I'm not aware of representing anything, given that I've never
studied lit crit. Simply offering my opinion as a writer
rather than a critic. I'm sure that whatever school of
criticism is in vogue is the right one, though (cough,
ahem)...
----- Original Message -----
From:
juri.nummelin@pp.inet.fi
To:
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 9:41 AM
Subject: RARA-AVIS: Reader or author
Allan:
> You're missing my point, Juri. When a character
tells a story is not the
same as the author telling a
> story. Any apparent 'social assumptions' are those
of the character. That
much you can say. To
> make the claim that they are also those of the
author may or may not be true
but I don't see how a > reader can tell simply
from the text.
This might collapse into a discussion of
semantics, but I should say that
reader can tell the social assumptions simply
because he reads the text. The
results may vary, but the text itself guides the
way. But you're right - there
are various factors in a story and
narration.
I've understood that literary studies is veering
back towards the new critique
and understanding how a text works in itself and
that the postmodern attitude
which you seem to represent (sorry if I'm wrong
here) is considered dated (i.e.
that the reader is the main source of meaning,
not the text itself).
Juri
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rara-avis-l/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
rara-avis-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06 Sep 2006 EDT