Awritingreader’s Weblog

Though I hate to revert back to The Intentional Fallacy, there is one more small piece of their writing that has been gnawing at me for a number of weeks now. Wimsatt and Beardsley state in a tiny little aside in the midst of their criticism, “The day may arrive when the psychology of composition is unified with the science of objective evaluation but so far they are separate” (1380). In reading many of these authors it has been a constant problem for me to digest the different theories on the role of the author and how that might harmonize with my view of the author. This quote has made me wonder whether or not the time Wimsatt and Beardsley speak of is now.

Likewise, reading Roland Barthes and Bertolt Brecht has made me realize that it does boil down to a producer/consumer mentality. Though these different authors address varying aspects of the role/place/purpose

of the author, they all essentially wish to examine her place. And more often than not (at least in this mini-series of readings) the tendency has been to diminish that role.

While the psychology of composition is a more specific aspect of the author consideration, I believe that nonetheless, it stands in to represent most considerations of the author. The critical landscape that I’ve learned and lived in allows for a rather extensive conversation about the author. It is normal and somewhat expected to utilize the resources we have regarding knowledge of her in helping to further our understanding and appreciation for the work. That being said, the work must prove its own merit as well and though the lines may blur, I like to think that I examine my literature with somewhat of a balanced criticism while being aware of my own particular situation that may influence me to one understanding over the other. Even this serves to reach more balance.

And I can’t help but think of the Wise Mind. In psychology, the wise mind is that place where your cognitive and emotional responses synergize to work in harmony and create wisdom. So we might say that the study of structure and emphasis on the words/text only might be too cognitive. Whereas considering the human factor as supreme and basing value judgments on a heart response is too emotional. In this new place where both are allowed to exist and flourish jointly, one is neither dominated by the monster of rationality or the storm of emotion. Both work together perfectly to establish a psychological feng shui which results in the ever-coveted wisdom.

So though I am not naive enough to believe that my critical generation has somehow achieved perfection in our methods. I’m willing for now, until the next theory proves me wrong, say that we are living in the time that Wimsatt and Beardsley predicted and it has brought us wisdom to balance our study.