Quote:
|
My difficulty with this concept is that the logical conclusion is that those who do not interpret the text in the “right” way cannot fully appreciate it. And I am very uncomfortable with any suggestion that one reader’s appreciation of the text might be accorded greater weight than that of another. Who is to say which way is “right” and which way is “wrong”? Every reader will naturally believe their interpretations to be the “right” ones. But unless they all share the same interpretations (which could never be the case), they can’t all be right.
|
I understand your hesitation and sympathize with it up to a point. I’m not sure how or if “appreciation” comes into it, so I’ll leave that alone. But—
Take an extreme example. I, for one, am not uncomfortable in condemning interpretations like those made by
Stormfront (link is to a recent BD discussion, not a white supremacist site). And if there are patently wrong interpretations, doesn’t that imply that there are, indeed, right interpretations?
I certainly agree that differences of interpretation will occur the more we get into details, and those are great and good. Vive le difference. I think we could get beyond simple propositions – indeed, the whole providence issue already might – and still agree before we cross over the border where anything goes.