|
I have a quick question about a topic that is not currently at the forefront in the discussion on this (wonderful) thread, but it does pertain to it:
What does everyone define 'interpretation' as? It seems to me that interpretation can only be applicability or allegory - what Primary World ideas we ourselves get from reading about things from Faery & Middle-earth, or what ideas Tolkien intended for us to get out of it. I could apply things from Professor Tolkien's work to my own life which he did not 'intend' for me to apply, & someone could say, "But Tolkien didn't mean for you to interpret it like that!" Well, unless I the reader am given the responsibility of deciding what to take out of the work & what not to take out of it, I am essentially making my mind subordinate to the mind of the author, and in doing so submitting myself to the "domination" of the author, whether purposed or circumstantial. The only way to be free as a reader is to interpret the book any durn way you want. Just make sure you don't get your interpretation mixed up with what the author intended.
|