Now or Then?

There is a great divide among literary theorists on whether we interpret a piece of literature in view of today's age, or we view it in the view of the past. Some silly ideas were posited that we can read a word in its modern denotation over its archaic denotation. But, I find that has a singular answer, that we ought to read a word within its original context.

But, the idea persists, whether we read a work only as it relates in its historical context, or if we read a text as it relates to the modern age. And I think this is a question we ought to answer. The answer, of course, is that we do both.

No work can properly be communicated unless we read it in view of today's age. Without our modern understanding, the works we read can have no significance whatsoever. Having no recourse to modern wisdom, modern ideas, our current environment, the works of the past mean nothing. As, I was reading Samuel Adam's essay, and I had realized quite immediately that the words resonated today as much as they did then.

Yet, if one pedantically read the work as it was in the time period---they would say, "Well, these times were different." I'd say yes, they were. But, without a doubt, the words resonated with me in today's climate, as a defense of freedom in view of the declining Western Condition. That decline is into classism, tyranny, and a loss of mobility. And Samuel Adam's works resonated so strongly, that exactly what he wrote about then applies to today's age. The circumstances are different, yet the principles translate across time barriers. That, if the English can be understood, then there remains cross parallels between the past and present, which are inherent in communication.

It's not a secret that this is how the Bible communicates its message. A lot of preachers go wrong by trying to study it purely within the historical context---and often they evade the obvious meaning by doing so. I've heard it done many times, people drawing what they think the story meant in the contemporary context, such as Jesus' parables or teachings. Yet, the stories are universally so, that it would be appalling to think that one would need that historical context to understand the Bible. People, for centuries, were without it, and the Bible communicated truth to billions of people independently of its historical age.

With this, I think it's important we understand interpretation doesn't mean pedantic forays into the exact context and meaning, to cut off from it relevant meaning for today. It's imperative, often, that one brings with their interpretation some of their own knowledge, or else the knowledge cannot be assimilated within the modern framework.

Equally, it's important to know and interpret the text exactly as it was read back in its age, as that, too, is itself an important context. That too draws wisdom, and historical insight. Therefore, reading ought to be dualistic, keeping both the past and the present in mind when analyzing a text for its significance. 

Various. The Constitution of the United States of America and Selected Writings of the Founding Fathers. "American Independence", by Samuel Adams, pp. 113 -125. Barnes and Noble, inc, Leather Bound Classics, 2012. Text.