2. Famous Barthean "Death of the Author" was culmination of earlier critiques of authorial intent from Wimsatt, Frye, etc.
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
3. I actually think Frye's quite moderate formulation on question of intent in "Anatomy of Criticism" is best approach.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
4. Frye: what the author says about own work "has a peculiar interest, but not a peculiar authority."
3 replies 13 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
5. To apply Frye.If Orson Welles gave interview expounding on what Rosebud "means" we'd be naturally interested, but can't be "final answer"
3 replies 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
6. To say a work of art is ambiguous is simply to say that it is open to multiple interpretations. Which is to say, it is rich.
3 replies 6 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
7. There are works of art that exhaust themselves on first reading or viewing. That's okay. But richest works are ones we return to
1 reply 6 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
8. As
@michelledean points out, ending of Sopranos is only one of many ambiguities in show. Is Tony good or bad? How can that be answered?5 replies 3 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
9. Multiplicity of interpretation exists not only among different critics but within ourselves. Jane Austen changes each time you re-read.
1 reply 4 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
10. Despite Barthes, Frye, etc. there are a few areas where authorial intent still valid: satire, counterfeiting and criminal law.
5 replies 4 retweets 7 likes
@DavidHains Yeah, I think that's a key problem.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.