• Next message: Hardy M. Cook: "Re: Scotland"
• Previous message: Hardy M. Cook: "Re: Iago's Evi"
• Maybe in reply to: Hardy M. Cook: "Subtext"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.2870  Thursday, 20 December 2001

From:           W. L. Godshalk <godshawl@email.uc.edu>
Date:           Wednesday, 19 Dec 2001 15:37:01 -0500
Subject: 12.2851 (R) Re: Subtext
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.2851 (R) Re: Subtext

Seán Lawrence writes (among other things),

>As for misinterpretations relying on interstices, it strikes me that you
>can't even _wilfully_ misinterpret a text unless it's first open to
>interpretation.  A text that has no gaps in meaning would leave no doubt
>at all.  None of this is to undermine our responsibility in interpreting
>texts, but it is to suggest that the gaps are as important as the words.

I would suggest that interpretation and misinterpretation are the same.
What's "misinterpretation" to me may be "interpretation" to you.  We may
dispute the "explanation of the meaning."  And, of course, our
explanations are subject to interpretation, and so on and on.

Can you explain what you mean by "gaps" in the text?  Are the following
examples of gaps? I don't know Hamlet's shoe size.  I do not know
exactly what years or how long he spent in Germany.  I do not know
Gertrude's hair color. Perhaps these examples are not what you call
"gaps in meaning." These are gaps in information.

Metaphorically, can we call the universe a "book" -- as some early
moderns did?  Would you say that the universal text is incomplete?  If
it is complete, does it leave no doubts at all? Or are "gaps in meaning"
possible even when the "text" is as complete as it can be?

Or by "gaps in meaning" do you suggest that readers cannot always
interpret Hamlet to their individual satisfaction?  Or that we readers
of Hamlet argue over the meaning of passages in the play and, indeed,
over the meaning of the play in general?  If meaning is in the brain of
the beholder, I would not expect otherwise.

I do not understand Don Bloom's objection to "sceptic ally."  We seem to
have plenty of these.  And regarding love's distances, I refer Sean to
John Donne's Flea.

Yours, Bill Godshalk

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, editor@ws.bowiestate.edu
The S H A K S P E R Webpage <http://ws.bowiestate.edu>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

• Next message: Hardy M. Cook: "Re: Scotland"
• Previous message: Hardy M. Cook: "Re: Iago's Evi"
• Maybe in reply to: Hardy M. Cook: "Subtext"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]