I don't see what you're trying to argue there Dom. The subconscious is always there, even in basic day-to-day decisions.
How much of our actions is determined by free will, and how much by our sub-concious? I would argue that something as deliberative as writing would be more decision based, rather than impulse based. The more we think and deliberate on something, the more aware we should be about what we are doing. This includes writing.
They can if the author says it's valid. It's entirely up to the author and no one else to make that determination.
*Only* if the author clears it. And, again, it is suspect if the author's intent is that fluid to begin with. If the author's intent is that mercurial, how trustworthy are they?
Now you're trying to mince words. It exists because the author wrote it. Intent is something else.
Uh, the writer produces something because the *intend* to produce something.
What's "good" or "bad" is a matter of personal taste and is a separate issue from the band saying it sucks because it doesn't send the message they wanted it to.
The person who wrote something, be it a speech, a book, a song, whatever, has every right to call it "good" or "bad" based on how well it does what they wanted it to do. The Beastie Boys knew what they wanted to say with "Fight For Your Right To Party", and have decided that the song does not convey their intended meaning well. Hence, it is a bad song by virtue of not conveying that meaning. Their standard is completely objecive. They know what the song should do, and can compare their ideal results to what the song actually did.
The people who are misreading the song, while knowing its original intent, are being self-indulgent pricks.
You've been ignoring the answers. You keep claiming there is nothing the author doesn't intend, but you're ignoring plenty of legitimate literary theories that state otherwise.
[\quote]
I question the legitimacy of most literary theory.
It is the academic equivalent of snake-oil and black helicopter conspiracy theory.
At a basic level, it provides jobs by creating the illusion of productivity for people
who have degrees in a subject that has only limited real use. You know what, if I could
have stomached it, I would have gotten the Master's. And, yeah, I probably would have taught
theory. Of course, that would mean that I would be perpetuating, if not necessarily living,
a lie.
Here is an analogy:
If I am standing in front of the doorway to a pitch black room,
I might speculate about what is in that room. My speculation could be based on any
number of things. I may be familiar with the general plan for the building, and have
reason to believe it is an HVAC room. Perhaps, it might be a bathroom.
It would be blatantly absurd for me to say "I feel that this room has candy inside",
unless of course I had some actual reason to think that there might well be candy in the
room.
And, it would be impossible for me to find anything in that room that was not there,
regardless of how hard I looked. No matter fervently I believe the room is a bathroom,
I am only going to find a toilet or sink in the room if there in fact is a toilet or sink
in the room. I will only find candy if there is candy.
I may even have every reason to believe that there is candy or a toilet, (perhaps a candied
toilet), in the room. But, if there is neither a toilet nor candy in the room, my theory
wrong.
Obviously, I could have avoided much embarassment by either turning on a light or
getting a flashlight before stumbling around in a darkened room looking for sweets
and potties. If there is no light source available, they I ultimately would have to
conclude that I do not know what is in the room. If somebody shows me a picture of the
room, taken with the lights on, I can use that as further basis for speculation.
At no point would any reasonable person say that what is in the room is at all contingent
on what I would like to find in the room. I might have to poop something awful, possibly
while craving a Snickers. But, I will only find a Snickers if there is actually a
Snickers to find. It is impossible for me, or anyone, to actually find something that
is not there. Even if I have resonable expectation of finding a place of sweet release,
expectations do not lead to actuality.
Much of Literary theory effectively says that there is a toilet and bags candy in that
room because I want that to be the case, possibly even after the light has been turned on and the the room
has been revealed to be loaded with cardboard boxes...used to ship vegetables.
Dom
-but writing is magical so it does not matter.
