The idea that language, regardless of whether it is spoken, written or sung, can convey an entirely separate meaning than the intention of the speaker, author or singer is something that never occurred to me. Culler runs through the ideas that one’s interpretation can be derived from things such as an author’s intentions, context, experience of the reader or the actual body of work (referring to the language used). Regardless, whether or not you (with your experience) are capable of understanding the mind or thoughts of an author (based on context), it may be impossible to tell whether or not the author got their actual intentions out in their work. Despite the fact that it is okay for a reader to have an interpretation that is different to others, it may be impossible to compare what you extrapolate from a text to, what the author wrote the text to represent. Such information is something we are unlikely to find, unless an author has written a memoir or specifically explained what their intentions were and whether they were misconstrued. It is even harder to do such when referring to poems or books, as many of these tend to become popular after the death of an author, or at least much further along in their career. However, it is reassuring to know that great writers of the past may have never understood the power or the effect that their ideas could have on so many others. The “oracle” isn’t truly all knowing.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.