader.
Vanessa, you made a great argument/point that "we need to stop reading between the lines for a look at the background of the author but take the works as their words and make meanings just from them. That's what literature is- the words."
The words have different meanings to different people. I think that if we stop looking at the background of the author and look deeper into the words that maybe we will discover new truths about the piece of literature.
Posted by: Denamarie at February 7, 2007 11:00 PMI can agree to an extent, but looking at a piece of literature from a possible perspective of the author is really an important factor. Charlotte Perkins Gilman suffered from depression, and stated in an article that throughout most of her life before her suicide, that she felt trapped. Now, how can we not make a relation between literature and authorial background? I agree that sometimes, looking at an author's background is not necessarily the best approach, but we cannot simply disregard the ideas behind the literature. The words are important, but looking where they come from helps us find meaning in the text itself.
Posted by: Jason Pugh at February 8, 2007 10:52 AM