Monday, January 4, 2010
Reading Response (diagnostic)
“Plato’s pharmacy” was complex, but interesting. In Demerrida’s opinion, a true text should not be easily read and understood. Good writing can be thoughtfully examined, yet still have more depth than has ever been fully understood. You may never comprehend the complexity of a true text, but there is a lot of room for different interpretations. In order to get the most out of writing, you must thoughtfully engage with the work. Comparing writing to a woven texture emphasizes its many layers. Once one aspect is understood, there are still many more layers of complexity to search for meaning. It is like a game in which people have to untangle the clues and logically produce an interpretation. There are not infinite interpretations, but there is also not only one correct interpretation. It will never be easy and will require risks, such as thinking differently from others, but really digging in is the only way to gain a solid understanding. I think this type of writing can be good, but I disagree with Derrida that this level of complexity is the only type of quality writing. I believe that another skill in writing can be the ability to write clearly and concisely so that everyone is able to understand the purpose of the work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I won't usually comment on reading responses, especially this early, but I was inspired to add a couple things to yours. You do a really good job talking about the image of the text as woven, and about what kinds of risks a reader has to take. What maybe isn't as clear in this excerpt, because it is only an excerpt, is that to Derrida, even a text that seems crystal clear has a woven texture that will never fully be understood. Something seems clear because it easily fits into the reader's cultural discourses, into a kind of logic the reader already participates in. More on that later in the quarter, or Wednesday.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey,
ReplyDeleteSo I read your post, and I read Kaitlin's as well. She said something similar to me too...something about cultural differences, and about how it impacts each person's interpretations. I agree entirely. For example, would you agree with me that a hand shake is a perfectly fine way of greeting someone? I'm sure you would. Now here's the other thing, in Africa (I think), shaking someone's hand is seen as very disrespectful and insulting because they don't just see the hand as just a hand, they see it as the hand you used to wipe your bottom with. Very different cultures can very well indeed play a factor in interpretation.
I find it interesting that you mention that forming an interpretation based on the text is a risk. It's so true that as readers, we are always taking risks to form an interpretation that is not far from the purpose of the author but also one that is not far from our own cultural background. Moreover, I am in complete agreement with your statement that writing concisely is a skill that is many times necessary. It is a skill that I am also pursuing.
ReplyDeleteHi Stephanie, I definitely agree about what you said towards the end of your reading response. I also think that a good piece of text shouldn't always have to be complex. I personally think that a good piece of text should not be based on how complex it is, however more on how well can the reader engage and apply it to their life. If a text is just plain hard and has no substance even though it's precisely and perfectly written, what good is it?
ReplyDeleteWell written description and interpretation of Derrida's "Plato's Pharmacy". I would agree with the majority of what you had to say, and I believe what caught my attention the most was your description of how complex literature can be described as a game. You said that a reader must untangle the clues given by the author in order to come up with their own logical interpretation of the texts which is most definitely understandable and agreeable. I also would have to agree with you when you stated that another form of successful literature is text that is straightforward and instantly understandable for readers that are attempting to understand the art of the author's literature or trying to "untangle the web". If you read my reading response, you probably would have seen that we agreed on many concepts and wrote similar things.
ReplyDelete