Ah,
Mr. Underhill
Quote:
I have this nagging sense that there are certain ?right? interpretations of any text, and I instinctively rebel against critical theories which suggest that all interpretations of a text have equal merit. As readers delve into detail and subtlety and nuance, wide-ranging differences of interpretation will arise, but this does not contradict the idea that broader, more primary interpretations are indisputably correct.
I don?t have time to try to back this up at length, and truth be told, I haven?t really thought it through much. It?s my gut reaction to some aspects of this discussion, so I thought I?d toss it out there.
|
We have all known, I think, that feeling of delight mixed with frustration that we've got the real goods on a book which others just can't seem to sus out. But does feeling one is right mean one is right? How can we demonstrate this?
For example, just which "right" interpretation of the Bible do you think is "indisputably correct'? Or the Koran?
The history of reading as well as literary studies is littered with ships of correct interpretation which have foundered on the shifting shoals of historical perspective, cultural change, personal point of view.
The point more properly is, I would think, not that all interpretations have equal merit but that merit can surprisingly derive even from misunderstanding.
But really,
Undey you are sounding rather too much like a fresh young newbie who claims he hasn't thought much about the topic. If you want to stir the pot, give it a bit more thought.
