Perrine Poem Interpretation

              After reading Perrine's article on the interpretation of poetry, I have to say I could not have disagreed more with the author. To me, by its very definition, interpretation cannot be correct or incorrect. Interpretation is merely the reader's insight into the author's world. Just because 99% of the population interprets a poem one way, does not mean the other 1% is wrong in their interpretation. In fact, thinking outside the norm is encouraged in poetry. Students go through school encouraged to explore poetry, but few embrace poetry due to fear of not understand it. No reader should feel their understanding of a piece of literature is incorrect.  Perrine believes interpretation must be "the simplest or most economical of alternative ways of accounting for the facts." However, one could argue that assuming one interpretation is correct, simply because its the simplest or easiest, is not wise, but unimaginative and lazy. In reality, the simplest answer is not always the truth, and neither is it in the world of poetry. 

 Perrine often refers to an ink blot, stating poetry, unlike an ink blot, cannot be interpreted as anything the reader wants. This notion really struck me. If when one looks at an ink blot and sees a duck, and another sees a rabbit, who really has the authority to say which is correct? I believe that the reader, or in this case viewer, is the only one with that prerogative. If the background of the picture is better suited for a rabbit, by Perrine's standards this would mean the blot must be a rabbit. But who's to say it is not duck, lost in rabbit territory? Despite being less likely, it is not wrong. However, it is wrong for other's to judge any interpretation of poetry.