(PDF) "Theory of Interpretations"

i

Pramod Ambadasrao Pawar

OF

INTERPRETATIONS

i

THEORY OF

INTERPRETATIONS

ii

iii

Dr. Pramod Ambadasrao Pawar

THEORY OF

INTERPRETATIONS

iv

Published in Cameroon by

NYAA PUBLISHERS

P.O. Box 1467- Yaounde

www.nyaandpartners.com

nyaapublishers@yahoo.co.uk

Tel. +237 677 304 697

Assistant Professor & Head, Dept. of English,

Sant Dnyaneshwar Mahavidyalaya, Soegaon,

Dist. Aurangabad (MS), India

First published, 2024

Tel.: +91 88889 51510

in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form: electronic, electrostatic,

magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without

the prior written permission from the author and publisher.

ISBN: 978-9956-30-714-2

Printed in Cameroon by

NYAA & PARTNERS COMPANY

v

PREFACE

The author is the soul of the text; he has never

been dead in any interpretation of the text. In

fact, he is alive through his own point of view in

the text, having been rested forever beneath the

super-consciousness of the text. An author stands

as a soul in the body whereas the text forms the

entire body. How can the ingrained presence

of the author be left without any interpretation

of the text? If you drop the author and simply

focus on the text, it means that you disprove the

presence of the creator and celebrate its creation

only. This leads to mean overlooking the father

as a creator and pampering the son as a creation.

The celebration of any creation in the absence of

the creator is a literary injustice to the text.

I thank my dear parents, my teachers and readers

for their moral support and supervision.

Dr. Pramod Ambadasrao Pawar

vi

Dedicated to,

The Most Charming Daughter &

Beloved Son

Aashna & Parth

vii

Chapter Scheme

Chapters Nos Chapters Page Nos.

Chapter I Introduction 1–20

Chapter II Fallacies in Textual

Interpretations

21–55

Chapter III Authorial Point of View 56–75

Chapter IV Word, Text and Reader 76–93

Chapter V Conclusion 94–118

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The author is the soul of the text; he has never

been dead in any interpretation of the text. In

fact, he is alive through his point of view in

the text, having been rested forever beneath the

super-consciousness of the text. An author stands

as a soul in the body whereas the text forms the

entire body. How can the ingrained presence

of the author be left without any interpretation

of the text? If you drop the author and simply

focus on the text, it means that you disprove the

presence of the creator and celebrate its creation

only. This leads to mean overlooking the father

as a creator and pampering the son as a creation.

The celebration of any creation in absence of

the creator is a literary injustice to the text. This

is an unfair practice in the interpretation of the

text. Similarly, the binary oppositions like man-

woman, light-darkness and presence-absence are

always unique, interdependent and inter-textual

which must not be studied in isolation. These

2

apparently dissimilar oppositions initially direct

towards uniformity, oneness or absolutism. Any

reader or researcher studies no creation in the

absence of creation. Why is the biographical

note not taken into consideration in the research

activity? The author and the text are unique

entities for a reader. They are emphatically

inseparable entities in the interpretation of the

text wherein the authorial points of view do

matter especially for the readers. The interviews

of the author are hardly taken into the hypotheses

of research. Declaring author as a dead being is

a textual fallacy. How can intent of the author

become informal and trivial in the interpretation

of the text? Writing is a species of speech or

vice versa. It is a symbolic manifestation of the

self to the world, signs to the signied, words

to the world. Writing is not the destruction of

sound, but it is a concrete creation of the creator

concentrating on the point of view of the author.

The sound is misinterpreted in the realising of the

self. The sound, which is created and presented

in the form of writing, is not the sound of the

self, but it is an essence of existence rested in

your body in the form perpetual silence. Nada is

different from a mere sound in this regard. The

origin of all creations is soul, the unmoved mover

3

of all the textual probabilities. No intellectual

discourses, debates and powers can dismantle

the extreme supremacy of the soul. The inner

voice can be experimented, experienced and

trans-deconstructed in writing. Hence, writing is

an intuitive replica and a mentor of the point of

origin. Writing is functional in the practice and

pursuit of in the text. An idea of the inner self is

always codied in writing. It can be termed as

a speech-manifesto. The author is a genius who

experiments the experience of abstract notions

of various points of view in writing. Hence, the

author is a text-warrior who drops bloodstains

into the text. An author is often a deep-seated

being like a soul into the linguistic super-

consciousness of textual tapestry. His presence is

the absence of the self and absence is the presence

of his point of view ingrained into the text. The

text is inadequate in its totalitarian nature to the

fullest sense of absolutism. It demands further

contexts for the completion of meaning. Every

text retains its perfection in itself until the readers

are to divulge its essence to its fullest. This is a

scrupulous investigation into the self, how can

the text mistrust the absence of the author within

it? The meaning is often found within or without

the text. How can one mistrust the presence of

4

the author and rely much more on the circulatory

meanings in the text ending in a asco? The

heated debate on the presence of author in the

text is paramount at all times sensing the author

within it. The unique methodology of reaching

the author decenters the text and throws us into

the labyrinth of uncertainties and ambiguities.

The linguistic system compels us for the textual

analysis to the hidden meaning rapport within the

text. Do you really understand the text once you

fathom the science behind things? Is it necessary

to comprehend the centre in the text, embedded

by the writer in the text? All these questions are

relative to all in the interpretation of the text. Belief

and Science are two different entities of human

rationality to peep into the essence of inanimate

and animate objects in nature. Belief is assumed

irrational, illogical and superstitious whereas

science is experimental, logical and rational. It is

a meticulous and precise method for interpreting

the visible objects in nature. Intuition is a unique

entity in the body, which lies beyond human

interpretation. It is very difcult to dene what

intuition is, how it functions in the body. Nobody

has ever understood where it lies and how it

monitors the entire system. Its reference is with

the biological system in the human body. Man

5

hardly knows about the interrelated functioning

of all the entities in the body. The body has

emotions, air, mind, intuition, soul within it, but

none of these is present if the body is detected

thoroughly. The absence of all these things does

mark their presence in the body. In a sense, the

body is the text and soul is the meaning. The

text itself is a complete entity for signication

wherein the author is neither dead nor alive for

the readers. He is always in signiers reaching

the signied. Text is thus a coded secret of

signication in an authorial point of view. It is

restructured within the singularity of meanings.

It lies in a state of super-consciousness, yet to

be fathomed by readers. Neither a reader nor an

author can sense its super-consciousness unless

it is internally experienced and experimented by

them.

The text is a 100% genuine creative literary

product created by an author; the critics as

readers misread its 25% purity. 25% is deeply

structured in absences and the rest of % needs to

be trans-deconstructed to reach the textual super-

consciousness and absolutism in the text. . The

text is a complete body of super-consciousness,

which needs to be trans-deconstructed rst. The

text is full of ambiguities in-built in the text,

6

beyond denition, interpretation and analysis.

Can anybody conrm that the ideas, which are

beyond human understanding, are disbelief

and wrong in conception? Can we assume that

the science behind all sciences is illogical? Do

we agree with the notion that things, which are

unknown to the human mind, are not trustworthy

and genuine? The human mind can differ with the

meaning linguistically, but not a philosopher and

a transcendentalist. The mind is equipped with

restrained, constrained and stereotyped notions

of life. The text is full of meanings without what

the text talks about it. There is a unique method

behind the theoretical approach of a critic that

every discourse denes the precise position

of the human mind and natural demarcation of

human reach to know the signied. It does not

mean that there is no signied at all! Yes, the

signied, which is understood experientially,

cannot be experienced. For instance: in music, the

harmony infatuates us spiritually and the rapture

is felt within experientially, not experimentally.

To analyse and interpret the text, what the

text means to itself is a case of introspective

comprehensibility where the words can justify

the exact interpretation of the text unlike music.

Similarly, there are many objects in nature, for

7

example, air as a natural element can be felt,

but not expressed in words. The emotions and

feelings in the body, the shifting nature of mind

can only be experienced, but not experimented.

This is what I mean through transcendentalism

and trans-deconstruction that there are many

views beyond human comprehensibility, which

cannot be theorised and put into practice. Can

we call them invalid, fake and non-scientic?

In fact, the carries the absolute meaning of all

meanings for all the discourses. The discourse

we are talking about lead to heated debates again

as it makes us peep into the unresolved issues

of the text and meanings. Immaterial things can

be material unless it is scientically proven. The

presence of the author in the text is a bio-cultural

fact. It is an act of self-revelation in writing.

The author is a belief in actuality in the text. His

expression through other literary creations is

an amalgamation of art for art’s sake in its true

essence of meaning. This is always conceived

to be the perpetual presence of the author in his

own point of view into the text.

Education ultimately brings out a positive visible

change in the society. It is a concretisation of the

abstractions perceived by human beings. These

abstractions are nothing but the amalgamation

8

of reections received within and without by

the readers. Therefore, the readers are not the

nal authority to conrm the nalisation of the

meaning. The reader is simply a mediator to

communicate with all others for what the text

always stands by. This signication and the nal

analysis of the interpretative nature of the text

can be reanalysed and reintegrated in the context

of the textual super-consciousness. Interpretation

is not a novel term for critics and readers in order

to understand the text thoroughly. Generally, the

readers go for the critical readings of the same

text under consideration and this simply receive

certain observations which are the reections

made by critics on the specic text. In this

fashion, the specication for the particularisation

of the text leads to the generalisations in the

interpretations of the text. In fact, the specication

by an individual as a relative reality can never

be generalised or the generalisation of anything

in this world cannot be particularised. It simply

means the generalisation and specication of

certain objects are nothing but the creative

product of the extreme intellectualisation of

human minds.

The textual experience has never been ubiquitous

to readers. Interpretation seems to be a necessary

9

step to realise its own dimensions of perfection.

However, the perfection is not relative in its

perception. In a sense, human perception is

deception. Interpretation and intellectualisation

of the thought-processing are ingrained into

the text. The text mostly conceals its originality

and reveals its articiality. The originality and

the articiality of an art is the product of the

writer. However, the readers of the text in their

linguistic formulations held in the text nd this

originality of the text. It seemed to be an illusion

of the truth because the truth is something,

which cannot be affected based on doctrine.

Therefore, intellectualising things all around us

is the formation of the theory, which is nothing

but the emergence of the coded words. It is to

be interpreted in terms of the theory as entitled,

which also signies the coded information of

the things, which have not yet been encoded

into the theory. However, the theory is an

interpretative process of intellectualisation of

facts. Knowledge is the prime concern of almost

all human beings, but what is knowledge is a

specic understanding of each individual based

on its relative consideration of the facts around

him. However, the knowledge that we perceive is

the knowledge that we comprehend. Knowledge

10

that we nd all around us is knowledge that is

through our sensory organs. . Knowledge is not

the knowledge of perception; knowledge is not

the knowledge of around us, the knowledge is

not perceived only through true observations

and interpretations. They are unied with the

sensory organs bestowed by the Supreme Power

upon human beings. In fact, knowledge is

something different, which lies beyond human

comprehensibility, the human understanding, the

human perception and the human capability.

Knowledge is the human potential and the power

within the human body. In human body, there are

different sorts of powers. There are three kinds

of power in every human body. For example,

there is the power of the mind, the power of

the intellect, the power of the soul. However,

the most powerful thing that lies within our

body is the power of the soul. The soul is the

truth; the soul is the fact that the soul is a living

entity. The soul is the Supreme Power; therefore,

knowledge can be interpreted as the knowledge

of revelation. Therefore, what is revealed is

not the knowledge sometimes because we are

not in pursuit of the knowledge that we have

been persistently and ceaselessly attempting to

achieve. Knowledge is something different from

11

the human perception. Knowledge is an entity,

which is beyond the human intelligence. So, here

we are surely talking about universal knowledge,

is hardly known to the people on the earth. So,

here are the things which are very difcult to on

the path of knowledge and this acquisition of

knowledge becomes the actual information of

the facts. Interpretation is certainly a cognitive

process of realisation of things all around us.

It is mostly based on the of things. Fictional

reality existed as the essence of existentialism.

The interpretation of the text comprises three

things; rst, decoding of the coded information.

Secondly, reading is for the absences in the text.

This is to be understood in contrast with the

presence in the text. Thirdly, is to be transferred

to the crux of the things into the text in which the

super consciousness of the text is further made

in order to meet the absolute or the ultimate

meaning of the things. Everything seems to be

plural, but it is singular. The plurality of things is

the product of interpretation. Interpretation is a

diversied approach that is mostly merged into a

unied approach of singularity.

Plurality causes directionless discourses in all

human sciences, which ultimately lead to the

non-essence of existentialism. Therefore, many

12

theories are integrated to exactly understand

what the things really are, but it is found that it is

difcult to dene things. It is difcult to analyse

things and it is difcult to interpret things unless

we have knowledge of the universe.

Universal knowledge is such knowledge, which

needs the entire understanding of the spirit. The

samadhi means sam plus aadhi, which means

spiritual restoration prior to the stage of spiritual

being. Samadhi is the congregation of mind,

body and spirit in the spiritual meditation on

time and eternity. It is a regaining of the self to

a previous position. There is a unication of the

present position with the universal position. In

this fashion, it is important to understand that

interpreting things is quite a simple thing, but

this interpretation needs to be encoded with

the nalisation of meaning. The permanence

of things cannot be perceived as truth where

all the answers of the questions raised need

to be resolved to its fullest sense. Actually,

interpretation is a continuous action based on the

process of explaining the core meaning of the text.

The interpretation is made and the information

received is called interpretative data. This data

has nothing to do with universal knowledge.

The interpretive data or information is a product

13

of the knowledge received through the sensory

organs of the human body. Therefore, knowledge

of senses is not universal knowledge. Knowledge

perception is not universal knowledge.

Knowledge of things existing all around you

is not knowledge of the universal. Knowledge

is an intuitive truth existing within the human

body, which knows the truth. This absolutism

can be internally experienced through the super-

consciousness of the being. Even this is the

theorising aspect of knowledge; it is interpreted

as cosmic knowledge. This knowledge again

falls into the category of relative knowledge. It

means knowledge is relative knowledge, which

is different from person to person. Knowledge is

obtained from the sensory organs, which is meant

to be the knowledge of the physicality of material

nature. Therefore, this physical nature is not the

nal entity of universal knowledge. All human

beings know nothing about such universalism,

which is inherent in the law of nature. It means

that effectual understanding of the things all

around us is essential. There are a number of

interpretations by different human temperaments

and the intellectual capabilities. It is of thinkers

for whom no interpretation seems to be the nal

entity of all human discourses. All interpretations

14

are actually used to interpret the creative work

of art, but the author has already interpreted the

creative work of art. It has already been trans-

deconstructed; it has already been transferred

to the textual super-consciousness. Still, what is

required as a systematic approach of integrating

the text at its super-consciousness level is a prime

concern of every trans-deconstructionist.

There is a fallacy of judgement in the

interpretation of the text if the author is removed

from it.

Not everything can be understood based on

reason; there are some impulsive instances,

which play a crucial role in the interpretation of

the text.

No critic can study the text of the author in its

fullest sense.

Why do interpretations demand further

interpretations? The basic reason is that the

author is eliminated from the literary studies.

No critic can keep the human mind on the palm

in the laboratory and study it to its fullest sense.

Thus, the author is for every interpretation of the

text.

The concern of the author as a creator is an

aspect of the humanitarian literary study. The

15

special study of art and literature are to be studied

by keeping the author at the centre for what he

really is and what he exactly means throughout

the text.

The interference of the author for the

interpretation of the text is to understand the

essence that never spoils the purity of the text.

The purity of the text is governed by the

authorial point of view.

Subjectivity is to be studied along with the

objectivity of the text for interpretation.

The subjectivity and objectivity both will

go hand in hand in research, which will help

us to understand the text and this will help the

reader correlate his experiences with the textual

experiences. Therefore, the authorial point of

view ingrained into the text is essential for the

interpretation of the text.

In the trans-interpretation of the text, the text

is studied based on the psychophysical-cum-

spiritual factors of the text.

The author should be studied to the super-

consciousness of the text.

The shares his biological experiences with

the readers to prove the identical nature of

experiences.

16

The has his different experiences of the

economics, politics and society into the text to

justify the topic under consideration.

The world of the reader is completely different

from the world of the text and the world of the

text is closely associated with the world of the

author.

The author is the creator of the text, so the

creator knows much about his own creation.

The creator knows much about the created

facts for interpretations.

The author monitors the composition of the

text; hence, the primary rights are borne to him

only.

The reader should be engrossed in the text as

the author engaged at the time of writing.

The author has a humanitarian outlook for

writing his work of art.

Humanity is a basic doctrine of authorial

writing.

The author always dreams to bring in a positive

visible change in the society.

The author writes the text and the text is

separated from the author and the text is handed

over to the reader and the reader handles the text

17

in his own ways and attempts to know what the

text is all about.

The reader reads the text without the authorial

presence into the text.

The death of the author is the death of the text.

The birth of the author is the rebirth of the text.

The death of the text is the textual fallacy for

interpretations.

The reader is irresponsible for interpretations

because the reader has never thought about the

authorial point of view into the text.

The physical and spiritual facts are exposed

in the text. The exploration of physical facts is

easier spiritual ones for a critic.

This is equally important for a reader to know

how the text is created, why the text is created,

what are the impressions that the author had had

before the creation of the text.

Speech is divine in form whereas writing is

human in function. Speech cannot be written as

it is at the time of authorial creation of the text.

25% portion of the text is left out at the time of

the creation of a literary piece of art. The author

writes down the rest of 75% anyhow. Therefore,

the interpretation is of the written text and the

18

portion of the speech is excluded.

Whenever the text is written, the glimpses of

speech are borne only by the author, not the reader.

The intrusion of the author for the interpretation

of the text is necessary.

Super-conscious

ness, intuition, transcendentalism,

trans-deconstruction, monism are the key terms for the

trans-interpretation of the text. The on impulse rather

than reason, super-consciousness to unconsciousness,

monism to multiplicity, subjectivity to objectivity,

oneness to binary oppositions, trans-centre to centre

are the key points to study trans-inte

rpretations.

On the other hand, mere trust on the plurality,

observations, experimentations, logic,

rationalism, realism, relativity is not enough for

the exploration of the text in an absolute manner.

The presence of the author is much more

important for the interpretation of the text.

The discovery of the author in the text is not

the prime tool of a critic.

The summation of a critique as an interpretation

is not an ultimate goal of a critic.

The discovery of the author lies within and

without will certainly help the critic to reach the

nal signication of the text.

There is no death of the author in the trans-

19

interpretation of the text.

The author-text-reader, a trilogy is merged

into oneness.

The writing is an experience of the author and

the reading is a re-experience of the author.

The experience of the reader is relative in the

interpretations of text and has no scientic base

with it.

The Supreme Power and the author know the

actual meaning at that particular moment of time.

The text relates to the fondness of objectivity

and subjectivity in guise.

The author is completely blind about his

writing.

The reader knows nothing about the text, but

the author knows everything about the text.

The assistance of the author facilitates the

interpretation of the text.

The text is engaged with words and the words

are signed by the text.

The author represents the ambiguous nature of

the text.

The ambiguity of the author is manifest in the

language of text used by the author.

The text always carries the real experiences

20

and dialogues of the author that ascertain the

presence of the author into the text through a

sketch of the characters.

The author wanted to reach where the text

seems to be conspicuous, distinctive and tted.

The destination of the text is the fullment of

the objectives of the author.

For objective analysis, the reader has his own

cultural background for interpretations.

The reader has his historical knowledge for

repeating history for the sake of interpretations.

21

CHAPTER II

FALLACIES IN TEXTUAL

INTERPRETATIONS

It has been an interesting fact to dene what

exactly interpretation means to the readers.

Interpretation has never ever justied for the

nalisation of meaning to its fullest sense.

With more interpretations, the multiplicity of

interpretations ends in chaos.

Interpretation is an interpretation of interpreted

text. The readers interpret the text to reach the

nalised meaning, but it has been difcult to

understand the crux of interpretation. The process

of interpretation keeps the readers engaged at

the textual super-consciousness, which helps the

readers get rid of the labyrinth of the interpretative

nature. That is why, the multiple theories regarding

interpretations make a go for the interpretations.

Interpretations especially in Arts and Humanities

have potential reception in human discourses due

to their utmost importance in every discipline of

knowledge. Whenever the text is read, the author

has to be trans-deconstructed. , the critic most of

22

the time trans-deconstructs the text. This method

of deconstructing the text becomes quite easier

for the readers to reach the signied in the text.

The words are simply signiers because the

manifestation of the meaning heads towards its

. This manifestation of signiers towards the

signication is nothing but the application of

different methods to reach the signied. The

text is made up of signiers; all these signiers

are presented in circular motion in a text. This

circulatory sense of signiers is quite enigmatical

for the readers. The readers are not able to

understand where to proceed and where to cease

its interpretation. Therefore, the diversifying

approach in the interpretation of any text is an

integral part of the perception of human beings.

This perception is an inherent part of human trait.

The perception is relative in its interpretation.

For instance, there is an elephant and seven blind

men. All these blind men are asked to narrate

the experience of touching an elephant, as the

object. It resulted into the from person to person

even the object is the same. The objectication

of the thing on the perception of reality marks

the traceable essence of entities into the text for

the reader’s natural inclination and scientic

temperament towards the interpretation of the

23

text. He talks about many ways of integrating the

text but the author refers to a unique interpretation

where all the interpretations march towards the

nal signication for the absolute meaning of the

text.

The meaning of the text is unravelled through

different approaches in interpretations. The

approach is usually considered a unied

approach to the readers. The meaning is rich

with multiple choices of plurality into the text.

Understanding is the prime concern of every

reader most of the time. The reader reads between

presence and absences inherent in the text, he is

engaged in the process of trans-deconstruction.

He is seen to be with the process of transferring

knowledge. The transfer of knowledge from

multiplication of signiers to the signication is

a unique process of trans-interpretation. It thus

reaches the nal signication. That is why, it is

said that interpretation always asks for further

interpretations. Therefore, this furtherance

is deeply rooted in the ambiguous nature of

interpretation. The fact is that every man has his

own wit. Wit is a relative ending into multiple

discourses. For the interpretation of any text, a

few steps are essential to be undertaken in order

to fathom the genuine meaning of the text to its

24

fullest sense:

1. Reading for the signiers

2. Reading for the absences

3. Application of knowledge

4. Transfer of knowledge

5. Binary oppositions and trans-deconstruction

6. Meaning rested within the text

7. Interpretation of the text without

8. Understanding the relativity of the text

9. Absolutism or nalisation of meaning

10. Knowledge and sense-perception

11. Interpretation within and without

Interpretation is nothing but an exploration of

the textual super-consciousness. It is the research

of the researcher to interpret the textual power

rested within the text. It is mostly interpreted

into the text wearing the ornaments of images in

guise of truth that is meant to be what it is not

sometimes and it does mean what it is voiced. The

search source of interpretative analytical modes

of thinking matters in the textual interpretations.

The rationality of interpretations matters which

is the interpretation of an impulsive reaction

to the object in consideration of the truth by a

few thinkers. However, a few thinkers are of the

25

opinion that interpretation can be made based

on rationalisation or intellectualisation of the

signiers in the text rather than impulsiveness of

an individual emerging out of yoked emotions,

feelings and sentiments. Therefore, it is important

to analyse a text based on the images implied

into the text wherein the meaning is ingrained

into signiers or of the meaning without the

text. It simply means interpretation of any text

can be trans-deconstructed in order to cope

with the perpetual silence of the text. All over

the text, interpretation is an intellectualisation

of the interpreter intruded into the text. Finally,

the readers come up with the nal solution of

the textual interpretation where the meaning is

an inner and outer entity of the subconsciousness

of the text. It means that the text within is

without. What it always means is simply the

textual power, which is a product of textual

supremacy profoundly rooted into textual super-

consciousness rather than textual impulsiveness.

The author writes the text. It is generally

assumed that the author is no more alive in the

text. However, I think the death of the author

gives room to the birth of the interpreter. The

declaration made by critics is that the death of

the author is the birth of the reader. It means

26

that the reader is always engaged with endless

interpretations and confusions. The author does

not write the meaning of the text. It is absolutely

enigmatic for the innocent readers to go for further

interpretations. Precisely speaking, it never

means due to its mysterious nature. Interpretation

is endless due to a decentralisation process that is

coherent in the text. It is decentralised further at

the centre of the text in the form of the unication

of all the diversied signiers into a single entity

within the text.

There are a number of questions, which remained

unanswered in the process of interpretation

in the text. All the interpretations made by the

critics need to be re-interpreted in the context

of nalisation of meaning. Interpretation is not

an intellectualisation of the text but merging of

the authorial sense within the core of the text.

Reanalysis and the reconstruction of the text

demands further interpretations. It is a rational

process of individualism to mean what he means

rather than what the text means. There is a big

difference between what the text means and what

the text is. The meaning of the text and the text itself

meaning what it is all about can be re-analysed

and re-interpreted through the consideration of

a new mode of interpretations. It means that the

27

process of interpretations is endless, but can be

ended with the singularity of all the divergent

pluralistic modes of interpretations.

A special trait that a human being has is the

quality of expression. Knowledge is revelation,

revelation is expression and expression is

codication, codication is de-codication,

de-codication is interpretation, interpretation

is unication of all the facts, unication is the

nalisation of super-consciously sensed textual

singularity of all the diversied approaches of

interpretations. This open-ended expression is

interpretative in its own nature. The expression

is the revelation of the self in the form of a

text. This revelation is the authentication of the

scientic and non-scientic facts to be observed

and analysed in a specic time of interpretation.

This is being governed by the rationality

rather than impulsive nature of an individual.

Therefore, every man has his own impressions of

life. These impressions accumulate in the form

of observations and interpretations. Such a group

of divisions is being hypothesised in order to

reach the desired goals. Such observations need

to be claried, analysed and veried in order to

exactly meet a certain conclusion where the text

becomes possessive with innite interpretations.

28

So, these interpretations are made critical to us to

know what the text always means to the readers.

The matter of the fact is that interpretation can be

proven as the nal interpretation or the ultimate

interpretation of the text. The critics are in pursuit

of the unique interpretation of the text. The trans-

interpretation of the nalised interpretations is

the emergence of absolutism.

Researched interpretation actually refers to

the expansion of unravelled ideas, but not the

complete entity of the textual essence. The ideas,

which are innite, are of high consideration

in every spiritual interpretation. This innite

approach of interpretations is a unique approach

of plurality. Then, it also demonstrates the

multifaceted perspectives the unied texts. It

disseminates the explanation of the interpreted

text or much more. The constant explanation

of the text does not mean that the text has been

fully combed. It does not mean that the text has

already been , which is a continuous ow of the

rationalisation of individuals. This rationalisation

has never been mature through interpretations

or by the means of interpretation in a point of

fact. Interpretation is constantly examined if a

thing raises a question. How can we call it as

29

an interpretation of interpretations? Therefore,

the text needs to be interpreted for its absences.

It must be blended and internally interpreted.

This process of interpretation is like a divisible

atom, which can be applied in research of

interpretations in order to interpret the text to

its fullest sense. The interpretation correlates

with intuition of the symbolic explanation that

has almost marked its presence in the absence of

the text. Any discourse constantly integrates the

culture and this interpretation means the act of

interpreting interpretations. It has been pursued,

for instance, by the geo-politicians and geo-

economists to bring out the social consciousness

and much-debated issues through interpretations.

The discourses in human sciences are researched

for further interpretations. They are based on

the ideas of interpretations. The translation

of the ideas emerging from the mind of the

poet needs to be interpreted. The translation of

authorial ideas needs to be reconstructed where

in essence they can be fathomed. Therefore, the

act of interpreting the text is the translation of

ideas. This act is a rebirth of a written version

of the text or a reconstruction to understand the

theoretical hypothesis on the textual inheritance

30

of the author. For the interpretations of the text,

understanding the psychological state of the

writer is not a fallacy. The author writes the text,

but his presence in the form of point of view has

averted the interpretations of the text. No author

has been dead in any interpretations of the text.

His presence is marked by his absences in the

text, which is underlined through his point of

view. It thus means that the author is still alive in

the super-consciousness of the text in the guise

of characters, plot, setting and dialogues. His

point of view is omnipresent, ubiquitous, and

conspicuous in the super-consciousness of the

text.

The author has already revealed his essence

into the text. His revelations can be interpreted

through the transformation of his emotional

process of intellectual capacity, his assimilation

of knowledge. Even the intrusion of the author

into the text seems to be subjective by its nature;

it is high time to research the authorial point

of view into the text in a scientic way. , the

author is paramount everywhere that needs to be

researched. Research is executed in pursuit of the

knowledge. It is the research of the physicality

of the text rather than the untold presence of the

author. The research should be an amalgamation

31

of subjectivity and objectivity to reach the super-

consciousness of the text.

The process, which is meant for the simulation

of knowledge through its interpretation and

analysis, is of utmost importance in research.

The research tools need to be used to know the

textual differences.

Ideas are assimilated into the text in the form

of authorial point of view. In this fashion, there

are many ways of ascertaining textual integrity

and super-consciousness. For example, the text

is 100% in its totality; therefore, it becomes

difcult for the readers to interpret the complete

essence of the text. The readers through their

perspectives study 50% of the text in a biased and

prejudiced manner. The rest of 40% of textual

comprehension is attributed to the exposition of

characters, setting, plot, dialogues … etc. The

last but not least, 10% of textual comprehension

is borne by the point of view of the author for

its complete interpretation. The analysis lights

up interpretations in the text by the author.

The authorising of clarications is made in

terms of the interpretations, which conceals the

constructive nature of the text.

The author is addressed to the text. The text is

32

addressed to the reader and the reader is addressed

to the author into the text. The circulatory

move of the interpretations sets up the textual

power in its totality. This is one of the traits of

interpretations. This reconstruction needs to

be trans-deconstructed to read the respective

responses of the readers in multiplicity. Trans-

deconstruction seeks to fathom the essence of

super-consciousness into the text. Interpretation

is mostly mistaken for sedation, simplications

and summation in a theoretical way. It is, in

fact, an intellectualisation of textual super-

consciousness encompassing the authorial point

of view as a tool for interpretations.

The textual interpretation is nothing but an

oversimplication of the ideas. Through

numerous precautions made by a critic,

interpretation refers to utmost exigencies of

research wherein a scientic explanation of the

objects all around it does matter. It is the nature

of interpretation where mere understanding plays

a crucial role rather than 100% interpretation

of the text. Interpretation often marks the

explication of an idea in the guise of perfection.

It helps the readers expose what the text has not

yet exposed. Integration helps the critics expose

33

what the text has concealed within. Therefore,

this exposition needs to be trans-deconstructed

and integrated for further research. Assimilation

of ideas for trans-interpretation can have its close

connotation with enlightenment of the text. The

text can further be illuminated based on the ideas

within the asymmetry found in the text.

Interpretation is nothing but a translation of

written communication. It also means the

revival of knowledge, which has already been

revealed in the text. Interpretation has been

encoded into words, which have already been

set as the doctrine for the human perception of

knowledge. It has been interpreted based on

verbal communication. Interpretation is a system

of the verbal communication, which is translated

into written communication. In interpretation,

the nature of translation is simply symbolic in

all human discourses. Interpretation is closely

associated with observation and analysis of

the text. The observation is based on sensory

knowledge of the text. Knowledge acquired

through ve human senses is a knowledge of

a physical world. Knowledge is perception.

Perception is deception. Universal Knowledge

is within and without. Interpretation seeks to

nd out the centre in the text. If knowledge is

34

the centre, the centre becomes perception. As

perception is deception, the centre has thus

become deceptive. Therefore, in interpretation,

the text needs to trans-deconstructed to reach the

signied, truth or absolute. Trans-deconstruction

often seeks for the truth. Truth is considered as

super-consciousness, Universal Knowledge in

this context.

Knowledge leads to the accumulation of the

facts and the factual analysis of the knowledge

sensed by an individual can be termed as the

knowledge of relativity. This observation

does not have any enlightenment, but it is a

bit of a justication in its own accord. Self-

observation is a cognitive process based on the

mathematical measurements. Observation is

something that features qualitative factors rather

than quantitative in nature. This non-qualitative

nature of the observation leads to the multiplicity

of interpretations. The nature of the types is so

quantitative in nature that the observation is

opposed to a qualitative nature of the text as

assumed by the interpreter. In this fashion, every

interpretation is essential at a xed point to nd

out what has been observed. Therefore, this

observation is sensory in perception. It is based

on human sensations, human rationalisation and

35

human interference of the real knowledge.

Therefore, what is observed is what is interpreted

into the text. What is interpreted is what is trans-

integrated, what is trans-integrated is what is

nalised as the absolute meaning, and what is

nalised is the non-indulgence of the human

mind with the impulsiveness of an individual.

The instinct in the individuals helps to seek

out the essence underlined the text. For such a

change, one trans-interpretations in accordance

with trans-centrism.

Trans-centrism is a new term in literary theory

specially coined for merging consciousness and

subconsciousness into the super-consciousness

of the text. The text has not been alienated

from its centre. Every text has a centre, which

can be interpreted with the assistance of trans-

centrism. Trans-centrism is a process of trans-

deconstructive reading practice. It encompasses

author, reader and the text as a single entity to reach

the absolute meaning or the centre and celebrates

their presence in the textual substance. The text

sheds multiple meanings to the readers; all these

meanings go in diversied routes and make the

readers remain directionless in ascertaining the

precise meaning of the text. Therefore, the centre

36

in the text is like a pendulum. Even if it engages

with multiple oscillations, still it always seems

to be stuck to the centre. It never surpasses its

demarcations in multiplicity while interpreting

the text in terms of excessive oscillations of textual

meanings. Trans-centrism is a ubiquitous process

of trans-deconstruction where the centre in a text

is nally destined, reached and singularised.

It is a homogeneous mixture of disparities

into the text. It the presences and absences as

the ultimate entity of textual beings. It never

believes in the presence of binary oppositions

linguistically conned in the text, but the merged

presence of all the absences and presences in the

text. Nothing is superior or inferior in the text; in

fact, everything is equally balanced and remain

in equilibrium in the text. Trans-centrism relates

to the notion of super-consciousness in the text.

Think for a while, the centre is the soul in the

body; super-consciousness is the tranquillity

or a profound spiritual meditation on time and

eternity. Without super-consciousness, it is

not easy to reach centrism, which cannot be

fathomed merely based on rationality. Trans-

deconstruction is an auto-transformation of

super-consciousness into trans-centrism. Trans-

centrism is a reafrmation of autonomy of the

37

text. No text conceals its originality. Therefore,

there is a birth of interpretations for the readers

to unravel the genuine essence of the text.

The interpreters of the text always seek to bring out

the unknown facts to the world. The text attempts

to study the presence and absences in the text and

prove its singularity in the labyrinth of multiplicity.

The text attempts to bring in the communication

gap between different things featured in the text.

The reader of trans-deconstruction needs to work

on the notion of singularity rather than plurality

in every interpretation. This unique identity of

the trans-interpreter is of utmost importance

in every critical interpretation. Therefore, this

interpretation is said to be factual, objective,

methodological and scientic. Its but stopping a

ceaseless ow of interpretations.

The text has impartiality and remains as unbiased

and unprejudiced in its purest form. Its approach

is in the interpretation of the text. The entrance

and exit of interpretation of the text is open-

ended. It is even related to minute observation

of interpreted facts of the author. However, in

trans-deconstruction, especially the authorial

entrance posits interpretation as the ethereal

note for further interpretations. This needs to be

38

researched rst for a deeper understanding of the

text.

In the present research, the authorial note has been

neglected and much more focus is made on the

text only. It means that the focus is made on the

creation rather than creator. The creator is almost

forgotten and the creation is fully celebrated. The

creator is lost in the formation of power. So, it

also relates to the creation and criticism at large.

What an individual about every creative text.

creation follows criticism or vice versa. Criticism

follows creation for the common readers. For the

readers of interpretations, creation is a genuine

literary product and species of criticism. Every

created work is criticised extensively and every

criticised work begets its new creation. Therefore,

this again posits the binary oppositions in

uniformity and this binary opposition has dealt

neither with inferiority nor with superiority. It has

only mute silence of textual super consciousness

leading to trans-centrism at its apex.

For this, silence leads to transfer trans-

construction into absolutism. Here is a complete

understanding of translated instruction, which is

nothing but the justication of all the diversied

interpretations in the text. Therefore, the mature

39

interpretations will nally unite into its singularity.

Interpretations have their supporting role in all

human discourses. The interpretation generally

has its oral implications rather than a written

one. The oral and all the online interpretations

of things are understood as the commands for

trans-centrism. These days, the interpretation is

an imported discourse conducted through online

transmission of knowledge. This is not a new

thing for the translation of ideas or interpretations.

Therefore, this simply forfeits intuition as a mark

of trans-centrism. Intuition and cognition are two

entities of trans-centrism. The fusion of intuition

and cognition is a symbolic manifestation of

trans-centrism.

Figure 1: Trans-deconstruction

Figure 1 shows the functioning of Trans-centrism,

which demonstrates intuition.

40

The intuition is to be experienced within rather

than expressed. The objects, which are the

same, are internalised and later externalised.

The essence within and without is the same. The

readers are very much interested in fathoming

the external reality rather than the internal one.

The study of the text within is as essential as the

text without. In this, it is not easy to nd out the

exact location of the centre in the text. However,

the centre is xed like a pendulum with its auto-

oscillations of interpretations, which nally

merge into a single entity.

Samadhi or the super-consciousness is an absolute

state of human cognition and intuition. Initially,

the intuition and cognition amalgamated to

create a sense of super-consciousness. Cognition

leads to super-consciousness through intuition.

Intuition senses cognition in illusions and merges

into absolute super-consciousness. The same

procedure happens within the text. The reader

always seeks for trans-centrism in the text. The

rapport between the reader and trans-centrism

is of high consideration in every interpretation.

Every reader with the help of trans-centrism

reaches textual super-consciousness. Reaching

super-consciousness is a symbolic manifestation

of attaining Samadhi or totalitarianism or the

41

absolute or trans-signication. The reader attains

super-consciousness through trans-centrism.

Trans-centrism is a deeper meditation on textual

rationality accessing the authorial point of view,

which often seeks to uphold a unique position

of super-consciousness. It aims to the absolute

meaning of the text.

Figure 2: Interpretations

Figure 2 shows the inevitable presence of the

author in the text in the form of point of view.

The text without is the same as the text within.

The author is alive through his point of view

nested into the super-consciousness of the

text. The reader is biased and prejudiced in the

interpretation of any text. The point of view of

the author needs to be fathomed by the readers.

The biased and prejudiced temperament of the

reader mistakes the textual interpretations.

42

Figure 3: Trans-relativism

Fig 3 shows the reader’s mechanism of trans-

relativism, which is a study of relativism

encompassing a wide spectrum of the inevitable

presence of the author in the text. The perception

of every reader is relative in nature. In fact, a

reader is an individual and an individual is always

relative in the comprehensibility of things around

him. A reader is like a blind man who believes

in the concrete touch of things. The four blind

men, for instance, touch an elephant as an object.

Each blind man senses the object differently

as per perception. It means that the truth is

partially understood rather than comprehended

thoroughly based on wholeness of the truth.

The perception of all these four blind men is

absolutely deception. In this fashion, the truth

is relative. However, the relativity of the truth

is not a complete truth. It thus heads towards

the notion of trans-relativity. In this context, a

43

reader misreads the text and his misconception

formulates the essence of the text. A reader is like

a blind man who succeeds in understanding the

partial truth of the text. In order to comprehend

the whole truth, the partial truth does matter. .

In the above gure, Trans-relativism deals with

monism as absolutism, super-consciousness as

intuition, word as a human rationality and the text

as a texture. All these activities rotate around the

soul as the centre the text. A reader reads the mind

of the author expressed through the sketch of

characters, the plot of the story and geographical,

socio-economic, cultural, biographical and

historical facts ingrained into the text. The text

is made up of words and words have super-

consciousness, into absolutism. The reader does

not merely read the text; he is engaged into the

intuitive nature of the text, which underlines its

super-consciousness. Every reader seeks to meet

absolutism in the interpretation of the text.

Figure 4: Trans-knowledge

44

Fig 4 is about trans-knowledge of the text, which

simply means universal knowledge despite the

understanding of the text as physical knowledge.

The text needs to be trans-deconstructed

to transfer the physical knowledge into the

universal knowledge. Trans-knowledge refers

to monism, which aims at the assimilation of all

the discursive discourses in human sciences. For

an average reader, the text sheds the multiple

layers of interpretations and ends at indecisive

conclusions. In this context, the text is incessant,

plural and ambiguous. On the other hand, a trans-

reader relates the text with intuition, monism,

trans-centrism, super-consciousness, and trans-

deconstruction. For him, the text is xed like

a pendulum, a singular and absolute entity.

Monism and trans-deconstruction both merge

into Universal knowledge.

Figure 5: Monism

45

Figure 5 shows how the plural meaning rushes

onto singularity, a still point or centre for all

pluralities. This reminds us about the pendulum

that always strives hard to stand at a still point

after having had a number of constant oscillations.

Monism is a big full stop for all the interpretations

at discursive discourses in all human sciences.

These days, technology limits the progress of

human beings. Technological services dene

how all human minds were cocooned into tiny

holes. It has almost captured the human minds

and human ideologies so that it can play a crucial

role in disintegrating things. However, this

interpretation is given by human ideas and the

human mind. The human mind is almost techno-

driven and constituted by technology through

articial intelligence. One computer monitors

thousands of computers in the supremacy of

the human mind. . The technology monitors

all of us through the life-threatening level of

technologies invented by human beings. for

example, there is video conferencing; actually,

in video conferencing what happens is that there

is an online interpretation of the data so that the

interpreter dates services as per interpretations

made. A video recording is also not considered

as the true essence of knowledge, which has been

46

transferred from one place to another. Therefore,

this is nothing but a video conferencing

wherein the computer is mostly used, tablets

or smartphones are of secondhand and this

knowledge is imparted to another person who

seems to be a little satised with the knowledge

that surrounds him. All knowledge, which comes

from a video conferencing with the text, is

interpreted. Using a computer, the interpretation

becomes easier in making interpretations. These

days, the live interpretation of the exchange of

knowledge is very much important for a critic. The

multiplicity of knowledge imported in various

languages can be termed as multilingual factors.

The interpretation thus plays a crucial role in the

interpretation of objects. Wherever you go, the

interpretation follows you. The dogged nature

of interpretation is persistent and prevalent in

every textual analysis. Therefore, it is important

to interpret the things which have already been

interpreted by interpreters. Interpretation is

closely associated with co-translation. There is

also in interpreting the text to its fullest sense.

The interpretation of the text, therefore, needs

to bridge a gap between interpretation and

knowledge. Knowledge is nothing but a complete

realisation of objects through the process of

47

interpretations. The interpretation of objects is

a demonstration of a thorough understanding

of the text. The interpretation is a replication

of signs, which repeatedly focuses its attention

on the explanation of the unexplained things,

exploration of unexplored objects.

The explanation of the translation reconstructed

through formulated ideas is concretised governing

the abstract notion of interpretations. Trans-

deconstruction is a transfer of interpretations

made by the readers from the text to another

trans-text, which often leads to the singularity of

the plural discourses in all human sciences. There

should be a full stop for all the diverse discourses

in interpretations. There should be the of the

objectives in interpretations, which have been

set by researchers. The interpretations cannot

be dened in terms of plurality, but it needs

to be dened in terms of the singularity of the

discourses made by the critics. The interpretation

hardly misinterprets the text misconceived by

interpreters. The readers understand the authorial

opinions made in the trans-text. There is scarcely

any chance to misinterpret the text misconceived

by critics. The text is full of interpretations

along with differences, which have already been

48

interpreted by the author. The text itself is trans-

texted which needs to be trans-interpreted and

trans-deconstructed rst to reach the absolute

signication of all discursive discourses in all

human sciences. It is difcult to know the untried

concepts of prejudiced ideas of the author

ingrained into the text; this may be conceptual,

authorial or textual. The trans-interpretation

helps the readers to never skip the author from

the text. Trans-deconstruction is a process of

translating the expressive ideas of the author into

the text.

Trans-interpretation helps the readers reach the

nalised meaning of the text. The essence of

the text is what exactly the author wants to say

through the text. Interpretation also helps the

text render a note of the trans-interpretation to

the reader and the author himself. A trans-critic

is to construe a non-biased approach to the text

through the presence of the author. The unique

nature of the text is to be trans-interpreted and

expounded in terms of its integrated nature of

nding the truth. The text is a genuine literary

piece of art seeking trans-centrism within and

without the text, which is represented as the

factual ideas presented into the text. Trans-

interpretation is nothing but a declaration of

49

the unwritten facts to its culmination point. The

transfer of knowledge that merges into a single

whole can be termed as trans-deconstruction. The

interpretation of the super-conscious ideas, which

helps the readers reach the signied, is of high

consideration during the process. It is a theorem-

practical device for trans-knowledge to resolve

the unresolved, the solved remissions of life. The

trans-integration is not the postponement of ideas

for further interpretations. It is not a re-of ideas,

but interpretation lays its essence into its totality.

It is not found in its stationary form. Integration

is always dynamic and its nature is ubiquitous.

The text is full of interpretations embedded with

meanings inherent to the text.

It means that denition of things is easy, but

nding the nalised meaning of something is very

difcult. That is why; interpretation plays a vital

role in understanding the text to some extent, but

asks the construction which has to know the text to

its fullest. Science, most of the time, is interpreted

differently. The interpretations are confusing

which makes us to understand different ways

of integrating things. However, a man is always

in search of nding out the nalised approach

of anything. That is why; the explanation of the

50

meaning effected after reading , which are equally

important in any interpretations. Interpretation is

communicating ideas and feelings to the text. The

communication is held for the average readers

for the deeper understanding and appreciation of

the word encoded in the text.

The interpretation is also important for playing

the role of the textual introducer who has

already dealt with the text through reading.

The interpretation is a reshaping of memories

and reconstruction of the text. Re-experiencing

the author reading the text is the core part of

interpretation. Analysing the text and trans-

interpreting it is necessary for interpretation. The

interpretation is very much essential for the text

even if there are differences in the reading. The

differences challenge the text for interpretation.

Such interpretation needs to be trans-integrated.

However, it is also important to know how reading

affects the centre in terms of interpretation. The

interpretation is almost scientic and its nature

is elastic. It talks about the observations based

on experiences of the text. The experiences are

not expressed in terms of interpretations, but it is

the interpretation that translates experiences into

observations.

51

It also means that there is a unied approach

of subjectivity and objectivity of interpreting

the text. The text is of two sorts that need to be

focused at an interpretative level and logic.

The inference refers to a logical interpretation,

which is always based on prior knowledge and

experience. In the same fashion, hypothesis is

extremely important for every research activity.

Research has its close connection with a proposed

scientic explanation for a set of observations.

According to the nature of interpretations, the data

is recorded as discussions and this can be called

qualitative data. Internet access for references

also leads to argumentation. The reconstruction

of logical scientic argument explains the

data. Finally, a text is made up of the scientic

interpretations. This scientic integration is

nding out the absolute truth, which is not

personal in its opinion. Scientic interpretation

is always objective rather than subjective

in human sciences. Interpretations focus on

inferences, suggestions, observations, and

hypotheses. It means that scientic interpretation

always focuses on a foundation of scientic

knowledge and the individual expertise. The

scientic knowledge is a product of rational and

52

irrational intellectualisation of things. However,

is it nal in its interpretation? Of course, it is

not. It means that interpretation is a continuous

change of interpreting ideas, which ends with

the interpretations. There are many types of

interpretations, such as factual interpretations,

trans-interpretations and relative interpretations.

However, interpretations should always have

logic behind it. Science aims at the observation

of facts, experimentation, formulations and

invention of knowledge.

Interpretation also refers to the exploration of

meaning inherent to the text. Of all the things

around you, interpretation is a scale of every

interpreter which studies actual things like

the messages written, charts, diagrams, and

maps. It also focuses on verbal and non-verbal

communications, invitations, and the completion

of things. It understands what the text is all

about. Interpretation needs the understanding of

the written data on material interpretation. It is

closely associated with the decoding of the data,

which is greater. It also bridges the gap between

the connections and the facts. Interpretation is also

used in law, which should go with its favourable

meaning of the text. It refers to a scrutiny of

53

the legal texts that suggests the text of statutes,

contracts, wills. It is distinguished from the literal

meanings because both are different entities for

nding textual meanings. It leads to the fact that

the truth triumphs. It cannot lead to supercial

meaning in the interpreted texts. In the same

fashion, the verication of text is different from

interpretations made by the text. Interpretation can

be veried but verication cannot be interpreted.

The legal meanings are borne to the interpreters.

It means that the interpreter is solely responsible

for his legal interpretations. Therefore, the

interpretation should not be misinterpreted to

meet the expectations. However, meaning is to

be interpreted whereas truth needs to be veried.

Interpretation is closely connected with

interpretation and communication in which

the communication focuses on cultural

interpretation of meanings, that is, generally

found in written and spoken form. It is important

to have the active negotiation of meaning with

the writer or the speaker. Interpretation closely

connects to socio-economic growth, industrial,

commercial and rational research. It is oriented

to communicable experiential professional data

analysis. The interpretation aims at the meanings

54

and rendering of great messages. Interpretation is

a product of multilingualism. It is deeply rooted

in the collected information and reprocessing of

assigned meanings.

To sum up, it engages itself with the process

of determining the conclusions. It retains the

largest signications and the signicance. As

the implications of the ndings in the research

surmount, interpretation demands the collected

facts. Therefore, collected facts are essential for

every interpretation. The same collected facts do

matter in interpreting the text.

The interpretation is always in its analytical

and experiential mode. The search for every

interpretation is broader in its vision and

perception. The interpretation of the meanings

always ends with research ndings. The

information element in every search is adamant

to gure out tabled interpretations. This helps to

categorise and classify the collected information

for a particular search. Interpretation also

results into data, which is present in the form

of pictures, interviews and notes. Therefore,

the real appearance of interpretation undergoes

inner transformations within them to come

up with a novel interpretation of the text.

55

Integration always clears the unclear points in

the text. It makes things transparent and exible

for further interpretations. The interpretation

aims at presenting results where the results are

methodological, systematic and scientic in their

approach. Hence, the result is an accumulative

approach for all observations made by the

scientist. The discussion on all such observations

and the explanations always constitutes the

theme of interpretation. Despite optimism in

the text, interpretation means the exploration of

negative aspects of the research, which helps in

trans-interpreting the text once more.

56

CHAPTER III

AUTHORIAL POINT OF TEXT

The author is forever alive in the super-

consciousness of the text within, nested in his

own point of view. The presence of the author

in the text is ubiquitous and mouth-pieced. His

authorial existence is pre-and-post occupied in the

textual landscape. Why is the author in literary

studies and in the interpretations of text? The

author transcends the text proving his own point

of view. His co-relation with the text is as natural

as a feel of breeze in the air. The author retains

within the soul of text without whose presence

the text cannot exist. He retains his purity in the

text. The presence of the author helps the readers

trans-deconstruct the text, trans-interpret and

trans-text to reach the nal absolute signication

of monism.

The author is dead – why is it so? How can

we say that the author is dead? What makes

the readers study a centre of the text from the

textual point of view in the absence of the

author? To study the meaning closely is to get

57

into the super-conscious essence of the text.

This is not a justied way of the interpretation

of the text. To study generated meanings in the

absence of another is not the concrete mode of

the interpretation of a text. The interpretation

is incorporated with almost all the shades of

meanings that are recurrently interrogated with

minute differences. The demarcation about the

subjective and objective analyses of the text

is still questioned in literary theories. No text

is subjectively analysed until the objectivity

becomes a coherent and inherent part of textual

interpretation. Consequently, the text can never

be studied in a biased and prejudiced approach.

Many critics turn up to post-structuralism from

structuralism at the summit of the study because

they are in full swing discerning it once more

for the absolute settlement of meanings. The

meaning, in a text, functions like the circulatory

axis of the wheel merging the author. The textual

meaning is nowhere, text and it does move along

with the whimsical wings of plurality like a

pendulum; without any signication in a wheel

for the signied absolute. The author has never

been dead in any interpretations of the text. He

helps the readers trans-interpret the text. The

biographical sketch of the author has never been

58

taken into consideration for the interpretation of

the text. Can the subjectivity of the author not

assist the critics for the objective analysis of the

text? His interviews are closely studied in order

to critically analyse the crux of the text. Does

it mean that the authorial meaning thus absents

thoroughly from the text? How can we opine that

his absence makes the text study in-depth and his

presence unnecessarily brings in subjectivity? It

is not a fallacy to ascertain the presence of the

author. In fact, the author is a prime body of the

textual super-consciousness. The presence of the

author in the text is independent and autonomous,

forever nested in the textual super-consciousness

in isolation. It is factual that the focus of the

study is the author, the creator. How can you

neglect the creator and celebrate the creation?

Creation and creator are both interdependent and

conned into oneness. It is an injustice to the text

to keep the author far away from the text in hand

for interpretation.

Literature imparts knowledge, which is attained

based on sensory perception. The knowledge

it conveys is physical rather than universal.

However, the text is a uni-physical literary

product. It does have a base for science and

59

facts, some knowledge is proven and a universal

one is yet to be proven. Literature deals with

spirituality, physicality and universalism. The

introspective study of human values, ideologies,

socio-cultural aspects in literature are equally

of high consideration. Language unlocks the

doors of literature and opens up the unending

discussion on interpretations. It is connotative,

expressive and open-ended embedded with

emotions, feelings and sentiments of the author.

However, declaring the author as dead is not

enough to avert his presence in the text. His

views are codied in objectivity in guise of

subjectivity in the text. Every reader is curious

to know about the text. It is important to know

how the text never stands still in interpretations.

Is there any autonomy of meaning for what was

written by the author into the text? The answer is

a big NO. His work is not a product of intention,

biography and history. His literary experience,

which is subjective by nature, is internalised with

the essence of the text. The text is self-governing

in ringing its own meanings. In fact, there should

not be any restriction upon the text because the

text is not always free from all prejudices and

biased meanings within the text. The text is

always independent, enigmatical and spiritual

60

in nature. This ubiquitous note of the text makes

the readers study in isolation for the sake of

upholding singularity for all the meanings in

all the discourses. The text is free from all the

restraints and external forces of pressurisation.

The death of the author means the birth of the

reader. The meaning is nothing, but futile in

nature due to its dependence and interrelatedness.

The author and reader stand poles apart in the

interpretation of meanings in the text. The text

is an artifact; it is neither of the author’s not

the readers. One can reach their construction

of the meaning from the text. In reading, the

death of the author signies that the author is

no more in the text. Is it to talk and assume the

death of the author in the interpretation of the

text? The meanings have never been stationary

in the text. Text is often plural and multiple in

meanings. There is, of course, a free play of

meanings. Such endless free play of meanings

demonstrates the textual vulnerability to reach

the signied. Although deconstruction is not all

about the abandonment of all restraints, it is in

fact the disciplined identication for the sources

of textual power. It is a systematic dismantling

of the sources of textual power. However, trans-

deconstruction comes into force as a theory and

61

the author gets trans-centred for the interpretation

of the text. Man is at the centre of the universe

because he thinks too much. Most of the time,

the intellectual perspectives, social behavior and

architecture have centers.

To sum up, whenever I think of the author in

the text, I think of the presence of the author as

marginalized and oppressed. The relativity in

textual interpretation thus perishes the notion of

time and space as xed and central absolutes.

There are again the intellectual for an artistic

regulation of the textual powers. The harmony

in music, the chronological sequence in narrative

representation of the visual world has been

discarded in the interpretation of the text. It is

interesting to know whether the author in a text is

xed or not. However, the author is not dead; he

is still alive in the text through his point of view.

The readers in pursuit of the truth that is a

reframing of the linguistic structures which has

been formulated into the text consciously or

unconsciously by the writer have interpreted

it. Interpretation thus demonstrates a deeper

understanding of the text. Interpretation is an

integration of interpretations. It is the process,

which demands the translation or the transfer

62

of knowledge from one portion to another.

This transformation for transferring knowledge

in terms of the physical knowledge can be

transformed with the assistance of interpretation.

Interpretation is nothing but the translation

of ideas and this translation is not unique in

its structure. Translation is the transferring of

knowledge from one coded language to another,

but this codication makes a big difference in

the interpretation of the text. The translation

is presented in guise of interpretations, which

means the nalization of the text. It means the

ultimate meaning of the text lies in its totality. It

means the true meaning often resides within the

absolute meaning of the text. All these questions

remain unsolved. Therefore, it is a reader who

translates one language into another. Knowledge

can be transferred to super-consciousness in a

trans-interpretation way. The text is very much

important in terms of interpretations wherein

the following things are seriously taken into

consideration. The rst thing is that it focuses

on the words on the page as they really mean.

It unmasks the presence in the text. Secondly,

it highlights the absences in the text. Thirdly, it

nds out the binary oppositions, which are held

into the super-consciousness of the text in a

63

chaotic mode. The fourth thing is that it reverses

the binary oppositions and vents to prioritization.

The textual superiority and inferiority of

the meanings are merged into oneness. The

autonomy of the text further focuses on its trans-

deconstruction.

The interpretation is understood based on

realizing the super-consciousness of the text

unmasking these two binary oppositions is

unied into a single entity and it leads to the

singularity of all the diversied approaches of

human sciences. Therefore, for this instance is

concerned, one reference is to be given that is,

a pendulum moving from one place to another

stands still ultimately to the one position that is

the centre. These oscillations of the pendulum

are caused due to the xed centre and the xed

centre is the manifestation of singularity of

all the varied discourses in human sciences.

Interpretation is a conscious realization of the

text. The consciousness is gradually sensitized

and assisted based on the unfamiliarity of objects.

Interpretation emerges from ignorance and

ignorance emerges from knowledge. Knowledge

emerges from trans-knowledge and trans-

knowledge emerges from cosmic knowledge. The

cosmic knowledge is a mysterious entity of the

64

Supreme Being who knows the world. The things

are kept uncertain for critics, readers, writers

and all scientists in this universe. Therefore,

this uncertainty does not mean that there is no

nalized entity in this universe. This uncertainty

does not mean that there is no absenteeism in this

universe. It does mean that there is absolutely

such absenteeism in this universe, but the method

to approach such absenteeism in this universe is

a unied approach. Interpretation was always

made for the readers; the meaning is unknown

to them. Interpretation is expected when readers

nd difculties to understand its contextual

meaning. Interpretation is nothing but bridging

the gap between the original text and the reader.

Therefore, this mediator acts, as an interpreter is

not the nal asset of the text.

There are many things in this life, which cannot be

dened by means of interpretation. Interpretation

is nothing but the revelation of meaning. It is the

translation of ideas into reality. Interpretation is

the reading of the coded words on the page. It is

nothing but a sign language to reach the signied.

Interpretation is the justication of textual super-

consciousness. Meaning begets meanings in the

interpretation of any text. For instance, a seed

begets a plant. The plant produces seeds. Each

65

seed begets a plant. Another example can be

given for the clarication of multiplicity through

singularity and singularity through multiplicity.

What comes rst, an egg or a hen? An egg

begets a hen and a hen produces eggs. Therefore,

interpretation can be dened as the illumination

of meaning. This explanation is not a nal one

because life is made up of signs, which are

arbitrary in nature. Therefore, this arbitrariness

is not the nalization of the meaning in the text.

The arbitrariness of any textual entity is not the

nal authorization in the interpretation of the

text.

The authorial point of view in the text is not the

nalization of meaning. Therefore, the meaning

in the text is unknown to the author. The reader

makes a critique what an author does so. An

interpretative circulation of human ideas cannot

end up in decisive conclusions. In order to

generate ideas, knowledge needs to be transferred

from one form to another linguistically and

trans-deconstructively. Interpretations need to

be nalized to reach its absolute meaning; just

as when a pendulum rotates, its oscillations

will nally be stuck at the xed centre. This

is the same case with any textual reality. The

interpreter becomes a predator like a seagull in

66

the interpretations of the text. The meaning is not

known to the text at all. The reader is supposed to

interpret the text unbiased and unprejudiced. The

nature of trans-deconstruction is a revelation of

super-consciousness of the text.

In this fashion, the interpreter essentially uses

sign language for the translation of general

ideas into concretizations. There are many

forms of interpretation. The interpretations are

of multiple modes for the analysis of facts. A

careful listening to the listeners is also a part of

interpretation. Interpretation is the rendering of

the message into the target language. It interprets

listeners and the transformation of knowledge

to other interpretations. It also focuses on the

essence of the speaker. The essence of speech

does matter for interpretations. However, the

speech is not the original one at all the times

where the differences are made and their

differences lead to trans-deconstruction of the

text. Interpretation is simultaneously made for

the integration of ideas. It has its oral tradition

where integration can also be orally made for

analyzing the text fully. As a matter of the fact,

interpretation is a theoretical hypothesis wherein

the research data is counted as a whole rather

than a part. Interpretation is a unique method

67

for the realization of super-consciousness

featured in the text. By means of interpretation,

it means that explanations of things, which are

really bunkum, do not matter. Conspicuously,

the super-consciousness in the text is simply a

translated version of the authorial point of view

in interpretations where attempts are made to

bring vision into reality. The author in the text has

already spoken all the ideas in its written form.

Therefore, ideas cannot be translated into writing

because ideas have their own independence or

entity of interpretations. Thus, interpretations

are autonomous and ubiquitous in nature. The

ideas that naturally strike the mind cannot be

translated as interpretations. The abstract notions

of the mind cannot be transformed into different

languages especially for all the human sciences

at the time of interpretations.

 The presence of the author is equally important

in the interpretation of the text.

 The text can be studied with a scientic base

to fathom the profound rationality stuck in the

linguistic structure of the text.

 The text often manifests absurdity which

means nothingness for certain phases in the life

of the author and when the author becomes blank,

68

he is to write how life is set free from the clutches

of time. He is to serve the society and contribute

to the nation. The author pines for faith to make

a man hopeful in order to be successful in future.

 The motif of the text is the pursuit of the

truth.

 The truth for the presence of the author is the

truth of his writing.

 The death of his writing is the truth of his

imitations of experiences in life.

 The distinctiveness of the imitation is the

truth of his existence.

 The author marks his presence in art and

literature through ideas and images.

 How can you say that the author is eliminated

from his sentiments in a text?

 The author reects impressions, humorous

events and passions into the text.

 In fact, the author is engaged with all his pre-

existed things in the post-existed text.

 The text is nothing but a web of science.

 Art is destined to change life into optimism.

 The aim of art is to reach a nal signication.

 The nal signication is embedded and

ingrained into the textual writing.

69

 The author monitors the nal signication

because the author is the creator of a text; he

knows where and how the text goes and he knows

how the text leads to the conclusion.

 The author knows about the characters, the

beginning, the rising action, the falling action and

the conclusion. He is the backbone of the text.

The author knows how everything is planned,

how the things are arranged and constructed,

he knows about the cultural impressions upon

the characters. It is awesome that he knows the

societal will as a means of radical, visible and

positive changes. He knows that the cultural

impressions that he has received will be reected

in a work of art. He also knows about the

political inclinations and consciousness imbibed

and inculcated by his characters. He even knows

about how the educational background affects

his characters and how he meets its destiny at the

end. He s knows about himself and the text he

has created.

 The author is the sculptor of the text.

The entire text is monitored by his planning,

preparation and his execution. Nothing is hidden

from his knowledge about the text. He knows

what the text is all about. Even the presence of

70

the author is excluded in the interpretation of the

text.The text is nothing but a demonstration of

signs.

 The text is meant for nal signication.

 The text is made for a transfer of interpretation

to the reader.

 Alienating the author and studying the text

in isolation is simply an injustice upon the text

because the author cannot be eliminated from the

essence of the text.

 The text is an amalgamation of the

psychological, historical, geographical,

economic, moral, religious and cultural aspects

of the author as an individual.

 The author sketches a realistic portrayal of

society in particular and the nation in general in

the text.

 A mere analysis, explanation of the text …

etc. is not enough to come up with a conclusion

for interpretations.

 The endless interpretations are not enough to

which the nalization of meanings can bedestined

to.

 There is a continuous chain of the endless

interpretations of the text wearing the mask of

71

history, society, politics, economics and culture.

 The presence of the author should be taken

into consideration for the interpretations of the

text.

 Writing connotes the implied meaning to

what speech hides at the time of the creation of

art.

 Writing confesses meaning that cannot be

assumed at its fullest sense.

 Absences in writing do matter for the

interpretations of the text.

 Speech is the rst perception of beings to be

followed by writing at its perfection.

 Arresting the meaning is not the prime

concern of the art.

 The art talks about the culture of the author.

 The motif of the art is not just creation, but

admission of the self into the world.

 The reader thinks about the experiences

shared by the author in the form of art.

 The text is simply a manifestation of the

arrested meaning to the readers for interpretations.

 The detained meaning is released by means

of criticism.

 The criticism is not understood to its fullest

72

sense unless the text is trans-interpreted.

 Trans-status of the text lets the author to read his

own point of view in the form of interpretations.

 The text is read at two levels: 1. Interpretative

and 2. Spiritual

 The critic explains what exactly the text means

in presence of the author.

 The author precedes he text and pre-owns

it for three times . i.e. pre-creation, post-creation

and reading the text as a critic.

 At the time of creation.

 How the text is written?

 What is written in the text?

 The meaning of the text is known to two

entities.

 1. Author himself at the time of creation

 2. God

 In interpretations, words mean, do they really

mean what the author in guise of the text meant?

 The text is read at the spiritual, intellectual,

sentimental level with the emotions and feelings

of the author. This impulsive level of reading

means that interpreters read the text every time

differently.

 As per the individual trait, every mind analyses

73

the text denitely, but the core of the text has not

yet been analyzed.

 The spiritual readers may interpret the text

at a philosophical, transcendental and trans-

deconstructive level.

 The rational readers are always scientic in

their temperaments.

 The reader hardly believes in what the author

trusts in.

 The art is an interpretative philosophy veiled

into a text.

 Why is the author different from the text?

 Why is the text declared a unique work of art

in the absence of the author?

 The text is read through a number of literary

interpretations, but still the analysis for the

nalization of the meaning seems to be highly

impossible.

 The reader has not yet met the nal signication

of the text.

 There is the death of the author that refutes

his point of view into the text.

 The author is still alive in the interpretation

of the text and the readers have not yet observed

it.

74

 The author makes the readers understand the

text to its fullest.

 The reader has a misjudgment about the

deeper understanding of authorial emotions and

feelings at the time of the creation.

 Incorporating the emotions and feelings of

the author for the interpretation of the text leads

to the subjective analysis of the text that is not

taken into consideration by critics.

 For the objective analysis of the text, the

subjectivity is marked into the text and this helps

the readers to know about the objectivity in guise

of subjectivity.

 The psychological effects are not exerted

upon the minds of readers due to the presence of

the author in the text.

 The reader never presents himself in the

super-consciousness of the text. This is a trans-

fallacy of interpretations.

 The subjective analysis of the text is not a

fallacy, but a study in trans-deconstruction.

 The interpretive mode of philosophy stems

from the study of the authorial sensitive effects

on the reader.

 The readers must properly validate the text.

75

 The integrity of the text is attributed to the

author, not the reader.

76

CHAPTER IV

WORD, TEXT AND READER

Language is a ubiquitous species of literature

and literature is a socio-cultural super-conscious

product of language in the guise of absolutism.

What comes after the interpretation of the text?

Such questions lead to uncertainties, suspicion

and interdependence within and without the

text. Creation follows criticism and vice versa.

Criticism follows creation. What comes rst?

Male or female, day or night, presence or

absence … etc. All the binary oppositions end in

a asco in every human discourse in all sciences.

There is no prioritization of binary oppositions

pinned into the text because they are inseparable,

absolute and unique entities of the textual super-

consciousness. There is oneness, singularity in

interpretations. No creation is possible without

criticism. It is rightly said that criticism is easy,

but art is difcult. Then who creates the creator,

the creator of the text is the creator of the genuine

literary piece of writing, that is the author.

However, No critic wants to study the author and

77

declare him to be dead, for example, the author

is dead, who is the author? Author is not dead in

the interpretation of text. Author means a creator

whereas the text is a creation like God and the

creation of universe. Therefore, the creation

cannot be celebrated in absence of creator. I

think the literary work is incomplete without the

study of the author. In each research work, the

authorial intent must be taken into consideration

for the study in its in-depth analysis. The author

is the originator; he is the creator of the text. It

is he who writes a genuine literary piece of art,

maybe, a non-literary notion of authorship that

demands debate for its inclusion in research or

not, because the author is the backbone of textual

super-consciousness which helps the readers

attain absolute meaning in the text by keeping the

author aside and studying the text. The words in

the text are derived from numerous perspectives

in theories, which lead the researcher nowhere. In

conclusion, it is important to focus on the author

because the text is autonomous, embedded with

the point of view of author. The author makes

the readers fully comprehend the text in guise of

characters ; this can be told as textual wholeness,

which can be completed in the presence of the

author for the complete interpretation of the

78

text. Why the text demands interpretations of

the text? The text is an art or an entity, which

is independent or autonomous in its nature, but

still demands the supporters. The author dwells

in super-consciousness of the text that is needed

for research. Why the interviewers of the authors

have been taken into consideration for research

as the author is dead? The interviews of authors

which are taken for the interpretation of text helps

readers know the text fully. The reader nds the

text handicapped for interpretation in the absence

of the author. The question is that the author is

read in the interpretation of text. The reader is

in pursuit of understanding the authorial point of

view. A study of the intention and biography of

the author does matter in the interpretation of the

text. It means that the text has been polluted; does

it mean that the text has been studied subjectively

instead of objectively? I mean the author is

alive in the interpretation of text. The text is

anonymous, but the presence of the author in the

text is in the form of super-consciousness prior to

its mingling with the text. There must be a focus

on the textual super-consciousness, which is read

as the printed words and the concise options in

the text. It is equally important for you to fathom

the creation of the author. Along with the author,

79

I think the concept and signicance of authorship

is the prime concern in the interpretation of the

text. Every text is obsessed with the point of view

of the author. The text is in guise of the author

for a real content, consent as well as intent of

the author. It leads him towards absolutism for

the centre in the text or the singularity of the

text rather than plurality. This is true that the

text is nothing but a tissue of ideas. It’s a web

of science, which leads to the nal signication

of the text. The critic focuses on the textual

super-consciousness along with the study of the

text. It cannot be considered as a fallacy in the

interpretation of the text. This is equally important

because the author is a socio-cultural product.

He is a geo-historically witnessed product. The

author amalgamates numerous experienced ideas

into a textual form. If the author is declared to be

dead in the interpretation of the text, it becomes a

great injustice to the text and the readers.

The author is innocent in the text. He can be a

part of history, culture and society in which the

characters are placed. The author is an integral

part of the creation. It simply means that the

author is super-consciously obsessed by society,

history, culture and all other factors. If the study

is studied in isolation without the author, it means

80

an injustice is done for the nalization of the text.

In its conclusion, an author is an expression of

his point of view. He is a revealer of the self and

a mute submitter of his essence to the text.

The text and the author are ubiquitously merged

into singularity reaching the absolute super-

consciousness of the text. Its fusion must

not be confusion in the interpretation of text.

Socio-culturally and historically, the author has

ingrained his ideas into the unspoken form of

the text. Therefore, it will be a waste of time to

focus only on the textual history and culture at

large. The author is still alive in the interpretation

of the text. The author is still alive in the super-

consciousness of the text with his point of view.

He is an integral part of literary studies and gets

himself incorporated into the characters in the

plot making the text alive. The text is objectively

studied rather than subjectively. It would be an

injustice to the text in the interpretation of text if

the author is kept aside consciously.

The presence of author has been accepted

socially, culturally and historically. The different

cultures and societies have been embedded into

the text. No text goes in a singular direction of

interpretation. The diversity of plurality is unied

81

into textual oneness in all human discourses.

It is high time to study the textual super-

consciousness, the presence of the author and

the biographical sketch in the interpretation of

the text. The authorial point of view is embedded

into the textual super-consciousness.

Declaring the author as dead and studying the

text trans-deconstructively is a prime concern of

every interpretation. The text needs to be trans-

deconstructed asserting the presence of the author

in the text. The author mirrors the geographical

location, culture, tradition, custom and history in

a work of art. The art loses its originality if it is

studied in the absence of the author. The text loses

its virginity if it is studied in the absence of the

author. The art deceives itself if it is not studied

in the authorial point of view. The art is studied

in isolation, which creates a great barrier in the

absence of the textual super-consciousness. The

text ends in a asco if it is not trans-deconstructed.

It means that the author, the text and its meaning

are intertwined and are inseparable entities. In

the authorial point of view, no author must be

studied in isolation. He is fully understood by

himself prior to the creations made by him. The

study of creation cannot be made in the absence

of the author. Therefore, every research must

82

consider the author for further studies. Before its

creation, the author is authority, his rootedness

in culture, history and geographical locations

are ubiquitous. Many discourses must have been

held to prove the author dead with the emergence

of reader-empowered discourses. The reader has

nothing to do with the author, who says so? I

mean that the reader must study the author fully

before he studies the original text. The authorial

study in literary studies never defaces the purity

of text.

In fact, the author cannot rely on the interpretations

made by critics. He always wants to seek out the

left out interpretations presented by the critics.

The text is for the text by the author.

The critics through interpretations make the

studies of the text. The creation is made to study

the text within and without to know the areas

unexplored by the author. It means that the father

(author) is killed as soon as he (author) gives

birth to the son (text). The focus of the study thus

needs to be made on both creation and creator in

the process of literary interpretations.

In fact, the author is the creator and the text is

the creation. How can the creator be neglected

in the study of his creation? To study the text

83

within and without along with the presence of

the author is the prime concern of the critic in the

process of every interpretation. The study of the

text without any consideration of the author is a

literary injustice. The author is the creator like a

father and the text is the creation like a son. It is

unfair not to look after the father and simply focus

on the son. It thus means that in literary studies,

both author and the text are equally important for

the interpretation of the text. Writing is a speech

reection of the authorial point of view. Writing is

the blood of the author that is circulated through

a dense web of arteries of blood vessels in the

body; nally, it sheds its tears for interpretations

at that particular moment of time. Writing is

presented in a constructive way rather than a

destructive mode through mute voices of author.

Writing is a record of the feelings and emotions

of the author, often ingrained with rationality and

experiential learning of things all around him. It

is a functional process of generating meanings

out of the linguistic formulations held in the

text. It is in fact the practice of signication

for absolutism. Language has no barriers for

expression, revelation and codication. The real

origin of language lies in guise of ambiguity.

84

A writer is a master spirit for the inculcation of

human values into the minds of readers through

writing. Writing is a species of speech and vice

versa. It is an inscription of ideas reected in

the text to ascertain his specialty, honesty and

genius. His codication of language is not of his

own revelation; rather it is a humble justication

to the expressed views inspired by divinity in

a genuine literary piece of art. A writer is born,

skilled and omniscient. A writer has to code and a

reader has to decode the crux of the matter texted

through writing. A writer is of the language as

the language is autonomous, ambiguous and

substantial in nature.

The text in the absence of the author is incomplete

to the readers for interpretation to the fullest sense

of absolutism. It demands for the trans-context

for the completion of meaning in its totality. No

text is impeccable in itself without the inclusion

of the author. It is a meticulous question, why

does the text trust the absence of the author

within it. In fact, the meaning is instituted within

or without the text. How can one trust and rely

on circulatory meanings in the text ending in a

asco? The frenzied debate on the text is vital

85

at all times sensing the presence of the author

within it. The methodology of reaching the

author decenters the text and throws us in the

labyrinth of uncertainties and ambiguity. The

linguistic system necessitates readers for the

textual analysis to channel the hidden meaning

rapport within the text. Do you indeed understand

the text once you comprehend the science behind

things? Do you certainly fathom the essence of

the text once you fathom the science behind it?

Is it categorically essential to grasp the centre

in the text to be embedded by the author in the

text? All these questions are relative, logical

and rational to all. Belief and science are the

two sides of rationality to screen the essence of

objects. Belief is a thought process of impulse

and irrationality whereas science is a disciplined

scientic approach for the interpretation of

things.

There is a trans-method for the assimilation of

interpretations, which is a unique singularity for

all diversied, plural signications. The centre in

a text is like intuition. It is very difcult to dene

what intuition is, how it functions in the body.

Nobody has ever understood where it lies and

how it monitors the entire system. Its reference

is with the biological system in the human

86

body. Man hardly knows about the interrelated

functioning of all the entities in the body. The

body has emotions, air, mind, intuition, soul

within it, but none of these is present if the body

is detected. The absence of all these things marks

their presence in the text. In a sense, the body

is the text and the soul is the meaning. There is

no death of the author in the interpretation of the

text. Every structure is linguistically bound to

the text and the meaning is xed in singularity

like a pendulum. Interpretation undergoes a

swift transition from structuralism and post-

structuralism to trans-deconstruction. The text is

tied with trans-interpretations for the decoding of

language.

The text is full of ambiguities inherent into

the text, beyond denition, interpretation and

analysis. Can anybody conrm that the ideas,

which are beyond human understanding, are

disbelief and wrong in conception? Can you

assume that the science behind all sciences

is illogical? Do you agree with the notion that

things, which are unknown to the human mind,

are not trustworthy and genuine? The human

mind can differ in meaning linguistically, but

not a philosopher and a transcendentalist. The

mind is equipped with restrained, constrained

87

and stereotyped notions of interpretations. The

text is full of meanings without dissipating what

the text says about itself. A critic applies the

trans-method behind the theoretical approach.

Every discourse denes the precise position of

the human mind and natural propensity to the

absolute signied. It does not mean that there is

no signied at all! Yes, the signied, which is

unwritten experientially, cannot be experienced.

For instance: in music, the harmony infatuates

us spiritually and the rapture is felt within

experientially, not experimentally. To analyse and

interpret the text, what the text means to itself is

a case of introspective comprehensibility where

the words can justify the trans-interpretation of

the text unlike music. Similarly, there are many

objects in the nature, for example, air as the

natural element can be felt, but not expressed

in words. The emotions and feelings in the

body, the shifting nature of mind can only be

experienced, but not experimented. This is

what I mean through transcendentalism and

trans-deconstruction that there are many views

beyond human comprehensibility. Can we call

them invalid, fake and non-scientic? In fact, the

essence of the truth carries the absolute meaning

of all meanings for all discourses. The discourses

88

we are talking about lead to heated debates again

as it makes us peep into the unresolved issues

of the text and meanings. Things can be material

unless it is proven rst.

The absence of the author in the text marks his

presence through his point of view. No author gets

alienated from the text; in fact, he is contextually

attached with the text. The presence of the

author in the text is like a shadow, which never

diminishes from the text within and without. The

author relates himself with history, culture and

socio-economic reality. An act of writing never

ceases by its own will, but it extremely transforms

the text into interpretations. The author does

not speak the text. It is transcended completely

from divinity. Every text has its own standards

and doctrines of output. The text is a symbolic

manifestation of rationality, individuality and

transcendentalism. The author absents himself

deliberately from the text, but his presence is

marked by endless time and eternity, and remains

ubiquitous to all forever.

The presence of the author in the text is timeless.

The author is always looking for a vanished

past, bitter present and unpredictable future in

the written and unspoken text. The text and the

89

author are homogeneous, intermixed and mutual

for any interpretations. The author reads the text

like a reader. He then connects himself with the

time when the poem was written. He recollects

the time when he expressed the world and peeps

into the uncanny world of characters who lead

his own interpretations elsewhere. Unlike a

reader, the author never reads what is written and

unspoken; he reads what he loses in the text. The

time when the text was written is only known to

two people: 1. The author of that time 2. God. In

every text, the author has pre- and post-existence.

The characters think what the author had thought;

the author is the mother when the text suffers.

The author is the father and the child is the text.

The author is dead, how can you state that

the author is dead? What makes you study a

critique of the text from the authorial point of

view? To study meaning meticulously is to get

into the real essence of the text. This is not a

justied way of interpreting the text. To study

generated meanings in the absence of another

is not the concrete interpretation of a text. The

interpretation incorporated with almost all the

shades of meanings are recurrently interrogated

with major differences. The demarcation about

90

the subjective and objective analysis of the text is

still questioned. No text is subjectively analysed

until the objectivity becomes an inherent part

of textual interpretation. Therefore, the text can

never be studied in a biased and prejudiced way.

Many critics turn to post-structuralism from

structuralism at the end of the study because

they started thinking again for the nalisation of

meanings. The meaning in a text functions like

the circulatory axis of the wheel merging into the

author. The meaning is nowhere but a moving

body of the text and it moves with the wings

of plurality without the signication.. There is

the death of the author because the text is in the

hands of the reader. The biographical sketch on

the author is no more existent in the text. Does

it mean that the authorial meaning is completely

absent from the text? How can we say that his

absence makes the text study in-depth? The

analysis of the literary text is . It is true that the

focus of the study is made by keeping the author

away from the written text.

Literature is a demonstration of knowledge with

rationality, human values, facts and sensory

experiences and experiments. It is an expression

91

of emotions and feelings, which cope with the

reality of life.

However, making the author dead is not enough

to avert his presence in the text. His views are

codied in objectivity in guise of subjectivity in

the text. Every reader is pleased to be in pursuit

of understanding what text is all about. Is there

any absolute meaning for what was written by

the

author in the text? The answer is a big no. His

work is not a product of intention, biography

and history. His literary experience, which is

subjective by nature, is internalised with the

essence of the text. The text is independent in

carrying its own meanings. In fact, there should

not be any restriction upon the text because the

text is not always free from all prejudices and

biased meanings within the text. The text is

always independent, enigmatical and magical in

nature. This ubiquitous note of the text makes

the readers study in isolation for the sake of

upholding singularity for all the meanings in all

the discourses.

The text is free from all the restraints and

external forces of pressurization. The death of

the author means the birth of the reader. The

92

meaning is nothing, but futile in nature due to its

dependence and interrelatedness. The author and

reader are apart in the interpretation of meanings

in the text. The text is an artifact; it is neither

of the author’s not the reader’s. One can reach

the reconstruction of the meaning emerging from

the text. In the reading, the death of the author

signies that the author is no more in the text. Is

it worth-considerable to talk and assume about

the death of the author in the interpretation of the

text? The meanings have never been stationary

in the text. Text is often plural and multiple in

meanings. There is, of course, a free play of

meanings. Such endless free play of meanings

demonstrates the textual vulnerability to reach

the signied. Although deconstruction is not all

about the abandonment of all restraints, it is in

fact the disciplined identication for the sources

of textual power. It is a systematic dismantling

of the sources of textual power. These days,

almost all the critics are desirous to achieve the

intellectual event to be discussed and debated at

length. It is a disastrous norm about decentering

of ideas. It is concerned about decentering of

the intellectual universe. However, before that,

the author was acceptable and the existence of

an author in almost all the things was taken into

93

consideration for the interpretation. However,

deconstruction comes into the existence as a

theory and the author gets decentered. The author

is of the universe because he thinks much. Most

of the time, the intellectual perspectives, social

behaviour and architecture have centres.

To sum up, whenever I think of the author in

the text, I think of the presence of the author as

marginalised and oppressed. The relativity in

textual interpretation thus perishes the notion of

time and space as xed and central absolutes.

The intellectual rulers are meant for an artistic

regulation of the textual powers. The harmony

in music, the chronological sequence in narrative

representation of visual world has been discarded

in the interpretation of the text. It is interesting to

know whether the author in a text is xed or not.

However, the author is not dead; he is still alive

in the text through his point of view.

94

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS

Essentially, there is a deep concern of the author

in the text created. First, the author is not dead in

the interpretation of the text. Mostly, the author

plays a zero role in the interpretation of the text.

The critic is to criticise it intensively. Is it fair

to state that the author has no contribution to

universal knowledge that makes the text trans-

interpreted? In a genuine literary piece of art,

the creation is a product of the experiences

felt by the author. Creation is a product of the

creator who unconsciously gets engaged in the

creative activity. Yes, this is true that the text

has to be studied in isolation. The text needs

to be eliminated from the inuences of the

author. The inuences may be personal, social,

political, cultural, biographical, historical and

geographical; those are cut off from the contexts.

Along with such inuences, the creation based

on non-contexts does matter in the interpretation

of the text.

The references of non-context are very much

95

inuential in the interpretation of the text. The

problems that encourage the intrusion of non-

contexts in the creative activity are principally

the presence of the author. No one can deny the

presence of the author in the super-consciousness

of the text. The presence of the author in the text

is a root cause of interpretation for a literary piece

of art. It’s important to declare the inevitable

presence of the author in the text. He is never

dead for the trans-interpretation of the text.

The interpretation of the text without the author

is as the life of the body without the soul. Author

for the text is as essential as the soul is for the

body for a trans-interpretation of the text.

Such study of the text without author is an

incomplete study for interpretation. This never

leads the readers not to misinterpret the text..

If this is the case of declaring the author as the

centre in the interpretation of the text, where is

the centre in a text?

The centre in a text is always xed like a

pendulum shedding its unending oscillations of

interpretations all along the sphere of circulatory

meanings of the text.

Why should you go for reading the author in a

text for interpretation? The author reads himself

96

in a text. There is a ubiquitous note of the author

in a text, which is predominant for the readers

of trans-deconstruction. Why do you spend so

much of time in considering what the author did

in a lifespan? Why do you spend so much of

time and energy in understanding what exactly

the author interpreted in the text? The author

failed to feel felt feelings of his own in the text.

The text is different to the author at the time of

the creation of the literary texts and the time of

reading it as a reader. These things essentially

bafe the readers to know the essence of the

text and the author. That is why; the readers are

in pursuit of understanding something about the

creator and the creation. If the creator is declared

to be dead, something has gone terribly wrong

with someone somewhere. The author is never

dead in the interpretation of the text. He is in

fact still alive through his point of view in the

super-consciousness of the text. He is still alive

as a mouthpiece of the different characterisations

sketched, scheduled and designed by him. In

his masterpiece, only the author can make the

directions in the interpretations of the text. As

a matter of fact, the authorial note needs to be

taken into consideration in any research activity.

It has its own subjective implications rather than

97

a study of words-on-the-page. Can you prove

that the subjective inclination will not help in the

objectication and intellectualisations of things?

The subjective inclinations do not hold any

scientic temperament in themselves. So much

understanding hardly seems to be up to the mark

for the interpretation of any text. In all human

Sciences, the creator is much more important than

the creation. The creator is important not only

because he has created something, the creator is

important because the creation is an integral part

of the creator. The author is always alive in the

interpretation of the text. The authorial note is

for the interpretation of the text. The author often

nds his own space in the text in the form and

functioning of the text.

Most of his writing in the text is a product of

his experiences, which have been shared through

different characters, novel events and unique

situations. This is nothing but the fact that the

creation never overlooks literary objectives. The

text is an output of the author himself, that is

why, the other worldly note, cannot be ignored in

any interpretation of the text. This is important to

take the example of William Shakespeare’s plays

What happens in his dramas is that he simply

98

expresses his experiences, which may be realistic

or ctional through the characters. It means that

the author is talking to the readers through his

masterpiece. This is the same thing for almost all

writers, that is why, the author is always conned

in the text and is in guise of the character of any

drama or any ctional stories. Therefore, this

is enigmatic to ascertain ethereal impressions

exerted upon the text. Therefore, a person or a

character has a different instinct dressed within

him. The reader who tries to relate his own

experiences with the written text understands all

these traits and comprehension is made. Does it

mean that it is a hundred percent understanding

of the taste of the literary text?

Of course, it is not. The text says something to the

readers and the readers read something out of the

text. The intensive reading has much more gaps

in the interpretation of the text and these gaps

are the best in terms of the trans-interpretation

of the text. The interpretation is nothing but the

amalgamation of all the experiences of the author

studied rst, then the text and its social, cultural,

historical and biological things are taken into

consideration.

With the help of different experiences lived by

99

the author, the creation is made unique for the

interpretation of the text. The creative activity

is a product of the experiences of the author

felt within and without. That is why, this book

is important and talks about the term trans-

interpretation.

Trans-interpretation is not a subjective

interpretation of the text. It is not merely a

scientic way of interpreting the text. It is

simply the deeper understanding of the text

through an introspective and intuitive study

of the author absorbed in the text. It helps

the text to be understood its concrete and

abstract information along with denotative and

connotative implications of the text. The author

is in the text and the reader is to nd out the

essence of the text. The different shades of an

unpretentious creation of the literary piece of art

are ubiquitous. Interestingly, if you are yourself,

you are something else. Can you experience

what another person felt? You will not feel the

same absolutely. The suffering, the experiences

felt by a particular group of people, individual,

society, and nation, may differ from the person

to person. The readers do resemble with such

temperaments. Another person in terms of words

cannot put such experiences forth.

100

Readers retell the text in terms of experienced

facts of author. . The expression of the experience

felt by the author is nothing but the amalgamation

of the experiences felt by the author within and

without. This expression needs to be analysed in

order to reach the nalisation of meaning. The

meaning is coded into the text by the author and

the decoding of meaning is a prime concern of

the reader. Simply, the birth of the reader and

the death of the author do not mean a deeper

understanding of the text in its fullest sense. Still,

the same scenario is thought be a rational one and

leads to no further interpretations.

However, such is not the case with interpretations.

One can fathom the necessity of interpretation

for the readers within and without. The inter-

texted expression of any story can be assisted

by the presence of the author in the super-

consciousness of text. The text is a generator of

meanings by the readers. What the narrator says

in the text is muted by a perpetual silence of

intellectualisations by the readers. The authorial

experiences remain as a tool for the budding of

interpretations resulted into new experiences to

the readers. The outcome of the author can be

realistic, imaginary, ctional, socio-economic,

political, cultural, historical, geographical and

101

experiential to the readers. All such experiences

of the author are combined together to create a

literary work of art. These experiences do matter

in the text for the interpretation of the text. Most

importantly, the narrator uses his experiences as

a tool for expression and revelation.

The expiration of meanings is revealed through

writing. The author cannot be personal at all

times in the writing of the text. Therefore, his

impersonality is marked by his absences in the

text. Interpretation is to express something from

the text as there are many things nested in the text

in their inexpressive nature. Things are important

to be exposed for the sake of interpretation.

This privacy of the author is integrated into

the text through the means of characterisation.

The sources such as characterisation, plot are

important as tools of expression for interpretation.

Interpretation is to gauge the experiences faced by

the author within and without. The congruence of

experiences revealed by the author as an outsider

into the text is a prime concern for readers as an

insider while interpreting the text. The author

opens up his span of life through the character

sketch in the text. He shares his experiences

with the readers through the text. He writes with

the solution for the problems he encountered in

102

life. Every writer is worried about the solution

of the problem that needs to be understood by

the readers through interpretation. It is a huge

responsibility of every reader to understand the

text before interpretation.

Misinterpretation is a product of the vulnerability

of the reader and his poor reading of the text

whereas trans-interpretation demonstrates

rationality, intellectualisation and spirituality of

the reader. Interpretation puts forth the problems

of the text along with solutions in front of the

society and expects radical changes into it.

Every author vents to the solution through his

text and expects more from interpretation. The

reader fails to understand what the text does not

talk about itself. That is why; readers mistake

the text. The text is trans-deconstructed for the

exploration of the context. Every literary work

of art encompasses a wide spectrum of the

inherent ideas penned into the text by the author.

The reader often puts on a mask of fear in his

mind in the name of objectivity at the time of

interpretation. This phobia of objectivity rather

than subjectivity in the mind of readers is a great

hindrance to trans-interpretation. The sentiments

of the author are expressed in the text, but the

readers have not yet divulged them. Hence, the

103

theory of trans-deconstruction takes precedence

in literary studies.

The expression of sensitivity in the text is

to be sensed by the reader every time. The

reader is to become subjective-cum-objective

in the interpretation of the text. When the

reader himself is subjectively prepared for the

interpretation of the text, how is the subjectivity

kept aside at the time of analysis? The text is

to keep all authorial personal experiences aside

in the explanation. A biased and prejudiced mind

is a natural trait of every human temperament

that cannot be eliminated from interpretation. It

can be an impediment to the text as a complete

entity. It means that a personal note of author is

instinctively considered as subjective rather than

objective for the interpretation of text. The reader

is always engaged with the text for interpretation.

The interpretation is broadly divided into two

parts: Subjective Interpretation and Objective

Interpretation. Both interpretations are essential

for trans-interpretation of the text.

There is no reader who can keep himself aloof

from interpretation. His study of the text is

concerned with both subjectivity and objectivity.

The text is like a rainbow that sheds its multiple

104

colours in uniformity. The production of meaning

is not a different entity in any interpretation of

the text as it goes hand in hand with reading. The

subjectivity and objectivity are to be merged into

oneness in order to trans-interpret the text. The

protagonist of the text talks about his sunlit side

of life whereas the villain of any text talks about

evil things, conspiracy, vices and destruction.

The virtues of the text are to be inter-tuned with

the facts for the interpretation of text. Therefore,

the ideas poured into the text by the author are

paramount in the text. The ideas are prevalent

in the super-consciousness of the text. The ideas

presented in the text are ubiquitous in nature

that they cannot be encompassed for a very

wide range of interpretations. Therefore, the

interpretation is all about super-consciousness

of the text. It is absolutely true to state that trans-

interpretation makes you come up with some

concrete solution to the problem unsolved by

human endeavours. Writing is the expression

of the voice unspoken by time. It is a mute

voice of the voiceless sufferers. It is the voice

of the authorial experiences left hidden within

individuals into the text. Writing is a shadow

of human personality; it is an expression of the

voice made by the author. It has been unmuted by

105

the readers at the time of interpretation. Writing

is an expression of identity, individuality and

self to the readers. The identity of the author

is at times lost in the interpretation of the text.

The identity of the author is mostly revealed in

the text in guise of objectivity. Therefore, every

interpretation is the expression of the creator.

How can we say that the author is dead when the

reading is started? Not! The author goes hand

in hand with the reader. It is right to say that

he is still alive after the completion of writing.

He is reborn in reading by the readers. The text

manifests the loneliness of the author embedded

in the text, which needs to be trans-interpreted.

The author is crucial in the interpretation of text.

That is why the authorial sources have been

taken into consideration by incorporating them

as a Secondary Source in the research work such

as biography, autobiography, interviews, BBC

Hard Talks … etc. The texts have been used as

the secondary sources for the interpretation of

the text. The interpretation of the text reveals

relative reality. In this context, the reality is

understood in parts rather than as a whole.

Individual impressions reected on the texts

are often relative. They differ from person to

person leading to truth in chaos. Therefore, the

106

amalgamation of subjectivity and objectivity

in the interpretation of the text is necessary to

fathom a complete truth of wholeness.

Does interpretation reveal reality? If it is so, what

kind of reality does it reveals? Is it a partial truth

or an absolute truth? Why does interpretation

demand further interpretations? Why is it

essential to re-interpret the text? The answer is

that it is partial and hence discursive in nature.

Once it is based on singularity of all meanings

for directionless discourses in human sciences,

it will become condensed, specic and trans-

interpreted. Discourses are unied, singularised

and trans-deconstructed if the interpretation is

trans-interpreted. There is a big full stop for all

discourses as life meets its destination in the name

of redemption. Similarly, the text meets its centre

once the oscillations cease at a certain point like

a pendulum. Consider for a while that the text is

like life, the life is as difcult as the text to know

within and without. All the interpretations rest

in piece as the super-consciousness of the text is

experienced and experimented. Interpretation is a

literary tool to fathom reality to be masked by the

author. It is an act of unravelling and unveiling

reality through a mode of interpretation. It is

107

much more important in the context of trans-

interpretation of the text.

Trans-interpretation is a reading of the unravelled

reality inherent to the text, usually found beyond

the linguistic clutches of the text, which can be

judged through the unmuted voice of the author.

The author enters himself into the arena of text

where he never meets his own death.

The author is never dead in the interpretation of

the text.

The author has never been dead in the

interpretation of the text. In fact, the author is

a genius who always nds different means of

expression to reveal himself in the text. This

expression cannot be interpreted as a personal

objective of scientic temperament of the author.

Science is an inherent part of interpretation. The

interpretation has a scientic base and utility. .

The scientic base helps in reaching the goals

of interpreting the text. Science is objective-

oriented, logical and experiment-based. The

reader focuses on peculiar ideas of the text itself

by inducing into the textual aggressive forces of

essence within the text. He looks for the centre

in a text, which is xed like a pendulum. The

narration is a product of the author’s genius

108

based on his experiences. The genius is born

who can taste the essence of life and recreate the

same experience in writing. The text is fathered

through his in-depth output of life experiences.

The reader should not be restricted for the

interpretation of the text. The ideology of the

text is a product of authorial experiences. Text

makes the individuals to form such ideologies.

The formation of ideology is an entity to deal

with the expressive world of interpretations. Not

anything, which is expressed, is interpretation.

Expression is a root cause of human personality

that demands it. The text cannot carry the hidden

secrets with it at all times. Every reading leads

to the interpretations of interpreted facts into

the text. It leads to the expression of knowledge

to the readers, which is revealed in a work of

art. The revelation of knowledge is understood

through the authorial note in a work of art. In this

context, the theory of monism is essential for the

analysis of the text, which incorporates both the

subjective and objective connotations.

A ubiquitous authorial note reected into the text

is taken into consideration in order to nd out

the scientic base of the things. The author has

already studied the text at the time of his creative

109

interpretations. How can we deny the presence

of the author in the interpretation of the text?

The absence of the author is a demarcation for

the trans-interpretation. Art is natural with the

presence of the author. The absence of the author is

the absence of art. How can we say that the author

is no more in the interpretation of the text? How

can we declare that the author is removed from

the textual interpretations? It is not. The author is

monitoring the text consciously or unconsciously.

He lies beneath the super-consciousness of the

textual power. The hegemony of the author into

the text is ubiquitous, omniscient, omnipotent

and prevalent. The author dictates the rules of

the text through a sketch of characterisation,

dialogues, plot, setting and locale. The author

marks his presence in history through writings.

The author is a creator of textual power and a

maker of trans-interpretations. The author marks

his own literary presence in history. He makes his

perpetual mark through his biographical sketch

in a literary work of art. The author peeps into the

text through a number of interviews, magazines,

e-journals, research papers and BBC Hard talks.

He is sensing the text through his inevitable

presence into the text. The author is making an

awareness of his literary power in the text. He

110

is making the literariness of his creativity that

empowers the text with multiple philanthropic

implications. He is read and made transparent for

the further interpretation of the text. The author

is very curious to get embedded and absorbed

into the real interpretation of the text. The reader

is interested to look into the facts of the text. The

author mirrors himself into the text. The self-

image is a manifestation of the essence in the

image of the narrator through characterisation in

a story designed by the author.

The text is a literary manifestation of himself

through his own image. It is the expression of

his cultural, historical, biological, geographical,

economic, social, regional and political sense. The

author is the expression of his own contemporary

culture in the text. How can the author be

reected into the text for interpretations? This is

a moot question for every reader for the cessation

of interpretations. The interpretation of text is as

important as the writing of text itself. The study

of the text should be done trans-deconstructively

along with the presence of the author. The author

cannot be ignored for the sake of interpretations.

His presence in the text in guise of point of

view governs interpretations. To set the readers

111

directed, it is thought that the text has nothing

to do with the other entities outside the text for

interpretations. However, the text is a product of

the author and a nal artifact of expression.

The text demonstrates everything about the

author. How can you refute the presence of the

author in the interpretation of the text? That is

why, the delivery of the voice is much more

important for interpreting what the text is all

about. The text always marks the presence of

the author and the presence of the author needs

to be centred in every interpretation of the text.

The geo-historical experiences of the author

need to be studied thoroughly while the socio-

cultural aspects of the author have to be engaged

constantly with the textual interpretations.

The socio-political experiences of the author

will help the readers to interpret the political

inclinations of the author. Writing the text

shows the inclination of the authorial presence

in the text. The cultural impressions of the

author play a vital role in the interpretation of

the text. The interpretation is turned to trans-

interpretation for the cessation of meanings. The

trans-interpretation is much more important for

the analysis of the text in a complete sense. The

112

interpretation conceals the interpreter in guise

of trans-interpretation. Trans-interpretation is an

umbrella term that encompasses a fundamental

area of trans-deconstruction. It leads to a specic

conclusion, which helps to understand what the

text is all about with a complete sense. The author

relates himself to the text through his desire,

passions and much more. Mostly, the critics are

of the opinion that the text is ctional, but the

functionality of the text is rational, realistic and

relative in interpretations. The functionality of

the text has its deep concern with the experience

of the author. It begets from the experiences of

the author. Therefore, the delivery of the ideas

by the author is important to be studied as a part

of a textual analysis. For every interpretation of

the text, the language speaks rather than rooted

essence.

The author speaks the text. The reader is to

consider this point for interpretations. What

is language after all? Language is a mode of

expression to the readers. The language is a tool

of interpretation to the text. Simply, the language

unmasks expressions to the readers. Language

simply facilitates the readers to understand a

deep sensation of the author. The author has been

reected in the text for the sake of interpretations.

113

The language is much more signicant in the

interpretations of text. It is a means of venting

the author to the world. The manifestation can be

personal or impersonal in nature, but the notes

it generates are to be merged into oneness. The

text is studied thoroughly for the exploration

of a core meaning hidden into it. The reader

is to sense the text in complete wisdom. He is

to go for interpretation of the text seeking the

author in it. His psychological conditions affect

writings adversely or sometimes favourably. The

psychoanalysis of the text needs to be undertaken

for interpretations. The inclusion of the author for

interpretations is a prime concern of the critic.

Writing is not reaching the crux of the matter in

a text where the destination is essentially made

by the author for interpretations. It is mistakenly

interpreted that once the author writes the text, he

is dead for further interpretations. He is removed

from the text forever. The author is essentially

like the soul in a body. Once he is removed, the

body is of no use. In fact, the author is an integral

part of the text, which cannot be alienated from

the corpus of the text. The researcher has to read

him rst and incorporate him in the research

studies for interpretations. His writing reaches

where he wants the readers to be led . The fact

114

is that the writing is simply a means of reaching

somewhere where the author desires it to be. The

fullest sense of the author can be had through

the study of the author in its relation with the

text. It is indeed important that the authorial

concern does matter in the interpretation of the

text. The readers can reject the interpretation.

However, the authorial note is not averted. The

acceptance or rejection of the text is based on

a mode of interpretation chosen by the reader

in writing. The text is manifested through the

language and its language that often speaks

to the readers. The author puts on the mask of

language. It is a reader who unmasks the face

of the language. The linguistic interference into

the trans-interpretation is very much appreciated

for the pre-existing impersonality of the author.

The essential point of interpretation is to be met

by the reader. The author needs to be taken into

consideration for justied interpretation by the

readers. The text is in guise of a pre-existing

personality of the author inherent in the text. There

is no superiority and inferiority of the content in

the interpretation of text. How can you celebrate

the creation while ignoring the creator? How

can you research the creation while rejecting the

creator? In this context, the text is a creation and

115

the author is a creator. Both creation and creator

are intermixed and cannot be studied separately

or either eliminated. The amalgamation of these

two diversied strategies in any interpretation

of the text does matter to nd out the essence of

text. This is mostly assumed that the author is

not the backbone of the text. The text is written

forever for the readers. The author is declared

dead because he has nothing to do with the text.

The author does not govern the textual matter or

the textual content. As a matter of the fact, the

author and the language he uses govern the text.

The linguistic formulations held in the text are

to be studied critically and it will lead you to

understand the formal structure of text. However,

this is not true as far as trans-interpretation is

concerned. Trans-interpretation is essential for

the exploration of the centre in a text. It is to

study the text fully by incorporating the point of

view of the author. It is equally important that

the author plays a vital role in the interpretation

of the text because he is the creator and without

his perspectives and the language, no text can be

fully studied. An author is a tool for expression

that cannot be separated from the creation.

The language in a text governs the content and

the language is to be studied to know the content

116

to its fullest sense in the text. The interpretation

of text is based on the consideration of prevalent

textual super-consciousness. Therefore, it is

natural to know the security of the text rather

than its insecurity.. The text was nothing, but

an expression of a deep authorial content to the

readers. The author hides many things from the

text such as his authorial note. It is much more

important to know the author completely because

the hidden part of the author has not yet been

reected in the text. The authorial note is the

crux of the matter for interpretation of the text.

The point of view of the author ingrained in the

text is extremely important in the interpretation

of the text at its fullest sense. The revelation of

knowledge has not been a sole responsibility

of the author; in fact, writing is a necessity of

creation. In some cases, the status of the author

has been maintained for the interpretation of

the text and his presence is absolutely retained

in paintings especially in art and literature. The

impression is that the authorial note presented in

its creativity marks the perfect presence of the

author in paintings. It is said that language is a

substitute of communication. The language can

also be entitled as a system of interpretation in the

interpretative world. The linguistic formulations

117

held in the text are crucial for interpretations.

The reader is to study the language of the text

before reaching the absolute meaning of the text.

The language is the prime concern of almost all

literary texts for interpretations. The scientic,

observational and methodological mode of

interpretations formulates the meaning. The

study of the textual analysis is a herculean task

for readers to meet the absolutism in the text.

The interpretation is a symbolic manifestation

of facts from the text comprising of illusion and

reality altogether. The reality can be perceived

in terms of the sensitisation of things. It can be

perceived through the sensory perception. It is

sensed rather than outwardly concretised. It is

interiorised rather than exteriorised. Writing is

a huge responsibility of the author and a prime

concern in the interpretation of the text. The

writing is not an escape from the emotions and

feelings of the author in terms of the formulation

of the text. It is an apparent interpretation of the

thought processes of the author. It is a tangible

manifestation of the imagined world of the

author wearing the mask of concretisations.

The utmost care is taken for the emotions and

feelings of the author in interpretations. In terms

of writing, the pragmatism of the original author

118

peeps into the interpretations. There are different

disciplines of knowledge, which further demand

for interpretations. Writing is paramount for the

author who is present himself in the text through

language. It cannot be speech narration for the

interpretations. It can be the personication of

the author conned in the conceptual essence of

the text.

The author can only justify the motif of writing

in the text. In fact, the writing is simply a

manifestation of the authorial inclination of the

experiences of life reected into the text.

119

THEORY OF TRANS-INTERPRETATION:

 Interpretation is to trans-interpret the text

fully to cease the multiplicity of the text.

 Language is to speak about the content rather

than the crux of the matter ingrained into the text.

 The author is to nish writing and be relaxed

in the super-consciousness of the text.

 The reader is to study the subjectivity and

objectivity of the text to reach the nalisation of

the meaning.

 The binary oppositions are to merge nally

into the oneness of textual power.

 The centre is to act like a pendulum xed for

the measurement of oscillations of plurality into

the text.

 Super-consciousness is a rational-cum-

spiritual meditation on the centre and content

of the text merging all the disputes in perpetual

silence emerging through unending discourses

in human sciences and resting them in peace

forever.

 The author, his point of view, intuition and

super-consciousness should be given prime

120

weighting for the interpretation of every text.

 The centre of a text lies within and without

like two Bhahmandas for interpretation. The

exploration of both centres is probable by means

of trans-deconstruction, a theory on monism.

 The text has to do something with the content,

not with the language.

 The author is still alive through his point of

view in the interpretation of the text. His death is

the death of the text and the rebirth of the reader.

 The absence of the author in the text is the

death of the text.

 The author is alive forever in the super-

consciousness of the text.

 In the theory of trans-deconstruction, the

absence of the author marks the presence of his

point of view in the text. He is not alienated from

the centre of the text; often found relaxed on the

lap of super-consciousness of the text, which has

to be revealed through trans-interpretation, trans-

deconstruction in order to reach the nalised,

absolute meaning of the text.

 Writing never nishes the author; in fact, it

makes it reunited with the text.

 Writing is, in brief, interpretative in nature

121

with the camouage of subjectivity in guise of

objectivity for the trans-interpretation of the text.

 The author is no more, but his absence in the

text is presence forever.

 Why are the readers given opportunities to read

the text at leisure? Do they read what is meant

for reading from the text? Are they not biased,

prejudiced in the interpretation of the text?

 The reader carries his own world with him at

the time of interpretations and the same world

makes a big difference to him.

 The readers can unwillingly get the text

drenched with their emotions and feelings. Here,

the subjectivity surpasses objectivity.

 The readers connect themselves with the

textual experiences at the time of interpretation,

so the reading of the text becomes partial and it

can meet both the beams twinkle in darkness,

that is, a sense of the subjectivity merging with

a sense of the objectivity in the interpretation of

the text.

 The issue of subjectivity and objectivity

intertwined for the trans-interpretation of the

text.

 The interdependence of the textual subjectivity

and objectivity will lead you to the scientic

122

approach of analysing the text for the sake of

clear interpretations of the text.

 Like a detective, the human mind always

foresees a text rested as a paralysed patient

dreaming for the well-being of the world all

around him.

 The author is pre-existed and post-existed for

the interpretation of the text.

 In the trans-interpretation of the text, the

author is post-existed in the super-consciousness

of the text.

 The post-existence of the author mirrors the

own point of view of the author into the text

which cannot be denied by the researchers.

 The researcher interviews with the author

because he wants to know why and how the

character is created in a story.

123

APPLICATION OF TRANS-INTERPRETATION

FOR THE STUDY OF A LITERARY TEXT:

 The creation of the character is the manipulation

of the author in the text.

 A genuine literary piece work of art coexists

with the ideas and emotions of the author.

 The author vividly portrays how he suffered

in life, how he lived and what problems actually

he faced in his life and notable impressions he

received and failures he met are a symbiotic

manifestation of the self into the text.

 The character is fed into the text by the means

of the authorial point of view.

 Binary oppositions studied in the text are

considered a single entity. Superiority and

inferiority of binary oppositions are treated as a

textual impartiality.

 The prioritisation of binary oppositions

in a hierarchical mode is rejected in trans-

interpretation of the text. No binary term is

privileged; in fact, it is treated as an equal entity

in the interpretation of the text. For example:

presence and absence should be treated as

124

presence in the light (presence) and light in

darkness (absence). The presence and absence

are merged into a singular entity as a nal entity

in the trans-interpretation.

 The author talks to the readers through the

means of the character sketch. Therefore, it

is important not to ignore the author while

interpreting the text trans-interpretingly t.

 The presence of the author is post-existed into

the text after creation and the reader monitors

this justice.

 The presence of the author is marked by the

absence, which is lled into text by the authorial

point of view.

 The author is born with his text and dies with

a poor reading of a reader.

 He is always alive with his own point of view

in the text. He pioneered as an intruder into the

text along with his dialogues, plot, setting, locale,

themes, connotations, notations, characters

archetypes, etc.

 The author is an insider looking in rather than a

reader who looks out in the perception of reality

and textual interpretations.

 The aforementioned views about the authorial

point of view embedded into the text are quite

125

apt in the trans-interpretation of the text.

 The text never is detached from the voice of

the art concealed in authenticity. In fact, the text

is attached with the voice of the author.

 The reader is reading the text in order to

understand the morality, culture and individuality

of his writing.

 The focus of a reader is principally on the

values, ethics and morality reected into the text.

 Trans-interpretation believes in the fact that

the text nally ends with a certain conclusion.

The message of the author can be turned into the

message of the Supreme Power.

 The author into the text conveys the message

of the Supreme Power.

 The author of science is beyond understanding

of the textual power.

 The text is a representation of the culture in

which the author is born and brought up in a

socio-cultural ambience and the same cultural

traits are vividly reected into the text through

different characters or events.

 For the ction as a literary genre, the

functionality of the text is a parameter for the

sublimity.

126

 The textual analysis is subject to the presence

of the author in a literary piece of art.

 The author-oriented interpretation will never

be a fallacy for the readers in the literary theories.

 In fact, the reader is dead if the intent of the

author is not taken into consideration.

 The text has already taken the position of the

point of view of the author. His existence has to

be revealed by the reader by connecting his own

experiences with the textual experiences of the

author.

 If it does not go as it has been aforementioned,

the existence of the text will be felt without the

soul in the trans-interpretation of the text.

127

Pramod Pawar’s Theory of Interpretations x-rays the

indispensable place of the author in literary criticism. According

to Pawar, the author is the soul of the text; he has never been

dead in any interpretation of the text. An author stands as the

soul in the body whereas the text forms the entire body. If you

drop the author and simply focus on the text, it means that

you disprove the presence of the creator and merely celebrate

its creation. Pramod Pawar maintains that the celebration of

any text in the absence of the author is literary injustice to the

text. This work ts squarely in the realm of Critical Theory,

Cultural studies, Translation and Interpretation Studies.

About the Author

Pramod Ambadasrao Pawar is an Assistant

Professor of English, Research Guide and

Head of the Department of English, Sant

Dnyaneshwar Mahavidyalaya, Soegaon;

Dist. Aurangabad MS, aliated to Dr.

Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada

University, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar,

Maharashtra State, India. He is the

Director of Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) of the

institution. Pramod Pawar is the Editor-in-Chief of Epitome

Journals. He has published many creative works, presented

numerous papers and delivered several lectures in various

national and international seminars in his native India and

abroad.

9 7 8 9 9 5 6 3 0 7 1 4 2

ISBN: 978 9956 30 714 - 2

Cover Design by Nyaa & Partners and Edward Ndansi

"Theory of Interpretations"

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

Soluciones utilitarias de compromiso en problemas multi-objetivo con informacion parcial

##Alphabetical Wonders Pramod Pawarian Words to Wisdom

TRANS-DECONSTRUCTION : THEORY ON MONISM

Theory of Interpretations

Theory of Interpretations (Cover Back)