It's a matter of interpretation  

TheCaspianLion 40M
9 posts
7/15/2006 10:57 pm
It's a matter of interpretation

I remember when I read James Clavel's (sp?) Shogun. The protagonist suspected his interpretor of subtly changing the meaning of his words in his dealings with the Japanese King. Even in spite of the fact the interpretor translated his words instantly, perhaps to lull him into a false sense of securtiy, he still distrusted him. It was a great book full of intrigue. Im not really making a recommendation since I only do that with books I think people missed, rather I am illustrating the concept that words don't always have the meaning we intend.

It seems ironic to be writing this, telling you that words mean different things and you can't always be sure the author is saying to you what you think he is saying. So many have said so much on the subject already.

And the debate still goes on, they still argue about this stuff. I think it is nearing the end though. Some would say the author of this work (or any work) is dead, gone and buried, no longer saying anything once these words come into your posession. The reader in affect becomes the writer. I have this gut feeling that isn't right though.

What about Derrida? Is it really so bleak that we are doomed to argue in favor of the opposite of what we believe? That we can't make our feelings known to anyone anywhere? That is too easy in my opinion, we can know what people really think if we try hard enough, though we may not succeed.

From all the views, all the theories, new critical theory, deconstruction, reader response, various cultural themes and Marxist/communist themes we have to gain an awareness. With the awareness comes the knowledge that in the end words are simply an ostensible means to an end. Reality does exist even if we can't describe it properly to eachother.

Become a member to create a blog