Abstract

One professor of literature renounces his fight to discriminate wrong from right readings. He succumbs to pressures from theorists and practitioners in the profession at large and enters a world of unimagined intellectual freedom. After all, to suggest that some readings might be wrong is not only to engage in intellectual discrimination, but to enter into complicity with a number of imperious gestures that carry dire political consequences. Coming to terms with his newfound freedom to embrace all interpretations of texts as equally valid, he outlines for those who follow thirteen rules that guide hermeneutical practice in our postmodern age.