I think Le Guin said this in one of her essay's, the idea that if readers are taking intent in a story, that the author did not put there, then the author fucked up. A reader should find nothing in a story, the author doesn't already know about. I do not believe she was fully meaning every single individual feeling or part they might like best based on personal experience, but the overall idea/drive, context of pivotal scenes, character identification. Those, should be under the full control of the writer, or the author is less than they should be. She said a writer should have nothing in a work, that doesn't need to be there, that is not there for a very specific reason. If that is the case, then they have full control over what it means in the larger context and nothing is unknown to them.
That essay, if it is indeed she I am recalling, is a few decades old. I wonder if she still feels the same?
no subject
Date: 6 Dec 2008 12:54 am (UTC)That essay, if it is indeed she I am recalling, is a few decades old. I wonder if she still feels the same?