|
quote:
Originally posted by bckp
While I'm responding, I'll take the liberty to disagree with what you said about there being no answer to the enigma of an author's original intent. If there were no answer, then what did the author intend to impart upon the audience in the first place?
i did not do a great job of conveying what i meant by there being no answer. The answer is known within the author or whomever has divulged what it is from the author, but there's no way that ladi_jay would have known the answer to that, it was all her opinion and i didn't like being told what the quotation meant.
quote:
Next, I realize that you are firmly against placing words in one's mouth, as you accuse Ladi Jay of doing. I usually don't read theses that read, for example: "Walt Whitman may have signified the central role of sensuality as a bridge between the faculties of the human, as I perceive it." One simply makes a statement and proceeds to justify it. A great deal of scholarly writing is written on the premise that we interpret an author's work and justify our interpretation based on evidence.
that is true, i don't think ladi_jay's post falls under that category, there was no thesis, there was a quote and she told us what it meant. (no offense julie  i'm sorry to bring you up so much)
quote:
I'm not agreeing with Ladi Jay on what the movie director meant, but I certainly don't see directors placing specific quotations into movies so that no one can ever decide on how to interpret it.
think whatever you want, but don't impose your interpretation on others. By stating waht it meant right after she quoted the quotation she forced me to think in her line of thinking assuming that was the authors, and many other people as well. Like i said, most people won't ever think twice about the quotation and just blindly follow what she said adn that is limiting the quotation to what she thought it meant and in effect oppressing the author in not allowing eir work to be utilized however they wished.... .
quote:
However, I agree that we should agree upon the interpretation of something before making statements based on different assumptions, as you mentioned "Let us all uniformly decide what a quotation means by being given just that, the quotation." Surely we should not be saying there is one specific way to interpret what he says, but simply refusing to agree on the basis for a discussion on the grounds that interpretations lead to no good is fruitless.
it is. I'm not exactly saying that though, i mean that we should just be given the quotation and then make interpretations off that with follow up posts. Not for the initial post to just make an interpretation and then we make our interpretation off what the initial poster stated. That's just multiplying the error. We don't have to refuse to talk abotu soemthign because interpretations are fruitless, but we should not be ignorant about it. We need to keep the author's intent in mind at all times in order to get the most out of the author's work. I just pointed it out in this thread not because i didn't want to talk about it, but because i was kind of offended that she just told me what it meant (the audacity, hoho  ), and i just pointed it out more for future reference rather than to end this thread.
quote:
In any case, the quote that Ladi Jay cited is a stepping stone to the main focus of the discussion: Is the 'beauty' of a girl in her shyness, quietness, and introvert personality, as well as purity? Without a doubt, there is a notion in different societies that females must embody these characteristics/stereotypes to be accepted as 'beautiful.' Therefore, let us discuss whether this notion is true for ourselves and our societies or not.
yes let us discuss.
The beauty of a girl is in whatever society tells me it is. It's that way for everyone. I don't mean model thin girls are the most beautiful because we see them on tv and ads and the like. I mean that we tend to not like hairy girls, not to like smelly people, that kind of societal construct. There is a choice somewhere in there though as i'm sure everyone knows.
__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.
"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell
|
03-25-2003 02:09 AM
