Preparing to Write about The Tempest

In discussions of the analyzing of literary works such as Shakespeare’s The Tempest, one controversial issue has been the path a reader takes in deciphering the original intended meaning of the author. On the one hand, some people like George Will argue that literary works should only be analyzed explicitly from the text, and no inferring should be done. He also believes that political issues should be kept out of literary analysis as to not “corrupt” the works in a sense. On the other hand, Stephen Greenblatt contends that one must look between the lines for hidden gems to analyze in works such as Shakespeare’s. This view matches up with Aime Cesaire’s view from his work, A Tempest, which attempts to portray the supposed true meaning of Shakespeare’s The Tempest in a very brute and satirical fashion. Others even maintain that all analysis is worthwhile as long as their views relate to other critics’ and they are critical, state a strong held position, and in the end contribute to the overall discussion meaningfully. After seeing all these different ways to approach analyzing literature, I believe I hold firm on my perspective that literature is for one to analyze for them self. As humans we tend to interject our own beliefs into everything we encounter. I believe you can give 100 different people a complex work like Shakespeare’s The Tempest, and each and every one of them will have their own unique perspective on it. They will conjure up an analysis that relates to something they have experienced in their life, and even though it is intrapersonal analysis, it will not necessarily be wrong. As a student used to the fact that past English teachers have shoved “accepted” meanings and analysis down our throats, having the freedom to analyze literature from my point of view is a breath of fresh air.