Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

I guess all this question/answer nonsense bothers me from a literary perspective. The story ought to tell itself and if it doesn't, that means that the story is either poorly written or the fact is generally not relevant to the course of the story and the audience may decide on its own what they think. Though I don't buy all of the tenants of "New Criticism," I think their stance on intentional fallacy is right on the money. (Intentional Fallacy) Given ambiguities in a work of art, the artist is just as welcome to anyone else about what the art says or means, but his interpretation should not be privileged without textual backing.