A Literary Debate

It has always been true that people interpret pieces of literature differently, especially in the case of Shakespeare’s literary works. The two authors, George Will and Stephen Greenblatt, from the Literary Study, Politics, and Shakespeare: A Debate, have completely opposing views on how literature should be interpreted. Although George Will’s Literary Politics states that “all literature is...political” he goes on to say that people over examine the meaning of literature in order to create their own ideas on what the author originally meant. He states, “By ‘deconstructing,’ or politically decoding, or otherwise attacking the meaning of literary works, critics strip literature of its authority. Criticism displaces literature. Critics displace authors of bestowing meaning.” On the other hand, Stephen Greenblatt in The Best Way to Kill our Literature is to Turn it into a Decorous Celebration of the New World Order states “ it is very difficult to argue that the Tempest is not about imperialism” meaning that culture and politics have and do influence authors’ literature. He believes that there are hidden meanings in the art of literature and they need to be examined and studied. He goes on to say that the beauty of literature is that these meaning can change with time and evolve to mean different things therefore each piece should be carefully analyzed.

I completely agree with Stephen Greenblatt’s ideas. I think that every author writes something with a clear purpose and for a certain reason. Although we can never be quite certain on what the author originally intended the piece to mean, we should analyze the piece to form our own ideas. In fact, I think a good writer should leave their meaning hidden so each person can analyze and eventually interpret their work differently. Shakespeare has done exactly that in his book The Tempest.