ENG 313 - Discussion posts on “Critical Interpretations” of Frost’s “Stopping by Woods…”

1. My first reaction was to say that each analysis was valid, that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but as I read all the
various examples, I feel like there needs to be structure and guidance to an analysis...otherwise it's just stating your opinion
without qualifying your statement. Like we discussed, the analysis needs to require students to look past face value.

2. I think they can all be considered 'good' as long as there is textual evidence that can be inferred. Sometimes students look at a
text and conjure up an analysis that is totally off, and I think this occurs because they do not know how to make good inferences
from a text and use text as evidence for an argument….. I think it needs to be contained to the piece of text itself while drawing
from other resources to inform your analysis – and this is what will separate a ‘good’ from a ‘not so good’ analysis.

3. …even though Frost might have a "correct" interpretation of what he was trying to get across, doesn't mean that everyone
else thinks that same way about the poem…. I don't think that there is such thing as a good or a not so good textual analysis in
regards to the interpretation that is being made. What separates the good ones from the not so good ones is the evidence that is
used to support whatever it is that you're interpreting.

4. In some contexts, I do think there are right and wrong ways to interpret meaning. All of the examples made assertions and
many of them back them up by using Frost's text but some did so in a more convincing and logical manner. I think what
separates one from another is the way the author supports their assertion. If they give a detailed answer that reinforces their
opinion then I think this is usually good, but if they just make some wild claim and rely on a few frivilous statements then I
think they leave it pretty weak.

5. Each of the interpretations of Frost's poem are true and valid because the author was able to support his claims. Each
interpretation offered another way that people could connect to the poem. Even if it is not Frost's original intent of the poem, it
does not matter because someone has found (and supported) another way to connect to it.

6. I believe that a critical interpretation has many key components however strong evidence seems to be very important when
the authors are trying to convey their points. All of the essays that we were to read were very different and made me adjust my
perspective on the poem multiple times with clearly articulated critical interpretations.

7. Critical analysis is something that in college I have always tried very hard to be good at and it seems the teacher always
knows the correct way a poem should be analyzed. Each analysis in this article seemed to have a very different take and each of
their voices sounded professional and insightful. But how do we really know if their is a right answer? … It is clearly up to
interpretation, and I think there is nothing wrong with not being certain about the meaning of everything.

8. I feel that anything can be considered a critical analysis if given the proper evidence to prove that opinion. If students can
provide meaningful evidence to back up their opinions, then I think that their analysis can be credited as valid. I believe that in
order for each of these examples to be truly authentic, they need to have the proper evidence to back them up.

9. …a single poem can have many different interpretations based on differences in experience. So, what makes any of these
interpretations and textual analyses 'good'? The ability to provide evidence within the text being analyzed, to support the
interpretation….. So does this mean that any analysis can be 'good'? Yes - as long as the interpretation can be proven through
direct examples in the text.

10. While I may not agree with all of these interpretations, if I received these as a teacher, I would not say that they are wrong. I
believe that all interpretations are "equal," as long as the student can support their claim.... I think that the biggest thing needed
in a textual analysis is evidence and referring back to the text. As long as students provide evidence from the text (and/or from
other sources) to support their argument, and refer back to these things in their paper, I believe that their argument should be
considered valid.

11. In my opinion, not one of these interpretations is better than the other. They all make sense to me, and with enough
evidence and support they could lead to a good textual analysis. I think that a good textual analysis isn't necessarily about
"right" interpretation, but that it makes sense and has plenty of evidence from inside and outside of the text itself.

12. As I tell my students in placement, if you can back it up with evidence then go ahead and prove it. The same I think goes
with textual analysis. If you can have proof and are able to back something up then it is valid. One student’s opinion might be
different from the next student’s opinion, but if they have evidence behind it, it can be made valid. In the examples from the
Robert Frost poem, all the examples provide evidence to back up their analysis. I don’t know what I would say if they were all
“equal”. They are all equal in the sense that they analyzed the text. However, each found different “critical interpretations”. I
think that each interpretation all brought something to the poem and their analysis of it was “good”.

13. In my opinion, for a critical interpretation to be "good" or valid, it must provide EVIDENCE. Therefore, since all of the
listed interpretations give both evidence and explanations, I think they are valid lenses through which to view this Robert Frost
poem.

14. Especially as a teacher, I feel that all of these responses would be considered "equal" as long as they could be supported
with evidence from the poem. All of these critical interpretations did that. As I think about it more and more though, how do we
define "equal?" Can we really measure things "equally," especially a textual analysis, when much is based on stating a claim
and supporting it with different resources and references as evidence? …. I think its hard to distinguish which of these critical
interpretations were "good" and "not-so-good" because they all leave room for students to use the original text, an outside text,
and their own opinion to make a claim. In my opinion, those three elements, as long as each are excuted properly and in an
organized fashion, make a well-established textual analysis.

15. It's hard to say whether or not these critique were "good" or "bad." I read each, keeping an open-mind to the interpretations
they provided. Some of them were easier to understand and relate with, than others. As long as the author is able to provide
substantial evidence and support for their claim, then I don't see a reason why one interpretation of Frost's poem could be that
it's about Santa Claus.

16. I think that all of the interpretations that Doyle references are valid, and therefore I think that all are "good". I don't think
that we should determine how good/bad an interpretation is, but rather whether it can be supported by actual examples taken
from a text. The differences between interpretations often comes from the differences between life experiences, and so I don't
think any one can be counted as more right than any other. The only way to judge them, then, is on their use of the text as
support, and I think that all of the examples in this article could be supported by different parts of the text (or sometimes
different ways of looking at the same part or the whole).

17. I think that it is always hard to tell a student they are wrong when they are looking critically at something. I cannot label any
of the poem's interpretations as good or bad simply because I am unsure how to interpret some of it myself. Part of the beauty
of textual analysis is there is no way to be wrong as long as there is substantial support and the writer can show the viewer
exactly where they are getting their ideas from.

18. Interpretations vary from person to person and I am not sure that anyone is an authority to deem it invalid if well-supported.
That is the main element—I would argue that any interpretation is valid if there is textual evidence and thorough support of this
viewpoint. As I looked through, my initial thought about some of the interpretations was that they were not as good as others.
However, I then realized that it was because I could not relate to these interpretations and not that they did not support the
interpretation.

19. I thought that all of the critical interruptions were good. I think it is hard to judge someone else opinion and what they took
from the poem. Each interpretation made me look at the poem from a new perspective and I think that is what creates a critical
lens. Students and teachers need to be open to all perspectives.

20. I think that all eight of the critical interpretations of Robert Frost’s poem, “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening” are
equal in terms of good or bad. Someone’s interpretation of a text cannot be deemed good or bad unless they refuse to offer an
explanation for why they feel that way.