7 ms·

>If anyone can answer what the 'correct' interpretation of a piece of writing is, it's the author. To echo the other comments questioning that premise, there's

by jasode 10y ago

>If anyone can answer what the 'correct' interpretation of a piece of writing is, it's the author. To echo the other comments questioning that premise, there's also the famous Isaac Asimov anecdote: Isaac Asimov often repeated an anecdote based on this: He once sat in on a class where the topic of discussion was one of his own works. (He did this in the back of a large lecture hall so he could remain semi-anonymous). After the class ended, he went up and introduced himself to the teacher, saying that he had found the teacher's interpretation of the story interesting, though it really wasn't what he had meant at all. The teacher's response: "Just because you wrote it, what makes you think you have the slightest idea what it's about?"

Pitarou 10y ago
Asimov being Asimov, he then went on to write a story about Shakespeare being summoned from the past to take a college course on his plays. He failed, of course.
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  Which story was that? edit: Someone else linked to it in the comments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortal_Bard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortal_Bard
- notahacker 10y ago
  According to popular legend John Lennon had a slightly different reaction to learning that his lyrics were being crudely analysed by high school teachers. He wrote "I am the Walrus".
- justifier 10y ago
  professors teach to their opinion i took a shakespeare course at university where we were asked to read troilus and cressida and compare it to its source troilus and criseyde by chaucer i wrote that i disliked the piece because it just read like someone who recently got burned in love venting irrationally, noting that i liked shakespeare's version more because he gives the last word to pandarus(o) who uses it to comically complain about his health and i felt this beautifully subverted the assumed tragedy the characters felt subject to in their stories.. woe is me! i failed the exam frustrated i went looking for evidence to defend my claim(i).. though contrary to the linked comic i did find some interesting notes first off chaucer was a source for shakespeare, but hardly the source of the work chaucer's main source was boccaccio's il filastrato.. which was based off an earlier version known as le roman de troie by benoît de sainte-maure but the interesting bit comes from boccaccio's version(ii) because the story itself is only 8 cantos long, even the wikipedia page says the work itself is only 8 cantos long!(iii), but there is an additional canto, a ninth canto, wherein the author, boccaccio, addresses the reader and apologises for writing the poem and states he's unsure where it came from but asserts that he was recently dumped (o) http://shakespeare.mit.edu/troilus_cressida/full.html http://shakespeare.mit.edu/troilus_cressida/full.html (i) https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/01/06 https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/01/06 (i/2) https://store.penny-arcade.com/products/agree-with-me-tee https://store.penny-arcade.com/products/agree-with-me-tee (ii) http://www.yorku.ca/inpar/filostrato_griffin.pdf http://www.yorku.ca/inpar/filostrato_griffin.pdf (iii) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_Filostrato https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_Filostrato front page of reddit right now.. https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_in_school/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_i... ;P
  - GrinningFool 10y ago
    Do you think it would have ended the same failed exam if you did that research first and included it in your interpretation?
    - zorked 10y ago
      My thoughts exactly. He had a good intuition, but teachers want substance not opinion - as they should.
      - int_19h 10y ago
        It sounds like this is a case of something where substance is opinion; or at least the established and agreed-upon subset of it.
    - justifier 10y ago
      there's more to the story.. lie by ommission the course was set up that we would read a work and then write a one page response in class here is where i voiced my distaste for chaucer 'creating', as was presented to our class, this story while appreciating shakey's subversion of the material this garnered the 'f' for my opinions about love forlorned then at the end of each four week period we would, in lieu of exams, choose one work to 'dive deeper on' and write a longer piece i chose triolus because it was the one piece i got such a low score on while 'going deeper' i ended up finding, and reading, bocaccio and sainte-maure and wrote about how all four are similar and different and how these comparisons related to my original, correct ;P, intuition i got a 'd' with complaints to the effects of 'stick to the course material' and 'just drop it' i think my axe grinding became the professor's honing stone, which is unfortunate that such a circumstance can occur in an as advertised educational environment
      - GrinningFool 10y ago
        Thanks for the additional context - though it's disappointing to hear. Seems the point of teaching this kind of thing should be to encourage people to explore their own interpretations. Having a fixed path for the student to travel seems counterproductive.
- Noseshine 10y ago
  It is a litte OT and not the funniest joke, but incidentally just now there is this on reddit: "Shakespeare in school" https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_in_school/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_i... The background story seems to be this half-hour video "Cunk on Shakespeare": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YeCpHoy9EQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YeCpHoy9EQ
fovc 10y ago
My high school English teacher met Tim O'Brian once and had a discussion about Going After Cacciato. They disagreed on whether Cacciato had been killed and ended with "George, I wrote the book; I know what happened." To which he replied, "Tim, I read the book; I know what happened."
- samirillian 10y ago
  I remember hearing a similar story about the adaptation of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" into Blade Runner. Ridley Scott was convinced that the protagonist was a replicant. Philip K Dick (and Harrison Ford) disagreed. In my mind, Scott had the more "cinematic" interpretation, and Dick had the more "novelistic" interpretation.
  - taneq 10y ago
    Do you think this is the source of the ambiguity in the movie? I was never convinced either way, even after rewatching the whole thing recently with the possibility in mind from the start. I think it was well done either way.
    - JorgeGT 10y ago
      If I'm not mistaken, didn't the protagonist receive a Voight-Kampff test in the original novel? I remember thinking at the moment that this was a reflection on how Philip K Dick wanted to assure us that humans were very capable of evil (he was apparently very moved by the Holocaust), that the Blade Runner didn't have the excuse of being an automaton to justify the cold blood "termination" of sentient beings.
draw_down 10y ago
I agree with the teacher.
Paul-ish 10y ago
Sounds like the professor may have been a fan of new criticism[1], which disregards the authors intent. This make some sense to me, because its not really that interesting to try to debate what may or may not have been going through someones head when they created something, especially if that person is long dead. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent#New_Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent#New_Criticism

by jasode 10y ago

Pitarou 10y ago

Asimov being Asimov, he then went on to write a story about Shakespeare being summoned from the past to take a college course on his plays. He failed, of course.

pavel_lishin 10y ago
Which story was that? edit: Someone else linked to it in the comments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortal_Bard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortal_Bard
notahacker 10y ago
According to popular legend John Lennon had a slightly different reaction to learning that his lyrics were being crudely analysed by high school teachers. He wrote "I am the Walrus".
justifier 10y ago
professors teach to their opinion i took a shakespeare course at university where we were asked to read troilus and cressida and compare it to its source troilus and criseyde by chaucer i wrote that i disliked the piece because it just read like someone who recently got burned in love venting irrationally, noting that i liked shakespeare's version more because he gives the last word to pandarus(o) who uses it to comically complain about his health and i felt this beautifully subverted the assumed tragedy the characters felt subject to in their stories.. woe is me! i failed the exam frustrated i went looking for evidence to defend my claim(i).. though contrary to the linked comic i did find some interesting notes first off chaucer was a source for shakespeare, but hardly the source of the work chaucer's main source was boccaccio's il filastrato.. which was based off an earlier version known as le roman de troie by benoît de sainte-maure but the interesting bit comes from boccaccio's version(ii) because the story itself is only 8 cantos long, even the wikipedia page says the work itself is only 8 cantos long!(iii), but there is an additional canto, a ninth canto, wherein the author, boccaccio, addresses the reader and apologises for writing the poem and states he's unsure where it came from but asserts that he was recently dumped (o) http://shakespeare.mit.edu/troilus_cressida/full.html http://shakespeare.mit.edu/troilus_cressida/full.html (i) https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/01/06 https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/01/06 (i/2) https://store.penny-arcade.com/products/agree-with-me-tee https://store.penny-arcade.com/products/agree-with-me-tee (ii) http://www.yorku.ca/inpar/filostrato_griffin.pdf http://www.yorku.ca/inpar/filostrato_griffin.pdf (iii) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_Filostrato https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_Filostrato front page of reddit right now.. https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_in_school/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_i... ;P
- GrinningFool 10y ago
  Do you think it would have ended the same failed exam if you did that research first and included it in your interpretation?
  - zorked 10y ago
    My thoughts exactly. He had a good intuition, but teachers want substance not opinion - as they should.
    - int_19h 10y ago
      It sounds like this is a case of something where substance is opinion; or at least the established and agreed-upon subset of it.
  - justifier 10y ago
    there's more to the story.. lie by ommission the course was set up that we would read a work and then write a one page response in class here is where i voiced my distaste for chaucer 'creating', as was presented to our class, this story while appreciating shakey's subversion of the material this garnered the 'f' for my opinions about love forlorned then at the end of each four week period we would, in lieu of exams, choose one work to 'dive deeper on' and write a longer piece i chose triolus because it was the one piece i got such a low score on while 'going deeper' i ended up finding, and reading, bocaccio and sainte-maure and wrote about how all four are similar and different and how these comparisons related to my original, correct ;P, intuition i got a 'd' with complaints to the effects of 'stick to the course material' and 'just drop it' i think my axe grinding became the professor's honing stone, which is unfortunate that such a circumstance can occur in an as advertised educational environment
    - GrinningFool 10y ago
      Thanks for the additional context - though it's disappointing to hear. Seems the point of teaching this kind of thing should be to encourage people to explore their own interpretations. Having a fixed path for the student to travel seems counterproductive.
Noseshine 10y ago
It is a litte OT and not the funniest joke, but incidentally just now there is this on reddit: "Shakespeare in school" https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_in_school/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5mr6ws/shakespeare_i... The background story seems to be this half-hour video "Cunk on Shakespeare": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YeCpHoy9EQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YeCpHoy9EQ

fovc 10y ago

My high school English teacher met Tim O'Brian once and had a discussion about Going After Cacciato. They disagreed on whether Cacciato had been killed and ended with "George, I wrote the book; I know what happened." To which he replied, "Tim, I read the book; I know what happened."

samirillian 10y ago
I remember hearing a similar story about the adaptation of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" into Blade Runner. Ridley Scott was convinced that the protagonist was a replicant. Philip K Dick (and Harrison Ford) disagreed. In my mind, Scott had the more "cinematic" interpretation, and Dick had the more "novelistic" interpretation.
- taneq 10y ago
  Do you think this is the source of the ambiguity in the movie? I was never convinced either way, even after rewatching the whole thing recently with the possibility in mind from the start. I think it was well done either way.
  - JorgeGT 10y ago
    If I'm not mistaken, didn't the protagonist receive a Voight-Kampff test in the original novel? I remember thinking at the moment that this was a reflection on how Philip K Dick wanted to assure us that humans were very capable of evil (he was apparently very moved by the Holocaust), that the Blade Runner didn't have the excuse of being an automaton to justify the cold blood "termination" of sentient beings.

draw_down 10y ago

I agree with the teacher.

Paul-ish 10y ago

Sounds like the professor may have been a fan of new criticism[1], which disregards the authors intent. This make some sense to me, because its not really that interesting to try to debate what may or may not have been going through someones head when they created something, especially if that person is long dead. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent#New_Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent#New_Criticism