Reading Alan Mckee’s guide on textual analysis reminds me to always look at different sides of the story. It may have 2 sides of the story, or even 5, 6, whatever sides you feel comfortable. in fact opinion, I believe that Alan’s guide into textual analysis should apply to all sorts of interpretation and judgment. People’s opinion are very biased, which makes them unique, because everybody has their own opinion, and some agree upon a bias more than others like Alan said “there is no such thing as a sing, ‘correct’ interpretation of any text. There are large numbers of possible interpretations, some of which will be more likely than others in a particular circumstances”. But often this straight line point of view produces conflict and irrational arguments, with each side thinking they are more intelligent than the other.
Understanding every group’s point of view is the key to make the best solution. If there are no solution, at least we can see, empathize, and find a relation that we can concile with each other. If you are doing an academic reading, you may not find the answer to which point of view is the best view, but rather which belief most people believe on, and why it happens to be that way.
But one thing starts to struck me, and I am not sure if my opinion can be held true. after reading the text, without further reading I believe that textual analysis would not be used, or even exist in a place where freedom of speech is supressed/nonexistant. My view is directed towards a radical-left communist environment, where the media is controlled and the preception are going in the same path. Everybody’s perspective would be the same because have to be the same. There will be no disagreement, but there would be no freedom. Which one would you choose?