Thursday, 10 April 2014

I... is for Interpretation

Interpreting something that one reads is a representation of what one is. How a text is perceived is to a large extent the reader's personality. For instance, a lot of my avid reader female friends are massive fans of Darcy, Heathcliff, and Rhett. What is it about these men that attracts young women, I wonder. I am personally not attracted to any of them. So what is it that draws one? What is the individual's interpretation of a plot? Of dialogues? What do writers want to convey when they write a particular statement in a particular way?
How does one ever know? Which critics are right? It is so strange that the study of literature involves the reading of those people who have read texts widely and have offered their own thorough opinion. I find it strange because every person is entitled to his/her own opinion. Why should I have to conform or quote? Why can't I be a critic!? What's your take on the interpretation of novels, poems, and plays?
This is the ninth post for the April A-to-Z Blogging Challenge 2014.
Previously, Archaism, British literature, Critical Analysis, Drama, Edinburgh, Faust, Gothic Fiction, Humour


Tony Laplume said...

I hated in school when the teacher told the class what our interpretation was supposed to be.

Barra the Bard said...

I changed my college major from Library Science to English because I wanted to talk about what was inside books more than just move their outsides around (although I later worked in a university library for almost a decade.) In a way, writing is a kind of performance art, presented for an audience. Never cared much for Rhett or Heathcliff, but Darcy has been growing on me over the years. Good post!