“What is an Author?” When pondering this question on my pre-test during the first week of classes, I evaluated an author in a very literal sense. I defined an author as one who writes or composes at any level, and they create a work so they, or someone else, can read it, interpret it, and understand it.
Luckily for me, this class commenced and immediately began to broaden the definition of authorship. We threw the idea around in group discussion of how an author is like an artist, and we tried to put our fingers on the purpose behind authorship. My guess was that an author writes in order to find meaning and in order to gain understanding. I would say that Emerson would disagree with me, for he believes that the poet is one who already understands the world around them, or at least thinks they do, and so the poet’s purpose goes much further. They write to articulate the symbols of the world because they have the ability in which to do so (Norton Anthology 730).
So as Emerson writes of the poet’s articulation in the third paragraph on page 730 of our anthology, he writes to answer the question, “How can poets articulate the symbols of the world better than anybody else?” Emerson would think this question important because, for him, authorship is a result of a “better perception” (730) and so this gives the poet the right, and the authority, to express how they interpret the symbols of the world. Poets interpret such symbols through their ability to “turn…the world to glass” and to “see…the flowing or metamorphosis” of nature (730).
In regards to the class discussion we had today on Emerson’s ideas of the fall, Emerson’s assertions leave me asking why, exactly, can a poet know the “true science” (731) of the world if poets always fall short with their interpretations?
1 comment:
"My guess was that an author writes in order to find meaning and in order to gain understanding."
Leanne, I have to agree with you and not Emerson, at least as the above quote pertains to my own experience. I always find that I come to a better understanding of things through writing. When writing papers for classes, I always think I know exactly what my thesis is, or what I believe about the subject, but as the paper takes shape, my true thoughts become known to me. Moreover, the flaws in my own thinking or the counterarguments to my thesis make themselves known to me where they were hidden before.
Sometimes, when a particular problem is weighing on my mind, I sit down for awhile to write about it, to work out my feelings, my frustrations--just get it all on page (or screen, rather). And like paper writing, I find I arrive at a better understanding after writing than before.
I don't remember everything from Emerson's essay, but right now I find myself wondering whether he touched on the idea of revision in his essay. That, to me, is a crucial part of writing that often comes about because as we write we are "finding meaning and gaining understanding" and must thus revise our previous work to reflect that new understanding.
Or does Emerson just always get it right the first time?
Post a Comment