[souprock]

We now have proof that it really is "going far beyond the author's intention". Texas licensed a poem for a standardized test. The poem's author was still alive, and was unable to "correctly" answer test questions about the meaning of the poem.

So yes, the English teachers really are spouting nonsense, and we have proof.

[antran22]

There also is a similar story of such in my country. There was this guy who wrote a short and it was included in the national textbook. The guy's son (or grandson, I can't recount exactly) was assigned to analyse that short and the author, out of curiosity, made the kid submitted his analysis instead. The teacher even went as far as commenting "You don't understand the author's intention at all". Which really make us think how absurd literary education can really go.

[goatlover]

Depends on whether you subscribe to the "death of the author" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGn9x4-Y_7A) or not. Does the author's intent in writing something trump everyone else's interpretation? What if we don't have the original author around to ask? A good example of this is all the interpretations of various passages in the Bible different groups have had throughout history.

Instead of privileging the author's intent, one can treat literature, or even religious text as akin to art. The reader participates in the meaning of the piece. Or you can think about how people argue over and critique movies and television shows.

[souprock]

You can find your own meaning, but you should be honest about the fact that it is your own meaning.

English teachers are demanding "correct" interpretation that has nothing to do with what the author intended. It's bullshit, and they need to admit that. It's also squeezing very important topics out of the schedule, such as the teaching of proper grammar and other things needed for non-literary writing in a professional career.