Walk this way

[Terrance]

Monica Belevan wrote:
> 
> Searching for a definitive reading and a definitive understanding of a text
> would demand a supremely limited mind, a natural talent for minimalization
> to apotheosic degrees.

Yes, here is a good one. 

   so much depends
     upon

     a red wheel
     barrow

     glazed with rain
     water

     beside the white
     chickens.

I read this as a sophomore in a sophomore class. 
What does this poem mean? Wrong question? What does the poet want to
communicate? 
Is that a good question? How do we begin talking about this poem? Why
are we reading it and not Shakespeare's sonnet 22 or a poem written by
our teacher or one of the students? Even if the poet tells us that this
poem is about his father and his father's farm, just a reflection, a
thought that flashed into his mind while he was looking out the window
at his father's red wheel barrow and chickens after a rain, is this what
the poem means? Does the poem have a meaning? Does it  have a different
meaning for each reader? For each reader a different meaning with each
reading of the poem? Meaning? 
Definitive? 

I think the poem could be about sex. The red wheel barrow could
represent Freud's  penis. The white chickens, a coy mistress. The
glazed....well you get the idea. 
Or maybe you don't because it's mine. All mine. Is that the definitive
reading, the one that means whatever I say today? Does each reader
creates meaning? Creates the poem? 
Kind of like saying playing Mozart's clarinet in A major is the same as
composing it. 
But there is a huge difference. Isn't there? And there is huge
difference between my playing the piano and wife playing the piano.
She's a pro. 

In the end, I guess these distinctions, while they are not artificial,
are meaningless. 

Remember when Dixon and Mason are hawking their professional talents?
We're pros. We have the tools. Kings pay us to do this. (something like
that, but I'll look it up later). But what they do, is in the end,
meaningless. The line will be given all sorts of meanings and shapes and
imaginings they never thought about, intended, or even dreamed (although
Mason seems to be dreaming about some of them). 


> 
> An educated reader is not categorically better than a layman, but the what
> sets a professional reader from a lay one is to a great extent a fairly
> consensual distinction and arguably no more than who has a more ingrained
> habit of sleeping under what type of covers.
> 
> Some use bedsheets, some use paperbags, and others hardbacks.

Gee, I don't know. Went to see a professional soccer match last night.
Although one player was categorically better than the rest, all were
better than the guys and gals I played with in the parking lot after the
game. We paid 50 bucks to see the professionals. Must say, it was a
pretty crappy match, the highlight being the opera at half-time, but
these were pros, some of the best players in the world. They don't buy
and sell these guys for 62 million $ because they are layman. They have
natural talents most of us are not blessed with and they have trained
and practiced as professionals. 
The professional reader, Like Tony Tanner (now deceased) is no layman.
He's a pro and it's not some consensual distinction that makes him so. 



> 
> But good readings are those that can be shared nonwithstanding these
> preconceptions, as a professional you have to be able to bridge distances in
> order to communicate your insights, and as a lay reader you are afforded a
> big pair of yodeler´s pants to grow into--that´s why I feel these group
> readings are a terrific essay in reading and hypertextuality. The fact is
> both the professional and the lay reader can work efficiently towards
> complementing each other´s readings--the first has the means to reinvent
> ends, and the other, very significantly, lacks a corset.
> 
> Eventually, there´s so much seed left to pick, that one can fix oneself a
> buffet of very assorted grain.
> 
> If you let me into your oatmeal I´ll parry my wheat.