Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 231 posts

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#211

Post by imagist »

mhurron wrote: post #13
cderwin wrote: post #6

If she had known the answer, would that make the question any better? I remember back when I was in high school, I always sort of assumed that the authors of the poems we were tested on wouldn't be able to answer the ridiculous questions on our assessments. But even if they did, I've never been able to figure out what skills these questions were testing. If poems are open to interpretation, isn't it reasonable to thi…

> If she had known the answer, would that make the question any better? If anyone can answer what the 'correct' interpretation of a piece of writing is, it's the author. If they can not, well maybe the authors intent wasn't what the questions are asking. Of course this is a fundamental problem in the way we teach and test literature. No piece of work has a single meaning because meaning is found in the merging of the…

> If anyone can answer what the 'correct' interpretation of a piece of writing is, it's the author.

Why is that?

There are a myriad of ways to analyze a piece, and many focus on reader response rather than authorial intent. You can dismiss reader response as merely incorrect initially, but this becomes complicated when you try to analyze works written by reader response critics. Indeed some authors like Burroughs take this to the extreme, introducing randomness (via cut-up technique) to their writing in an attempt to eschew even the possibility of authorial intent. Burroughs was somewhat limited in his approach by the technology of his day, but it's not hard to imagine approaches using modern technology which remove an author from the system completely.

I am not saying I agree that reader response criticism entirely: just because authorial intent isn't special doesn't mean that reader response is the answer. Frequently reader response is used as a way for critics to use a piece of literature as a soapbox for their own ideologies, and I find that distasteful. But I do think that there's some validity to the idea that authors don't have any special authority to interpret their own work.

For example, look at the song "I'll be watching you". Sting had said that he intended this song to be about government surveillance. But almost universally this song has been (mis?)interpreted as being about a stalker. Any analysis of the song which focused solely on Sting's intent would be incomplete, because the interpretation of the consumers of the song is far more related to its cultural relevance.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#212

Post by Retric »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #210
Retric wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That ability is based on context. Ignoring the author's culture includes their language. Consider handing just that text to an alien along side a few thousand similar, but randomly generated texts.

whoa wait, how did we get from ignoring the author's intent was ignoring all context to that means you are also ignoring the author's culture and ignoring the author's culture means ignoring their language to so the only way you can analyze a text without taking an author's intent into it is by handing it off to an alien with text mining tech? I'm just saying the main context I'm seeing here is goalpost moving.

I have been consistent in my line of argument.

The written word is a medium of exchange not an independent artifact. If you read a recipe with "Add 3 cups of water." the author's intent is to tell you how to make something edible. So, it means poor 3 cups of water not take three 1 cup containers with water and add the containers and water to the mixture.

You can find examples like this in any lengthy text. But, death of the author is not about exploring that kind of grammatical wordplay it's about shielding the critic from reality. Thus, intent is both considered and ignored when it helps them.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#213

Post by EdHominem »

jasode wrote: post #41
Retric wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which fails as it assumes text must have inherent meaning. But, it lets people avoid criticism making it a popular standpoint.

>Which fails as it assumes text must have inherent meaning. It doesn't assume that. It doesn't matter whether the text does or does not have inherent meaning. The essay's point is that the reader's judgement is just as valid as the writer's. As an extreme example, the phrase "colorless green ideas sleep furiously" [1] can be interpreted by the reader as having meaning even though Noam Chomsky says it's a meaningless…

> The essay's point is that the reader's judgement is just as valid as

But it's not. The question isn't "what does this mean to YOU", but "what did this mean to the author".

If I pick words randomly I can say with authority that there is no meaning in the words, and for all your understandings you can't change that the words were picked blindly, and thus without meaning.

> The author is not the final and not the only interpretation that's valid.

As to the author's intent, yes it is. Whatever intent there was is set down with the ink on paper. You come later, as a reader, so your interpretation is at most an addendum and not part of the original.

> [...] can be interpreted by the reader as having meaning even though Noam Chomsky says it's a meaningless sentence.

Sure. But an interpretation isn't a change in the nature of the actual thing. Even if I interpret an elephant as a butterfly it won't fly away.

This entire literary "discipline" (cough) is based on refusing to use an accurate description of the practice. Everyone agrees that a text can invoke various things - even unintended things - in various readers. That doesn't mean you're finding something inherent in the text but in the reader.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#214

Post by forgottenpass »

Freak_NL wrote: post #52
Spooky23 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're lucky this is an engineer heavy forum. Around humanities people, your comment is like pouring gasoline in an open flame.

How so? Crudely generalising; wouldn't engineering types be more susceptible to conclude that there is only one sanctioned way interpreting some text rather than someone with a humanities background? (I happen to be both. Poetry to me seems almost by definition something that will evoke different responses and insights for each reader.)

Crudely generalising; wouldn't engineering types be more susceptible to conclude that there is only one sanctioned way interpreting some text rather than someone with a humanities background?

Sure, but only to the extent that phrasing around "interpreting text" implies that the meaning sought exists in the text, rather than the cascade reactions taking place in readers upon their careful observation of the piece.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#215

Post by aianus »

coldcode wrote: post #11

I still can't understand how standardized testing is useful for anything. The only true result of an educational system isn't apparent until years later. I assume it's popular for political and business reasons (testing companies are all for profit) which ultimately have nothing to do with children learning.

> I still can't understand how standardized testing is useful for anything.

It's the only fair and economic way to assign limited slots in post-secondary institutions. Assigning them subjectively leads to racism and corruption (see: Harvard et al. setting Jewish and now Asian quotas and the many undeserving rich/famous students that are admitted instead)

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-di...

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#216

Post by throwaway729 »

halspero wrote: post #199
throwaway729 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some sense, this problem at least indicates we're trying to do something right. Some knowledge is both necessary and testable: arithmetic, geometry, algorithmic solutions to common problems and properties of those algorithms, spelling of common words, basic grammar, many scientific facts/ideas/techniques. The learning objectives of Common Core and other curriculum are ambitious -- they want to capture that "deep k…

Well physical quantities like length, time can be measured. Also fungible goods like wheat, oil. But knowledge is differentiated, non-homogenous and subject-specific. So it isn't measurable. Memorised facts like spellings, historical dates and common types of exam questions can be counted but these aren't useful in themselves. Knowledge is information that can do things.

I feel like knowledge is one of those "I know it with I see it" type things. It can be assessed, but not systematically via a multiple choice standardized test. Which puts a lot of trust in the judgement of teachers.

Not exactly a politically viable solution in America.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#217

Post by halspero »

throwaway729 wrote: post #216
halspero wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well physical quantities like length, time can be measured. Also fungible goods like wheat, oil. But knowledge is differentiated, non-homogenous and subject-specific. So it isn't measurable. Memorised facts like spellings, historical dates and common types of exam questions can be counted but these aren't useful in themselves. Knowledge is information that can do things.

I feel like knowledge is one of those "I know it with I see it" type things. It can be assessed, but not systematically via a multiple choice standardized test. Which puts a lot of trust in the judgement of teachers. Not exactly a politically viable solution in America.

"I know it with I see it". Yes indeed. One has to interact with a person to know that he knows stuff.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#218

Post by matthewowen »

mhurron wrote: post #13
cderwin wrote: post #6

If she had known the answer, would that make the question any better? I remember back when I was in high school, I always sort of assumed that the authors of the poems we were tested on wouldn't be able to answer the ridiculous questions on our assessments. But even if they did, I've never been able to figure out what skills these questions were testing. If poems are open to interpretation, isn't it reasonable to thi…

> If she had known the answer, would that make the question any better? If anyone can answer what the 'correct' interpretation of a piece of writing is, it's the author. If they can not, well maybe the authors intent wasn't what the questions are asking. Of course this is a fundamental problem in the way we teach and test literature. No piece of work has a single meaning because meaning is found in the merging of the…

Not sure what you mean here, but my experience of studying literature at university was not at all that there is "one correct interpretation". There are a bunch of different critical lenses you can coherently read texts through.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#219

Post by matthewowen »

justifier wrote: post #93
Pitarou wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asimov being Asimov, he then went on to write a story about Shakespeare being summoned from the past to take a college course on his plays. He failed, of course.

professors teach to their opinion i took a shakespeare course at university where we were asked to read troilus and cressida and compare it to its source troilus and criseyde by chaucer i wrote that i disliked the piece because it just read like someone who recently got burned in love venting irrationally, noting that i liked shakespeare's version more because he gives the last word to pandarus(o) who uses it to comi…

You got an F because no one cares if you liked the text or not. That's not what academic literary criticism is about.

Re: Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems

#220

Post by hueving »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #206
hueving wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still haven't provided any motivation for why Shakespeare should be chosen over other poets.

Are you really not trolling? Likewise you haven't provided any motivation as to why the Civil War should be taught in history class instead of last year's American Idol winners (If you tell me prominence in popular or cultural memory, than indeed Shakespeare occupies the same place). Shakespeare endures well because he endured for the readers, theater goers, actors, authors, poets, artists, film-makers and academics…

No, I'm not trolling. I'm pointing out that there seems to be very little objective criteria for choosing what poetry to consume. So far it seems your argument is that it's taught because "that's the way it has been done".

The civil war is taught in the US because it had a huge impact on the development of the country. The tensions in the south today relate directly to it (confederate flags still fly today). American Idol winners are irrelevant in the context of history so equating them is silly.

Did Shakespeare's work result in the overthrowing of a government or something on that scale I'm not aware of?

Post reply on HN