There isn't really, if you see authorial intent as one aspect of the
work's possible meanings. The way the argument has gone recently,
though, to make the specific points you want to make you wouldn't use
Pynchon to read Derrida. It wouldn't make sense.
Jim
Omlor@aol.com wrote:
> Jim,
>
> Nah, Foucault's essay is too archaeological for me. Why *not* use
> /Mason and Dixon/ to read /Of Grammatology/? For nearly 500 pages, I
> used /One Hundred Years of Solitude/ to read /Glas/ and vice versa and
> had a great time doing it.
>
> The shorthand is simply a reference to the signature. Of course the
> author's intention is one aspect of the work's possible meanings, even
> as it is exceeded when it encounters readers with their own
> determinate subject positions.
>
> I see no problem in this.
>
> All the best,
>
> --John
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Fri Aug 15 21:31:17 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 16 2003 - 00:28:16 EDT