Submitted by swedish_librarian t3_10p6ydb in books
lucia-pacciola t1_j6k8pk2 wrote
Reply to comment by Bladewing_The_Risen in The 10 Inalienable Rights of the Reader by swedish_librarian
Saying I think someone has the right to read a text for themselves, and decide for themselves what they think it means, is not the same as saying I think all interpretations are equally valid and correct.
There's also a huge difference between reading comprehension, where you correctly or incorrectly understand the explicit statements of the text, and interpretation, where you reach conclusions about the implicit themes and subtexts of the text.
PreciousRoi t1_j6kdiqh wrote
No, but, the thing is, when you say that you think someone has the right to "read a text for themselves and decide for themselves what they think it means" someone might read that and interpret it AS "all interpretations are equally correct", and then they might go back and cite your statement as a support of their argument. There could be a huge difference between your ability to comprehend and interpret text and when which is appropriate to the needs of the moment at hand...someone else, later, might not. And you didn't even say that much, it was much shorter, just "The right to their own interpretation of the text".
They might just say "I have the right to my own truth, and see, this out-of-context statement completely supports my position". You can't control who is going to read a bare statement of apparent fact, about a "right" and interpret what you said in a different way than you actually meant it if you don't qualify your own statement. The added qualification and your clarification add to the quality of the discussion and 3rd party reader's understanding. It was a bit too simplistic, a bit too concise.
lucia-pacciola t1_j6kfw70 wrote
Sorry, you've gone much farther up your own ass than I care to follow.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments