Idea of Authorial Intent in “The Intentional Fallacy” by Wimsatt and Beardsley

Vaishali Anand

doi:10.22161/ijels.4415

Abstract

“The Intentional Fallacy” by Wimsatt and Beardsley is a beautifully carved masterpiece to formulate and analyze the conception of authorial intent in any literary or non-literary text. According to multiple perspective there are multiple argument related to presence and absence of authorial intent in understanding of any text. Amidst such turmoil Wimsatt and Beardsley tried to pacify this argument by citing various exemplars from Romantic and Modernist texts. In simple terms “authorial intentionalism” refers to analyzing the text according to author’s intent behind the text. TS Eliot, Wimsatt and Cleanth Brooks belong to the school of New Criticism and they deny the use of authorial intent in understanding any text. They state that author’s intentions are “neither available, nor desirable” to judge a literary work.

Highlights

John Greene has stated very wisely that whatever symbol or metaphor the author uses in his writing should not be read in relation to the author’s intentions, reason being the writing or the text is meant be read in its independence and is not concerned with what author intents to write in the text.The term “Intentional fallacy” is coined by Wimsatt and Beardsley in an article with the same name
This concept became a controversial issue between Traditional who are referred to as pre-moderns critics, New Criticism who are modern critics and Hermeneutical who are postmodern critics
A fallacy as stated by Wimsatt and Beardsley is “invalid mode of reasoning” i.e. when a critic bases the interpretation of a literary text upon

Summary

INTRODUCTION

John Greene has stated very wisely that whatever symbol or metaphor the author uses in his writing should not be read in relation to the author’s intentions, reason being the writing or the text is meant be read in its independence and is not concerned with what author intents to write in the text. The term “Intentional fallacy” is coined by Wimsatt and Beardsley in an article with the same name. A fallacy as stated by Wimsatt and Beardsley is “invalid mode of reasoning” i.e. when a critic bases the interpretation of a literary text upon “external evidence” that stresses on author’s intentions, the judgment and analysis of the text becomes fallacious. They state that author’s intentions are “neither available, nor desirable” to judge a literary work. This paper tries to ponder upon arguments by intentionalists and anti-intentionalists on author’s intention and judgment of a literary work, bringing in theories of Roland Barthes, Romantic’s expressionism, poet’s impersonality and so on

MAIN ARGUMENT

DRAMATIC SPEAKER VS AUTHOR

REFERENCE TO BARTHES’ “DEATH OF THE AUTHOR”

HERMENEUTICAL BELIEF FOR THE AUTHORIAL INTENT

CONCLUSION