As a result, literary works mean more then authors are aware of, and their meanings are unstable as the language of which they are constructed- (2104). Authors may have their meaning behind his/her story, but a deconstructive has his/her meaning it theory of story. This does not mean !.
that the deconstructive critic is wrong, it just means that the textual meaning showed a different story line to the critic. Which leads into the approach of a Deconstructive critic. .
When a Deconstructive critic approaches a piece of literature he/she has to "disguise underlying tensions, with elements in a precarious unstable balance. The surface plot may mask real underlying agendas. We may need to read "against the grain-; we many have to listen between the lines. The playwright may be sending coded insider's messages going counter to the overt surface meaning- (1088). Dr. Susan K. Proctor is a deconstructive critic at St. Gregory University drama department. This is how Dr. Proctor's describes to me how a deconstructive critic approaches a piece of literature: .
First, accept that language is slippery-what I mean by blue may not be blue to you. .
Second, accept that we understand from different cultures- I am female, I am over 50, I have traveled all my life and do not call Oklahoma my home, etc. .
Third, accept that we read (listen, look, etc.) to art for different reasons-to relax, to read political messages, to escape, etc. .
Fourth, with all of the accepted statements, what is still understandable by both of us-by your whole class, by people of another language? .
Using those four steps, you will have some experience with deconstruction. There are no answers, only the discovery of how you think and how others do or do not think. .
Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening.
Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village, though;.
He will not see me stopping here.
To watch his woods fill up with snow.
