The Intentionalist's Argument for a Creator

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

I disagree because I think, and this gets to some of the criticisms of the intentionalists. There's certain parts of a work where I don't care like what personal reason the author had for, for doing it. So I like just saying I'm interested in what the work says, I think is just semantically equivalent to saying what is the, what is the author say.

What’s the meaning of a work of art? Does the text mean just what the author intends it to mean? Does it matter what Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark thinks about the end of 2001? Or is the artist’s interpretation just one interpretation among many once the text is out in the world? We explore the question of authorial intent, and brace yourselves - this is just about as postmodern as David gets.

Plus – do we have what it takes to get an invite to the thought criminals club?

Links

The Party is Canceled [newyorker.com]

Was I Wrong About The Irishman? by Thomas Flight [youtube.com]

Authorial Intent [wikipedia.org]