Thursday, May 19, 2011

Audience (part 2): Interpretation

People say true things all the time and most of what people say is true. I can imagine the stomach-level discomfort caused by such propositions, because we are bred to be narcissists - to think that everyone but us is totally full of shit.

But to simply maneuver the world - I mean to order coffee, to give directions, to find a classroom, to have a normal, everyday conversation - we have to understand how the world operates for us. I would postulate that the world works relatively the same way for everyone.

It basically follows then that if you are surviving in the world, it is because you know how to say true things about the world. You're speech-acts are having predictable outcomes.

So what does this have to do with audience? If I assume that the person writing is saying something that they believe to be true, I will interpret generously. Even if they say something that seems absolutely insane to me, I can try to locate the ways in which a certain belief is causing the fissure. The people who seem ideologically the farthest apart, are usually but one belief away from each other.

2 comments:

  1. I like this point because I think it puts knowledge or belief in its proper place; that is, as practical or practicable. By separating questions of knowledge from the milieu of everyday life, we make a distinction between acting and thinking which can be deceptive. And, furthermore, we miss the forest from the trees, so to speak. The grand architecture of everyday knowing becomes invisible to the myopic gaze of the narcissistic intellectual.

    However, I think it has to be admitted that the differences between interpretations are more than a matter of belief. We interpret, make statements, claims and condemnations to express our desires as well as our ideas. And while we may assume a certain consistency in beliefs across contexts, the dynamics of desire are thoroughly context-bound. This, of course, is just another point regarding the practical character of knowledge. It’s because knowledge is practical that it’s bound to desire and an expedient tool for Power.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think I completely agree with your statement that "differences between interpretations are more than a matter of belief," but I'd like to hear more about what you think causes the differences. Perhaps desires? And just different backgrounds of assumptions?

    ReplyDelete