I almost never would want to know what the author intended, right? And I think it's not fruitful. The price where any they all just go wrong is in trying to come up with some hard and fast general rule of interpretation. That indicates that there's more abstract kinds of art. It's not a hard and fast rule but typically authors intentions there mean less or could actually be a disadvantage.
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]
Sponsored By: