(urth) Wolfe being clear on 5HoC
Adrian Robert
arobert at cogsci.ucsd.edu
Thu Sep 21 16:10:36 PDT 2006
On Sep 21, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Nathan Spears wrote:
> I think this sort of interpretation is diversionary at best. If
> what an author achieves is greater (or more significant) than what
> he intended, then his skill as an author has failed him in some
> way. It may be interesting to look at what has "slipped out" but
> it would certainly not merit devoted re-reading and analysis, in my
> opinion. If the author's insight into his own work is less
> valuable than mine, then perhaps I should find someone else to read.
I recommend reading an excellent essay by Carl Jung on just this
matter, entitled "On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to
Poetry". It can be found in some volumes excerpting his collected
works. He refutes this view on the basis of two ideas -- first, the
writer is not operating in a vacuum, but is a conduit through which
species- and culture-universal as well as individual experiences
flow, and second, that what is accessible to conscious control and
introspection can in no sense be said to make up the entire
contribution to a creative work as complex as a poem, let alone a
novel. There are just too many aspects, too many details, too many
dimensions to suppose that the author has consciously exerted control
over every one of them -- yet they are affected and determined
nonetheless by the author (and that which has influenced him or her).
I find this an insightful way to look at many art forms. When you
start thinking about works such as major films, for example, affected
by many people, it leads to some interesting lines of thinking..
More information about the Urth
mailing list