The reading, “Tools for Analyzing Texts” starts off by describing how bombarded we are with advertisements and why it’s important that we be able to analyze them. It mentions that being able to analyze will help us to see the real significance behind a text by thinking in a more “meta” sense and also give us the ability to understand how it works and give us new insight. The reading then goes on to discuss lenses for analysis, which are basically different ways of looking at and analyzing a text. Different lenses allow readers to develop different theories on how a text works and manages to evoke a certain thought or emotion in us. When analyzing a text, there are many factors that need to be considered, like its intended audience, purpose, time period it was written in, genre, and what medium it was produced in to give us a thorough and accurate analysis. Some theoretical lenses that should also be considered for texts of any kind are the roles of ethnicity, sexual orientation, ableism/disability, and the cultural and social markers that indicate an entire identity.
It’s really interesting how there are endless ways for a single text to be interpreted with the abundant amount of tools there are to analyze with. So many factors contribute to a text’s analysis like the time period it was written in and its intended audience that it can leave a totally different interpretation among readers. It’s fascinating how using various lenses can drastically change the perceived meaning of a text.
Can a person’s analysis of something be wrong? Is there such thing as a “correct” analysis?
A good and thorough analysis is based in truth, in evidence — the facts. It is only towards the end that personal opinion and inferred implications have a place. An “analysis” charged with bias belongs in the “opinions” section of a publisher or news site. Of course, such opinions may be backed with analyses and facts, especially when you want to make a substantiated claim, you know, the strong, hard-to-dispute types of claim. I guess in that light, there can be no “incorrect” analysis so long as it is based in the realm of fact, not fiction.