> [Original Message] > From: Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Lit-Ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 12/6/2005 6:37:04 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Interpretation and Elision > > Was thinking about the relationship between elision and > interpretation. > > If I say, "Brahms is too serious for my taste," I'm stating an > opinion that is in part an *elision* of Brahms, omitting > compositions like the Hungarian Dances, the waltzes, the string > serenades. Or if I say, "Chris Rock's comedy is racist," I'm > stating an opinion that elides all the nonracist Chris Rock > comedy. To be even more extreme, if I say the second George > Herbert poem, "Love" is about love, then I'm eliding all the > other parts of the poem, for example, the fire symbolism. > > Can you really interpret anything without eliding part of it? > There's no way to assume or see the whole of anything so I would say it's impossible to interpret anything without omitting part(s) of it. I recently read three stories by Hemingway. In all three stories, plus one I know of, the protagonist dies. Obviously death was on Hemingway's mind, given his suicide. Even so, the deaths of the protagonists (of himself) are only a part of what Hemingway was working out. I can't imagine a complex work that is entirely graspable, including real people and life in general. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html