We, as human beings, define ourselves as rational creatures. We also identify our essence in "logos" (language) and consider the use of words to express our ideas as something that comes very naturally to us. The dawn of mankind is linked to the capability of forming meaningful sentences. However, in the domain of written works the situation changes a little.
Writing was not something that the first human beings knew how to do. It came in a little later by comparison to language, which began with the cuneiform method. Literature is even more recent and therefore certain questions appear, like: do we actually know how to read? In primary school, children learn how to read and write at a basic level. However, in the educational system it is believed that the children will naturally and spontaneously develop the capacity and ability to understand what they read.
The first time when the problem of comprehending texts was analyzed in a serious manner was in Ancient Greece when a gradual rupture with tradition took place and people found it difficult to understand written works that belonged to Homer. When Christianity became the main religion in Europe, cultured people turned to the Bible and wanted to identify the proper method of understanding it.
In Ancient History it was believed that the relationship between a text and its reader is one between a subject and an object. This meant that analyzing a text was perceived as being similar to analyzing a plant. A plant cannot hide its secrets from a scientist that uses the right instruments. Similarly, it was considered that if the reader uses the writing instruments he will be able to identify the message. The natural consequence of a meeting between a text and a reader was comprehension. Moreover, it was believed that a text had only one meaning, one message and that its discovery depended more not on the reader, but on his methods. The Greeks suggested that in order to understand a text you do not need to know anything about its writer and that instead you must turn to the text itself and the historical context in which it was written. However, this view left a lot to be desired.
Beginning with the 19th century, new theories start to appear. The influences of Descartes and Kant made their impact: that the subject is the one who constructs the world in knowledge. The old subject-object relationship in which there was no relationship between them dropped. The object is influenced by the subject who sees it in his own way. The new idea was: a text is a creation made by a human being at a certain point in his life that he made with a certain intention; to understand the text it is also important to identify that intention. How can that be realized? It was suggested that the reader had to imagine himself in the period and society when and where the writer lived and try to emotionally identify with him. However, that raised another question: how do you know you have emotionally identified with him?
In conclusion, where does that leave us? Well, all the theories mentioned above were dropped. They were replaced with new ones saying that the reader has a mind full of ideas that originated from his experience with the world around him. No matter how hard he will try, he will never be able to empty his mind in order to approach the text with no preconceived ideas. Therefore, he will make an analysis of the text based on his past experiences. There is no point in trying to identify that objective message behind the text, because the reader will never be eye to eye with the writer. In the process of reading two worlds collide: the horizon of ideas that belong to the reader and the one that belongs to the author of the text. The outcome can be difficult to predict. This is the reason why there are so many interpretations of a poem or a novel that made many of us in school ask ourselves: did the author really want to say that?
The most important thing to remember is that reading, when properly done, is a process with an existential implication: understanding a text changes the reader. What we read does not stay "outside" of us, because what we interpret and comprehend changes our life.
Writing was not something that the first human beings knew how to do. It came in a little later by comparison to language, which began with the cuneiform method. Literature is even more recent and therefore certain questions appear, like: do we actually know how to read? In primary school, children learn how to read and write at a basic level. However, in the educational system it is believed that the children will naturally and spontaneously develop the capacity and ability to understand what they read.
The first time when the problem of comprehending texts was analyzed in a serious manner was in Ancient Greece when a gradual rupture with tradition took place and people found it difficult to understand written works that belonged to Homer. When Christianity became the main religion in Europe, cultured people turned to the Bible and wanted to identify the proper method of understanding it.
In Ancient History it was believed that the relationship between a text and its reader is one between a subject and an object. This meant that analyzing a text was perceived as being similar to analyzing a plant. A plant cannot hide its secrets from a scientist that uses the right instruments. Similarly, it was considered that if the reader uses the writing instruments he will be able to identify the message. The natural consequence of a meeting between a text and a reader was comprehension. Moreover, it was believed that a text had only one meaning, one message and that its discovery depended more not on the reader, but on his methods. The Greeks suggested that in order to understand a text you do not need to know anything about its writer and that instead you must turn to the text itself and the historical context in which it was written. However, this view left a lot to be desired.
Beginning with the 19th century, new theories start to appear. The influences of Descartes and Kant made their impact: that the subject is the one who constructs the world in knowledge. The old subject-object relationship in which there was no relationship between them dropped. The object is influenced by the subject who sees it in his own way. The new idea was: a text is a creation made by a human being at a certain point in his life that he made with a certain intention; to understand the text it is also important to identify that intention. How can that be realized? It was suggested that the reader had to imagine himself in the period and society when and where the writer lived and try to emotionally identify with him. However, that raised another question: how do you know you have emotionally identified with him?
In conclusion, where does that leave us? Well, all the theories mentioned above were dropped. They were replaced with new ones saying that the reader has a mind full of ideas that originated from his experience with the world around him. No matter how hard he will try, he will never be able to empty his mind in order to approach the text with no preconceived ideas. Therefore, he will make an analysis of the text based on his past experiences. There is no point in trying to identify that objective message behind the text, because the reader will never be eye to eye with the writer. In the process of reading two worlds collide: the horizon of ideas that belong to the reader and the one that belongs to the author of the text. The outcome can be difficult to predict. This is the reason why there are so many interpretations of a poem or a novel that made many of us in school ask ourselves: did the author really want to say that?
The most important thing to remember is that reading, when properly done, is a process with an existential implication: understanding a text changes the reader. What we read does not stay "outside" of us, because what we interpret and comprehend changes our life.
No comments:
Post a Comment