Everyone has a different mind and brain, so everyone does not function the exact same way. When reading a work of literature, people can take in the text in different ways, and they can get same results as everyone else. You can not shove reading techniques into a perfect box just to satisfy "perfect reading rules". Vladimir Nabokov and Laurence Perrine both wrote pieces that express their theories on being the perfect reader and what a correct interpretation is. Nabokov explains a set of rules and characteristics that make up a perfect reader, which emphasizes fondling of details. Perrine is a little more flexible with his explanation, but there are still rules which imply there is rights and wrongs. I for one, and I'm sure many others as well, did not fall perfectly into their perfect categories.
One of…show more content… To have a correct poem interpretation he says it "must be able to account satisfactorily for any detail of the poem," and "relies on the fewest assumptions not grounded in the poem itself," (Perrine Paragraph 4). Perrine's rules are more lenient compared to Nabokov, but he is still firm about his rules. I may not have been paying attention to every single detail to prove or disprove my interpretation for a couple of reasons. I was considering the details of the interpretation I wanted to pay attention to, but I may not have been as determined with interpreting other ideas as much as the ones I wanted to interpret. I probably did not eliminate possibilities due to details as much as I could have because I assumed I had the right interpretation. Overall, I believe I was objective and emotionally detached throughout the book because I wasn't so invested personally in the book. For my interpretations for Ella Minnow Pea, I believe I was in the correct range with interpreting, since I paid attention to the details needed for my
