Once the work is published, who controls the world the author built? For example, if the author publishes a work and readers interpret something a certain way and the author offers up another interpretation, whose do we go by? Where is the line rawn? Do readers inherit the work upon paying to read it? Or do authors maintain a certain degree of control even afterwards?
To whomever decides to write on this: keep in mind this piece I wrote a while back on the impact that fan interpretations and theories should have on a work: https://the-artifice.com/relevance-of-fan-theories/ – Matthew Sims7 years ago
It's a difficult topic to address. Some offer that once a work is finished and released upon the world - in this case a published work of literature - that nobody controls it. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this passing of ownership is simply that the work, for all intents and purposes, has become unchangeable. (At least, theoretically.) Also I think it's fair to say that much of this comes down to how an individual is looking to interpret the work. I think for the most part a work of fiction, (where these lines are blurred perhaps the most frequently,) once published, stands on its own. Certainly, the author of the published work will have the most insight into the interpretation of the work, insofar as it relates to their individual involvement and creation. But as an outside reader, one is able to interpret the work any way they choose, thus negating any input from the author. A good example is as simple as asking whether or not the reader is aware of the author's intent. If you've never heard the author's input, does that automatically negate your own interpretations? I would argue not. – Chris L7 years ago
This topic is in danger of going to the depths of reader's theory and the author function. I would suggest reading Barthes and Foucault... – Jill7 years ago