Q21

[geverett]

Got this one wrong. Here are my thoughts:

(A) 13 - 17 "unified view acquired by examining only contents of the text"

(C) It's quite possible that even with their rigid adherence to the text that they could still extrapolate a different meaning from what the author intended.

[ivankrasnov88]

Just a more 'formal logic approach', correct me if I'm wrong:

The text supports the idea that if there is an intended meaning, it could be found (29-33).


Does that mean that if there is no meaning, then there is nothing to be found? No that would a sufficient/necessary flaw that isn't supported.

[bbirdwell]

Yes, (C) is an interesting choice. I think paying careful attention to the language might be helpful.

We know from the first half of the second paragraph that formalist's believe that the "author's intended meaning is legible within the work." We also know that the formalist's believe that "no work can be packed with COUNTLESS meanings," these "countless meanings" being how the reader-response advocates verge on "absolute subjectivity."

Now look closely at (C). We can approximate some formal logic here:
author not intend any ONE meaning --> formalists find NO meaning

Said another way:
author intends MULTIPLE meanings --> formalists find NO meaning

This is not what was said in the text. Even within the formalist view, authors may intend multiple meanings (just not countless meanings), and this intention will not necessarily prevent the formalists from finding ANY meaning at all. Therefore (C) is not a valid inference.

Another way to think about (C) is this: the passage states that the author's intended meaning is legible. An author not intending any particular meaning is simply not accounted for in the passage. Therefore we can make no inference regarding this.

(A) is supported by the first and second paragraphs. We know that formalists insist upon focusing on the text itself, and we know they believe that this leads to a "unified view," and again, that the author's intended view is legible.

[jimmy902o]

With respect to answer choice A, how do you account for lines 53-56? That new insights continue to emerge even after a "ostensibly definitive interpretation" has been offered?

[brandonbodie]

Hi Jimmy,

The author is referencing the reader-response theory when referencing the "legitimate additional insights" being formed after a definitive interpretation has been established about a major work. Thus, this particular reference does not mention formalists or their viewpoint.

However, other evidence throughout the passage indicates that formalists would indeed "find the same or similar meanings in a literary work," as formalists tend to focus exclusively on the text itself when interpreting these works (see lines 29-32). Thus Answer (A) can be most reasonably inferred from the given information.

[ysabel.jurado]

Just to add on, the formalist believe that there is 1) a limited set of meanings from a text and 2) and that the author's intention is evident within a text vs. Reader Response Theory which posits that there are multiple interpretations not just one.

That's how I was able to get to A.

[JamieY105]

Why is E wrong?