The question
Can a reading of a text be wrong? If so, what makes it wrong — and who gets to say?
Start here
Three readings of the same moment in Romeo and Juliet, all offered in this room in previous years:
- The Friar is the villain: every disaster follows one of his concealments.
- The Friar is the only adult who takes the children seriously, and the plague, not the plan, kills them.
- The Friar is beside the point; the play is about a city that arms its teenagers.
Positions to consider
| Position | The argument | The objection |
|---|---|---|
| The text decides | Evidence settles it; a reading contradicted by the text is wrong | Texts under-determine meaning constantly, which is why good critics disagree |
| The writer decides | Intention is the anchor | We usually cannot know it, and writers are not always right about their own work |
| The reader decides | Meaning happens in the reading, not on the page | Then no reading can be criticised, and criticism is what we are doing |
| The community of readers decides | Interpretations are tested by argument, and some survive | Which community? Communities have been wrong for centuries at a time |
The Indigenous-writing complication
When we read Moon of the Crusted Snow, “any reading is as good as any other” collides with something real: a reading that ignores what the novel says about Anishinaabe survival, or that treats the community as a metaphor for something else, is not just different — it is doing the thing the book is about. Bring that into the discussion rather than around it.
Ground rules for today
- Every claim comes with a passage.
- “That is just your opinion” is not an argument. Say what the evidence fails to support.
Afterwards
One paragraph: the strongest reading you heard that was not yours, and what it would take to convince you of it.
Curriculum connection
A1.5
develop and explain interpretations of oral texts, including increasingly complex texts, using evidence from the text and the oral and visual cues used in it to support their interpretations (e.g., explain how the narrator’s tone in the voice-over influenced their interpretation of the visuals in a movie trailer; explain similarities and differences between the deliveries of a monologue in the stage and film productions of a play)
Link to original
B1.6
analyse texts in terms of the information, ideas, issues, or themes they explore, examining how various aspects of the texts contribute to the presentation or development of these elements (e.g., explain how figures of speech in a text highlight the theme and help create a mood; determine how the setting in two short stories helps clarify each story’s main theme)
Link to original
A2.2
demonstrate an understanding of a variety of interpersonal speaking strategies and adapt them to suit the purpose, situation, and audience, exhibiting sensitivity to cultural differences (e.g., adapt speech according to the role/ responsibility assumed in a reading-circle discussion; negotiate consensus, when appropriate, by identifying the commonalities among the various points of view; use language and forms of address that are appropriate for the level of formality of the situation)
Link to original
A1.6
extend understanding of oral texts, including increasingly complex texts, by making connections between the ideas in them and personal knowledge, experience, and insights; other texts; and the world around them (e.g., compare their own delivery of a Shakespearean monologue with deliveries by their classmates or in professional productions; use role play and drama to explore ideas, emotions, and issues presented in oral texts; listen to a professionally recorded play and then explain how a character’s struggle resonated with a personal experience)
Link to original
A1.9
evaluate the effectiveness of a variety of pres-
Link to original