Paper on Accuracy of Literary Analysis

[JohnBeck]

Hi guys, I've been lurking this forum for a while and I finally decided to make an account.

The main reason being is that I'm working on a paper relating to whether or not the education system is doing an adequate job at getting their students to accurately analyze any type of fictional literature. That is, are the students missing the intended meaning of the author and completely misinterpreting the text given to them? This investigation is not limited to primary and secondary students. Undergraduate and graduate students will also be considered.

My question to you guys is what do you think of that topic initially? Do any significant names, authors, papers or journal articles come to mind when considering this issue? Any thoughts on the topic at all will be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

[Modest Proposal]

Hey John. Well, your paper addresses something of concern to a lot of people, unfortunately it is not considered "of concern" to most of the upper level faculty who are under 80.

While to many more conservative minded individuals, older classically schooled liberal humanists and a younger general audience this idea would seem to represent the main issue with the liberal arts, to everyone else (and in acadamia, these groups are small and/or powerless) this seems to be a last gasp of a dying idea. The concept of "accuracy" is not really in discussion as regards analysis, for many reasons. But more importantly the idea that "what is accurate is what is right" is considered highly suspect. If someone writes an intelligent essay about the huge post-colonial concerns in a children's poem, by modern academic standards, it is more important to discuss colonialism than it is to discuss whatever possibly trivial concerns the author had in mind. Essentially, English programs are trying to get away from the idea that authors are geniuses from whom professors can glean Truth and pass it to the students, and getting into an age where students and professors are empowered to make their own meaning.

Now right or wrong, this is the common thought. I think this essay could prove wonderful for both you and others who are sympathetic, but you will have to first address, not what English departments are doing wrong, but the assumptions of the role of the English department, which is, in this post-Foucaultian age, very difficult. I would recommend you familiarize yourself with Foucault, Baudrillard, Debord and Barthes so that you see why English programs aren't even concerned about accuracy. Then you can address where we went wrong, why it went wrong and how we can go right.

I'll warn you about two things. First, the English department's are VERY intrenched in their view and have A LOT to lose by it changing--essentially the power would be out of their hands and back in the hands of the authors--. Also, there is a lot of logical scholarship backing their views, it is not easy to refute some of the claims made.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Ah damn, I've just typed out a response and lost it somehow, so I'll keep this a little shorter.

I think it sounds like an interesting paper though it seems like it is stretched a little wide if I am reading you right; I mean from primary to post graduate? What exactly is your paper concerning, is it focused on a particular group more than another?

A couple of side points though - I'm a little unsure of what you mean when you talk of "accuracy" and "authorial intention" and these points change when you think about the age group you are working with considerably. Personally, I don't like to think that literary interpretation as a fixed interpretation at all, certainly beyond primary level, so the whole thing becomes hard to judge in that sense until I know more about your project.

My feelings of the educational system (in the UK) changes dramatically according to what age group we are talking about, and I do have a little experience of them all, so I'm not just ranting from personal experience - I'd be ranting in more detail, so if you could shed a little more light on it I'd be happy to constructively rant!

[JohnBeck]

Well the paper would be written from a combined statistical, literary, and educational policy perspective. Basically I would have a group of several hundred primary, secondary, undergrad and graduate students analyze a controlled text - ie. one where the author has made intended meaning explicit to myself. The purpose would be to see how closely the students interpretation aligns with the authors intended meaning.

Modest: Your references are proving to be very helpful, however your perspective of the potential implication of an essay like this seems limited. Are there any suggestions you would be willing to offer as to how it could be improved and made more relevant/valuable?

[Katy North]

I agree with Modest... while your paper indeed sounds interesting, does it leave open the possibility for multiple interpretations of the same piece? It sounds a bit rigid and inflexible... perhaps you can post your thesis so we can get a better look at what your paper is all about?

I am also curious to know what grade level you're at... is this a dissertation or undergraduate thesis? I'm assuming it is at least college level, but it's hard to know for sure.

Also, maybe you could post the criteria you have for a correct interpretation... would you mean an interpretation that matches the author's intentions? Or would you consider an interpretation correct if it is consistent with any scholarly reading of the work?

Please take into consideration when you're writing this that literature is considered part of the "Liberal Arts" for a reason... it is a form of art that can be interpreted in many ways. It is not like math, where there is always a correct answer. You can no more lay a finger on one single meaning of a specific work than you can look at a picture by Van Gogh and decide you understand exactly what the author was thinking when he painted it:

http://www.vangoghgallery.com/catalog/image.aspx?fn=images/0612.jpg

[kelby_lake]

Well the paper would be written from a combined statistical, literary, and educational policy perspective. Basically I would have a group of several hundred primary, secondary, undergrad and graduate students analyze a controlled text - ie. one where the author has made intended meaning explicit to myself. The purpose would be to see how closely the students interpretation aligns with the authors intended meaning.


So basically you're insisting that everyone agrees with YOU. Because unless the author has told you what their book is about, what may be explicit to you is a dubious interpretation for others. Essentially, you're saying 'How much does their opinion agree with what I think is the author's intended meaning?' Not exactly an essay.

You could look at how much the teacher's interpretation influences the students'. Are they merely copying what they have been told or are they making their own judgements? Asking students how they form a critical opinion on a text?

[Quark]

Hi guys, I've been lurking this forum for a while and I finally decided to make an account.

Hi, John. What kind of class are you doing this paper for? Is this for Education, Literature, Psychology, or something else? That seems like it going to change your approach. It sounds like a good idea, though. You'll have to come back and tell us how it goes.


Do any significant names, authors, papers or journal articles come to mind when considering this issue? Any thoughts on the topic at all will be appreciated.

You might want to look at previously conducted studies on misreading. Your topic has interested people at least as far back as 1929 when I.A. Richards published his study Practical Criticism (Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner: London, 1929). Recently--well, fairly recently--the journal Poetics published a reappraisal of Richards' analysis. I forget the title of the article, but, if you have access to the journal (and you should if you're at a university), look up the 1995 Poetics Volume 23 Issue 4. The I.A. Richards study was a rather famous case of testing for misreading so you might want to at least familiarize yourself with that.

That's where I would start, at least. You might also want to hone your test to focus on how these students have been taught to read--since that seems to be a major reason you're doing the study. When you say:


I'm working on a paper relating to whether or not the education system is doing an adequate job at getting their students to accurately analyze any type of fictional literature

It sounds like you're trying to diagnose the woes of literary instruction. Yet, just noticing that people are reaching different conclusions than the author doesn't necessarily prove that their teachers are failing them. It could mean that language is more polymorphous than we thought. Or, it could mean that the mind has some failure to put itself in another's position and understand what they're saying. Misreading isn't just a literary phenomenon. It's also a linguistic and psychological one, so perhaps you could devise some way to make it more targeted for just your purposes. Maybe you already have--I don't know. And, don't ask me how one would do this, as I'm horrible with statistics. These are just my suggestions.