Literature formation is an intricate process that is influenced by the writers' knowledge, preference, message, and purpose. To Feagan the same is true when it comes to appreciation of the created piece of literature by the reader. The reader does so through a system of functionality, interpretation and his personal contribution in interpreting the writers work (1996). A good example is in essay, shooting an elephant (Orwell,1926) which can have different meaning to different readers.
Since no two readers have similar experience, interest, or purpose for reading a certain piece of literature, then it follows that appreciation model can never be alike for any two people.
Main Point 2 - Literature Must be Categorized to be Appreciated
As pointed out by Kennedy, 1997 and Downey, 1912, literature classification is crucial in order to identify the specific part of literature work including the moral, entertainment and social compass that are impotent to literature work.
Conclusion
Even though it has been a subject for debate for a long time, it is impossible for a universal model toward literary appreciation to be developed, since there exists no support for such a construct. Such factors as emotions, intention, genre, social-cultural, and temperamental considerations determine each literary analysis as well as appreciation process (Feagin, 1996)
Summary
The only way to make sense and benefit from great literally contribution, is to develop one own literally appreciation model. In developing ones model, certain factors such as interests and cultural orientation comes to play.
Introduction
There has been a desire among many literally critics to come up with a universal for literature appreciation. However this will forever remain so as it is impossible to achieve one given the myriad of factors involved in the process. All of you will agree with me that none of you will ever read the same story, book or poem the same way and none of you will ever be able to explain why. Some have suggested the desirability of a universal literature appreciation which is impossible given the intricacies involved.
In the subsequent presentation I hope to take you through two main points to this position, i.e., it is impossible to build a universal literally appreciation model, in the hope that you will eventually create appreciation model that is best suited for your reading needs. Personal literally appreciation model as is the only way to make sense and benefit from great literally contribution keeping in mind the wide range of literally devices that authors put into use to create meaning, such as metaphors, symbolism, plot and character selection. In developing ones model, certain factors such as interests and cultural orientation comes to play. As far as interest is concerned for example, a person may read for pleasure, enrichment as well as information.
Body
Literature creation formation is an intricate process that influenced by the writers' knowledge, preference, message, and purpose. To Feagan the same is true when it comes to appreciation of the created piece of literature by the reader. The reader does so through a system of functionality, interpretation and his personal contribution in interpreting the writers work (1996).
A good example is in the essay shooting an elephant (Orwell, 2003) which refers to an incident during the writer's life in Burma as a police officer serving the British imperial. It is highly likely that the writer chose the form of essay to express and analyze his feeling concerning his country's imperial attitude. Nevertheless, because of the narrative text structure, it has plots and characters and thus seems more like a fictitious story rather than an essay about freedom. In the story, the author uses imagery and metaphor without having to explain the meaning so that the reader can exercise his intellect to make out the meaning. The essay does deal indirectly for instance with the presence of British colonizers in Burma and the impact on Burma people.
Since no two readers have similar experience, interest, or purpose for reading a certain piece of literature, then it follows that appreciation model can never be alike for any two people. As pointed out by Kennedy, 1997 and Downey, 1912, literature classification is crucial in order to identify the specific parts of literature work, including the moral, entertainment and social compass which are central in any literature work. This aspects need to be taken as a whole as by themselves they do not make up an effective appreciation model.
This being the case therefore, we reckon that there can only be a universal model for the technical production and classification of literary works of art but not literature appreciation. Even with the completion of technical and classification aspects of a literally model, changes are still inevitable as other artist adjust them to their liking. Thus even technical aspects of the creative process ought to be redistributed through the astonishingly complex lens of the human mind (Feagin, 1996).
Conclusion
Literary appreciation is a process through which the author commences and the reader completes (Feagin, 1996). Even though it has been a subject for debate for a long time, it is impossible for a universal model toward literary appreciation to be developed since there no support for such a construct. Such factors as emotions, intention, genre, social-cultural, and temperamental considerations determine each literary analysis as well as appreciation process.
Visual Description
The diagrams indicate the impossibility in coming up with a universal form of literary appreciation. Various factors as the reader's interest, recognition, and social cultural factors as well as his/her sense of morality will influence literary appreciation. There are also various contributing elements with coming up with work of literature on the part of the writer as he has to consider such factors as genre, functions and intention of the text (Feagin, 1996; Downey, 1912).
Potential Questions
If it is impossible to develop a universal literary appreciation model, why is the debate still on?
Answer: Literary critics believe that profound or influential work of literature ought to be taught, believed and explained in one way. This is one of the reasons many writers such as George Orwell (Shooting an Elephant), Franz Kafka (Metamorphosis), Harper Lee (To Kill a Mockingbird) and many more reluctant to explain their message leaving it to the reader.
If a universal model was to be developed would it have any value?
Answer: No. this is as a result of the fact that value in literature often change with every reading, and depends on reader's constant emotional and intellectual growth as well as societal factors such as value system. For instance if I was told to interpret Shooting an Elephant (Orwell 2003) in a specific manner, I might fail to see the message on social cruelties as well as cultural biases. Such assignment would not enhance my literature appreciation as they are fixed by the author.
