The Author's Intentions and the Reader's Perception
The author's intentions when crafting the text are frequently reflected in the way the text is written. In many instances, the aim is to discuss particular issues that are pertinent to the setting in which the text is written so that the issues that are depicted are understood. The issue arises, however, when an author's personal goal for writing a text takes precedence over the reader's perception, which is frequently the case. The text by Stanley Fish titled "Is there a text in this Class?" makes this issue clear. The author's primary thesis in writing the book is that the level of interpretation is directly related to the understanding by the author in composing the text.
Intention and Interpretation: The Relationship
After analyzing the reading of Lycidas, Fish's developed thesis is, "that the form of the reader's experience, formal units, and the structure of intention are one, that they come into view simultaneously, and that therefore the questions of priority and independence do not arise" (Fish, 165). In short, Fish is saying that intention and interpretation of a text are not independent of one another. Priority and independence are in regard to the term, "formal features", posed as questions in his analysis, Is There a Text in This Class? asking if formal features exist independently and if regular features are prior. Fish notes that the general answers given are that formal features do indeed exist independently, or on their own, because regular features are already "in" the text prior to the reader reading it. With that being said, the second answer would be yes, formal features are prior because they are already "in" the text, independent of whether or not the reader reads it. However, Fish argues that questions of priority and independence do not arise because he believes this assumes that the author's intention of a text exists independent of the reader's experience when, in his argument and thesis, the intention is actually dependent upon the reader's experience. Fish also argues that the ideas of prior formal features and independent formal features collapse on one another; formal features are independent because they are prior, and they are prior because they are already "in" the text because they are independent, and the argument goes in circles, an "assertion supporting itself' (162). It is a never-ending domino-effect of answers, it is difficult to tell which domino started the effect, it is difficult to tell how formal features are both prior and independent and how that priority and independence came to be already "in" the text. This ultimately suggests that the reader's interpretation of a text is a result of what the author intended the text to be. Fish's thesis opposes this and has a better explained and grounded argument, for Fish's thesis is supported by a cause-and-effect breakdown that intention is a result of the reader's interpretation.
The Reader's Experience and Understanding
Fish further clarifies the argument regarding the in the process of trying to distinguish the intention for writing, one gets to understand the intention for writing in the first place. The reader often analyzes the text that is presented to them and to the level of understanding that will be noted is based on what the reader has experienced while going through the stated version. On a slow-motion way of interpreting, it could be perceived that from a layperson's interpretation the amount of understanding that will result is proportional to the amount of energy that is placed in trying to break down the ideas so they can be understood. The decision that reader makes when going through a piece of text tend to be processional to the succession of ideas that have been made in the past by different scholars on the subject. It thus depends directly on the line and stream of things that the reader fails to understand based on their limited imaginative capacity.
The Interpretation of Text and Authority
It is thus worthy to highlight that based on the interpretation that is made, the makes the assumption that the concept of reading and evaluation tend to be interchangeable in nature. The overall impression that the reader gets when they are going through the author's mind is that the linguistic utterance tends to vary depending on the level of interpretation that is specific within the context that the framework is used. The greatest effect that is drawn from the analysis is that the subject of the interpretation of texts is directly related to the authority that is apparent in the interpretation of the text. It must be noted, however, that the decision is not inherently dependent on the process of determining the purpose and the intention of composing a piece of text. The text that is used
A New Way of Text Interpretation
The ramification of the new way of interpretation that the author insists in the text is that they present a new level of understanding text altogether. It establishes a new way of thinking about text relative to the intention by the author as opposed to a more objective way of understanding written text. The reader is thus able to draw correlations from the text based on the image that is presented in the form of words. It is thus plausible to think of the affective responses as the guiding criteria for the reader when they are trying to conceptualize a new text. An observer would note that such an effect would have disastrous consequences to the manner in which one would perceive the information that is given, Bias is a likely outcome because of the lack of objectively and freedom to exercise autonomy of the mind. The outcome is that in an attempt to follow the reader's opinion on an issue, the reader will most likely be perceived an issue from a different context altogether. The labeling thus means that the author is holding the reader hostage to think as they are thinking, which could affect the reader's level of creativity.
The Weaknesses of the Theory
It thus follows that there are glaring weaknesses in the theory that cannot be ignored. From the way in which it is presented, it is made to assume a metaphysical way of interpreting text because of the chance that the reader could also oppose the theory relative to itself. The main perspective of breaking down the theory is that it inherently interpreted in a controversial manner that is subjective depending on the framework that is defined in the society. It is pointless that there is a need to read a text when the interpretation is only perceived to be plausible with the reception aesthetics that are defined by the author of the book. It is thus questionable because the society tends to define its reality relative to the meaning that is used in the text. Problems will, therefore, result from a scenario where it is expected that the reader will be required to use deep intuition areas that are not relevant. For example, it is interesting that from a different viewpoint, the deep intuition can likely result in varied ways of understanding the text because of the limitation that is placed by trying to conceptualize the text. Such are the times that it becomes appropriate to consider the need for trying to use a unique interpretative ability that will make the stand out of the crowd. It is even worrying that issues of such a magnitude are often overlooked in the process of writing a given form of text.
The Author's Interest vs. the Reader's Interest
In summary, it is critical to underscore the fact that the text "Is There a Text in This Class" by Fish draws into the subject that many people tend to ignore despite the fact that they are often critical. The author underscores the theme that is apparent in the book by emphasizing that the eel of interpretation is directly related to the amount of effort that is placed in ensuring that the text communicates the intention of the author. It thus follows that the reader will often find themselves in a situation where they are trying to overcome their personal satisfaction while pursuing the interests of the reader, which could lead to misunderstandings. Overall, therefore, it is noted that it is yet to be known whether the preferred approach is to place the author's or the readers' interest more than any another thing.
