A few nuggets of knowledge I took away:

When you quote someone it loses its meaning and there is a different tone to when you repeat it. This is because when you take the quote out of its context it changes. I quote people all the time, especially in this blog usually because I think they have phrased it the best way. It’s all about the relationships all the parts have that we have mentioned in a couple symposiums now. The relationships that make the meaning.

Part of this course is teaching us how to read in opposition of the intention of the text. To realise that we don’t have to be try find out what the author intended but find our own informed interpretation. I think Neeve describes it well that intent has its weaknesses because of two main issues: Semiotics and the unconscious.

In regards to semiotics it is split into two parts: the signifier (the sign, the body) and the signified (what is means, the mind). The relationship between words and their meanings are not one to one, they don’t have one universal interpretation. It is important to think about it in certain contexts. A interesting point raised was whether words gain meaning from what they are not? An example that Adrian used was that the word ‘boy’. It can distinguish itself from the other terms that could have been there like man, lad, son etc.

There are problems with language because there is always a gap between what it means and what we understand it to mean. You can’t guarantee that someone else has understood what you have said based on your intended meaning. Taking it one step further an author or painter may intent for their work to say mean one thing but can the work also become its own thing