On authors and their own work

[girlyswot]

I came across this in an article I was reading this morning and thought it had some relevance to the 'JKR's word as canon' debate.

I am inclined to agree with C. S. Lewis who commented on his own book, Till We Have Faces, : "An author doesn't necessarily understand the meaning of his own story better than anyone else..." The act of creation confers no special privileges on authors when it comes to the distinctly different, if lesser, task of interpretation. Wordsworth the critic is not in the same league with Wordsworth the poet, while Samuel Johnson the critic towers over Johnson the creative artist. Authors obviously have something in mind when they write, but a work of historical or theological or aesthetic imagination has a life of its own.

Comments

[girlspell.livejournal.com]

Interesting article, and how it applies to fan fiction. Well, I still think the artist does understand his own creation better then someone eles's, because that is why they created it in the first place.

(Pretty bold statement from someone who can not write worth a plugged nickel, considering whom I'm disagreeing with) LOL :)

On the other hand, fan fiction writers are using someone else's character..oh what the heck. I changed mny mind. Its the singer not song. There are some outsanding writers in fan fiction. You among others (we know who they are).

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Yes, I think he overstates his case slightly. Authors do generally have the privilege of at least knowing their work better, and that obviously can be a help in interpreting it. But an author can intend to communicate something and fail utterly, or not intend to communicate something else that the text clearly indicates. That's the work of the critic - not to read into the author's mind what they intended, but to discern what the text actually says.