Heh, I must have written that part completely wrong
when you also got me wrong. My point was that
something like the "full meaning" cannot be reached
with any interpretation, since there is no such a
thing like a "full meaning".
--- Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: "Dunja Seselja" <[log in to unmask]>
> > As long as we expect from an interpretation to
> give us
> > the "full meaning" of the poem, I completely
> > with you.
> If that full meaning is arrived at through a long
> spaghetti noodle
> of prose, on step at a time, then I can't see how it
> is the
> full meaning. The fullness implies multilevels
> like hypertext. Standard prose is much to prosaic to
> get the
> job done.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around