Turbulence

Blue - King of Swords With rationality, you purge through the mist-of uncertainty. Weaving a sword, you snip off the knots you-cannot uncoil. You want to build a world out of pure reason. Little do you know, The world's on fire - yet - your wish's-unaltered. Have you ever wept for a withering flower?

Sometimes, it's better to just listen, not ask!

In Philosophy of Arts class, I have been taught two major schools of thought regarding interpretation of arts – hypothetical intentionalism (interpretation of arts is based on what is written in the text alongside other literature-relevant evidence such as the theme of the authors’ previous works) and modest actual intentionalism (interpretation of arts is based on what the author says they want to convey, but such has to be supported by what is written in the text). It seems to me that hypothetical intentionalism and modest actual intentionalism rely on textual evidence, alongside other literature-relevant evidence, to interpret a work of art. The extent to which each evidence plays in the interpretation of a work of art varies depending on the school of thought. I just wonder whether such an approach would do justice to the author, as language may not fully convey what the author wants to express. Let me clarify my point.