>what the author meant
![dn26481-1_800[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/H21oncG.jpg "dn26481-1_800[1].jpg")
>>7845886
>what some undergraduate twat reads into the text
>>7845886
>what the reader thinks
>>7845886
>Plato's Republic was really a quirky action-adventure romance about a quirky princess with newly-discovered magical powers who must save the kingdom and at the same time navigate an awkward love triangle with her in the middle.
>>7845897
why are all women so idiots?
>>7845901
oh the irony
>>7845897
Give me claims, support, and warrants in a 10 page paper and I might believe it.
>>7845903
I'll shove my foot up your ass.
>>7845906
>your typical biographical reader
>>7845909
Hi friend. Just learned about intentional fallacy and death of the author in intro to literary theory eh?
How's freshman year of college going for ya?
>what the author wrote
>>7845886
It annoys me to no end when they do this with religious art or literature and try to argue that the social or political context of the author was more relevant than the blatantly obvious and overwhelming religious meaning. I don't know if they're simply incapable of understanding religious meaning or if it's distasteful to them, but any reading of Dante that is not focused foremost on Catholicism is just missing the point. Of course you can point out various other things that are present in his writing because of his life and society at that period, but this is like focusing on the periphery, I don't understand the impulse, when the wealth of meaning available by treating the text on its own terms is so much greater.
>what the audience of the time would've understood
>what the author made the reader do
another thread by leftists pretending that they can interpret their books anyway they want
>author fights in war
>book heavily reflects that
>librul comes along "its not about war its about poor black people being opressed by white people!! my wifes son told me so!! d-d-death of the author!!!"
>>7847559
>literature as an artistic medium
>objective interpretation
Pick one.
>>7846015
>>7846027
>>7847559
I genuinely don't understand the hate on /lit/ for new criticism and subjective interpretation of texts.
I just read a Freudian interpretation of Don Quixote claiming the reason for his sudden change from respected hidalgo to knight errant was due to an incestuous attraction to his niece (who was a beautiful women just entering the age of womanhood), and in order to combat these feelings he had to create an entirely new identity where he was essentially a celibate knight errant with Dolceana Del Toboso being some type of a figurehead, distracting love interest. It was actually an excellent essay.
Now do I think Cervantes envisioned Quixote's madness the result of wanting to fuck his niece? Fuck no. Of course not. But it doesn't mean we cant learn something by studying literature through these scopes. There's absolutely nothing wrong with doing this. Good discourse on the humanities are often the result.
>>7847800
Do you have a link to that essay? Sounds cool
>>7845886
>character in the work is a blatant representation of the perception of art itself
fucking Blick Winkel
>>7847810
It was an actual book I checked out from my library but here's the details on it along with a brief synopsis. maybe you can find it somewhere online.
http://users.ipfw.edu/jehle/deisenbe/reviews/johnsonreview2.pdf
Reminder that interpretive lens are a cancer
>>7847800
I think most people are anxious that 'interpretation' is a sham which produces nothing of value (at least, in any observably empirical sense) because it offers nothing in the way of authoritative truth, only shifting positions of perspective. /lit/ and 4chan is incredibly misanthropic on the whole, so it doesn't surprise me that so many people are unwilling to consider a field which does nothing more than tell the other side of the story, so to speak.
>>7847979
Yeah it's surprising how close minded a relatively progressive board can be (in some respects)- but particularly with the humanities you would think that a board full of 'readers' would understand that shifting the scope of analysis on something opens up avenues for new conversations, and through these new viewpoints we can discover new 'truths'. If only concrete facts have value to them then why aren't they posting on some STEM board.
>>7847800
I like that idea in theory. What I don't like is that you read anythibg from a freudian perspective and took it even half way seriously
I remember the first time I read Barthes, too.
>>7846015
"Poetry is to be judged not by what the poet has tried to say; only by what he has said."
that being said, your post is a nonargument so I'll stop there
>>7848188
i didn't say i took it serious i just said it was a good essay
>>7848188
You're missing the point. It isn't a case of 'taking it seriously', its simply finding another way of framing art - and by extension, culture - such that it raises new questions and new perspectives on life as we know it. I don't have to take a particular interpretation seriously, but that doesn't mean I can't derive some value from it - and why am I required to take a novel like Don Quixote seriously anyway, when its so deliciously playful and comic?
>>7845886
>what the author meant
what are you trying to say, OP?
>What Nabokov meant
>>7848521
Papasito
Im mexican
