In our discussion on Chapter 4 of Interdisciplinarity today, we discussed the relationships between history and literary criticism as academic disciplines. In particular, we talked about the importance of context in being able to closely read a piece–in other words, it is important to understand the life and times of the author, so that we may have a better understand of what they may have meant by their prose/poetry, and/or what universal themes or truths they were attempting to discuss. After all, what’s the point of literary criticism and analysis other than to discover an author’s one true intention, right?
…Right?
No, not right. While this line of thinking–taking the context of an author’s experience into account and using to spearhead analysis–can be useful, it often leads to a point where there is only one “acceptable” interpretation of a work.
Does the context of a piece necessarily have to affect one’s views of it or its meaning? Does individual thought have a place in academic thinking–particularly literary criticism? Can we allow our subjective experiences to inform our interpretations of art?