[Milton-L] overt beliefs & reading; the Son's role
jamesrovira at gmail.com
Sat Jul 29 22:41:15 EDT 2006
It defies common sense to me that we can argue convincingly about
unintended authorial intents when we can't even decide upon intended
authorial intent, and that even when the author has taken the time to
state his intent.
The critic who invokes the subscious mind has given him/herself
license to say anything about the author, and generally makes
incredible claims apart from a very detailed, biographically oriented
argument. The fact that authors can speak unconsiously does not mean
that, at any given time, readers can accurately identify just when
that is happening. At any rate, a stable surface meaning must be
established before an unconscious intent -- or any kind of ironic
position at all -- can be juxtaposed against that.
More information about the Milton-L