WRITING: Reading

Just witnessed an amazing example of reader input changing a story that goes far and beyond even the freedom of interactive fiction. A fellow student’s interpretation of Photopia was so vivid and organized that even if I didn’t agree with her, it demonstrated the point of what she had seen as the meaning being so wildly different from most, that it gave Photopia a totally new theme. As well as her changing the story for herself, it also will no doubt affect my future reading of it and change it as well. It just blew me away.

On a more personal level, her ability to get involved within the text made me blush with shame. When we were discussing Octavio Paz’s The Wave, I wondered at this same student’s seeming discomfort of the story and acceptance of the wave as an entity, while I blithely took the writer at his word. This tells me something about how critical the personality of the reader is to a reading. While she sought meaning in stories and was excited by making sense of things, I was more willing to accept at face value, without seeking clues within every sign or symbol. At an age where I should enter “What is the Meaning of Life, Part II” I seem to be oblivious to much that should require further exploration.

Needless to say, this revelation, although a great one, has done nothing to improve my self image nor my mood.

This entry was posted in WRITING. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to WRITING: Reading

  1. ersinghaus says:

    Wouldn’t you agree that she took Gabriel and ran with it?

  2. Susan says:

    If you are suggesting that Gabriel was the starting point of the theory, I’m not so sure. She didn’t bring it up until later in the discussion, although Gabriel is certainly an odd enough name that many would tie in first with the Archangel itself (angels, I believe, are genderless, in proper Catholic faith—having been untouched by original sin). I do agree with S. however on reincarnation, so I was more receptive to her story than say, D.’s well-researched technical approach and discovery of a changed apostrophe. S. gives us a neatly tied up package that offers blessedly simple answers. I’m going back to Photopia.

Comments are closed.