N10.37.2.15 – The meaning of a literary work is not fixed but fluid

[fØrti]

Literary critic: The meaning of a literary work is not fixed but fluid, and therefore a number of equally valid interpretations of it may be offered. Interpretations primarily involve imposing meaning on a literary work rather than discovering meaning in it, so interpretations need not consider the writer’s intentions. Thus, any interpretation of a literary work tells more about the critic than about the writer.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the literary critic’s argument?

A. There are no criteria by which to distinguish the validity of different interpretations of literary works.

B. A meaning imposed on a literary work reflects facts about the interpreter.

C. A writer’s intentions are relevant to a valid interpretation of the writer’s work.

D. The true intentions of the writer of the work of literature can never be known to a critic of that work.

E. The deepest understanding of a literary work requires that one know the writer’s history.

[lsr]

Imo A.

[LegoLife]

My answer is B.

 

Assumption - "A meaning imposed on a literary work reflects facts about the interpreter"

 

Premise - Interpretations primarily involve imposing meaning on a literary work

 

Conclusion - Thus, any interpretation of a literary work tells more about the critic than about the writer

[lsr]

My answer is B.

 

Assumption - "A meaning imposed on a literary work reflects facts about the interpreter"

 

Premise - Interpretations primarily involve imposing meaning on a literary work

 

Conclusion - Thus, any interpretation of a literary work tells more about the critic than about the writer

I totaly agree (I don't know what I was thinking).

 

B it is.

[CrackXam]

I initially chose D. however, upon reading the explainations conceed with B!

[nikiforos]

My ans is D.

 

Pls post the OA

[fØrti]

OA - B

 

Thanks Lego for explanation!

[nikiforos]

why not D?

 

The interpreter dos not know of the writer's true intentions and that is why

he or she imposes his or her own interpretation; had the writer's intentions been known, literary works would not be fluid in interpretation.

 

Besides, B seems to be stated obviously..

[rawjosh]

In my view, facts ABOUT the interpreter does not mean his literary opinion. In that case, can the answer be D since if the critic knew the true intention of the writer, then we would possibly have one interpreatation of the work. Any takers?

[abhi426]

I dont agree .. It has to be C only... Its asking about the ASSUMPTION and noot the Conclusion.. The only Assumption here is that whoeever is Interpreting, its intention is to write exactly what Writer meant.. And the conclusion is that while interpretting it says things what he means and which may not be what writer meant really!!!!! But that only Assumption you can draw..

 

B is simply the conclusion.. wats the diff between the last line of the phrase and option B... It can;t be asusmption...

[EMMAHART]

I choose B

[kannn]

IMO B

 

nikiforos & abhi426,

 

C. A writer’s intentions are relevant to a valid interpretation of the writer’s work.

D. The true intentions of the writer of the work of literature can never be known to a critic of that work.

 

C & D talks about writer rather than critic.

 

As LegoLife pointed out, Conclusion of the whole argument is "Thus, any interpretation of a literary work tells more about the critic than about the writer."

 

This conclusion should be liked to the Premise.

"Interpretations primarily involve imposing meaning on a literary work rather than discovering meaning in it,"

 

Also there is another conclusion based on above premise : "so interpretations need not consider the writer’s intentions."

This conclusion acts as a premise to the final conclusion.

 

C talks exactly opposite of what is said in intermediate conclusion.

 

D: If you negate D it doesn't affect the conclusion. "True intention of the writer can sometime be known to critic".

Still it doesn't affect the argument. Bcos the argument says interpretations/critic need not consider the writer's intention.

 

Now if you negate B: A meaning imposed on a literary work RARELY reflects facts about the interpreter.

Then there is no way that author can conclude that "any interpretation of a literary work tells more about the critic"

 

IMO