I suppose the subject is completely open-ended based on our responses to any of the reading, so I will write about what interested me the most: the question over authorship and authority. Is interpretation limited to the intent of the author? Or is it for the reader to decide on the material presented, as an independent product of writing (or how ever many broad categories were outlined in the assigned reading)?
The inner critic in me would not like to choose one theory of interpretation or the other, but maybe the issue is more complicated than that.
I would like to draw on my favorite film as an example: Star Wars (1977). As most of us know, Star Wars was envisioned, written, and directed by George Lucas, who went on to direct the following five films in the series. However, his vision among die-hard fans is still controversial. You may have already heard of the famous controversy surrounding the mantra “Han Shot First.”
To summarize for the unaware and/or the uncaring, the original theatrical release of Star Wars is not available for purchase in any store or from any vendor online. Star Wars has undergone many changes from George Lucas in the nearly four decades since its release. These changes include updated CGI space battles, cleaned up visuals, and color corrections. However, certain “improvements” are deemed unnecessary by many, but none are so controversial as Han’s infamous Cantina scene.
In the original scene, Han prolongs the confrontation to get the edge on Greedo before he is killed. In the newer editions, Greedo shoots, misses at point blank range, and Han then returns fire.
Not only does this diminish the development of Han’s character, taint Greedo’s ability as a professional gunslinger, and pour lots of money into a seemingly minor scene, but it also drastically changes a scene in the minds of the original viewers of the film for no compelling reason.
So if I were to rephrase my original question in these terms, would George Lucas’s authorship status give his alterations precedence over the fans of the original? Or is the fans’ perception of what occurred originally, which I might add creates a deeper and more compelling character for Han, really what matters?
I would like to say the second option. But I must also add in fairness that films are a collaborative effort of the whole production team, despite our tendencies to view the director as the sole author like we see in literature. Lucas even claims that in the original cut, Greedo shot first, but the editing made it seem like Han was the only one. But also, Lucas’s original draft of Star Wars had Han as a slimy, green space lizard, and he thought the product he ended up with was so bad that he didn’t even attend the original premiere, so whose vision do you trust more?
You offer a really complex example where the reader’s “interpretation” is based on what we might call the author’s original intent, but then that intent seemed to change, or we realize that what appeared to be original intent was in fact just an editorial error. In a way, by privileging the effect of the first cut, even if it wasn’t intended, the reader has taken over the creation of meaning from the author, and the author’s attempt to re-insert authority–to re-author the scene–can seem over-bearing. There’s no clear answer here, but it just shows how complex “authority” can be. Great example!