As I was reading Michael Cantor's response I was nodding, thinking of all the times I've heard people defend their work in workshops by placing all the responsibility for a poem's worth in the hands of readers. I swear there are people who would post the ingredients list from the side of a box of cake mix and spit on anyone who didn't appreciate its brilliance.
BUT...I agree with Orwn. An argument that's mostly right can be twisted around and used for any purpose, just like Scripture. So just because some people would use the "everyone's entitled to his own interpretion" view to rationalize laziness, that doesn't mean it's not essentially true. I've seen poets in TDE behave as if we were all playing a guessing game and whoever came closest to the author's intent was "correct." Pshaw! The poem is everything you put in it, not just what you meant to.
BUT...everyone's interpretation equally valid? Er, that's kind of like saying there are no dumb questions. Everyone says it, but then when you ask a dumb question they still sigh. I think everyONE is equally entitled to his own interpretation, but not every interpretation is itself equally valid. It's possible for an interpretation to be just...well, dumb.
|