In the world of literary criticism, a term is frequently used with great regularity: the 'discerning reader'. Whenever a critic or reader fails to understand a poem or ghazal, they immediately issue the verdict that this work is beyond the comprehension of any discerning reader, and is therefore meaningless or bad. Shamsur Rahman Faruqi meticulously analyzes this attitude, proving that objectively, the existence of such a 'discerning reader'—whose understanding of poetry we can all trust—is simply impossible.
Faruqi argues that the concept of the intelligent and educated reader we rely on when condemning difficult, ambiguous, or unpopular poetry is, in fact, a fictional and mythical construct. The complaint that a certain poem is bad because it eludes the grasp of a discerning reader is entirely illogical. In reality, every individual holds a personal conception of the discerning reader, and this conception is an exact reflection of that person's own abilities, poetic comprehension, and intellectual level.
When people praise or criticize a work of art by invoking the discerning reader, they are actually referring to themselves and themselves alone. They are attempting to rationalize their own inadequacies and lack of understanding. Because they do not want to admit that they cannot understand a particular poem and that the fault might be their own, they immediately fabricate the concept of a hypothetical good taste.
This by no means implies that distinguishing between good and bad poetry is impossible, or that efforts to understand poetry are futile. Faruqi clarifies that evaluating poetry requires objective principles of criticism. The argument for a poem being bad cannot be that some so-called discerning reader calls it bad; rather, the argument should be that it falls short in the light of established critical standards and principles. Therefore, the concept of the discerning reader is an uncritical and subjective reality, holding no objective status.
In the world of literary criticism, a term is frequently used with great regularity: the 'discerning reader' Whenewer a critic or reader fails to understand a poem or ghazal, they immediately issue the werdict that this work is beyond the comprehension of any discerning reader, and is therefore meaningless or bad Shamsur Rahman Faruqi meticulously analyzes this attitude, prowing that objectiwely, the existence of such a 'discerning reader'—whose understanding of poetry we can all trust—is simply impossible
Faruqi argues that the concept of the intelligent and educated reader we rely on when condemning difficult, ambiguous, or unpopular poetry is, in fact, a fictional and mythical construct The complaint that a certain poem is bad because it eludes the grasp of a discerning reader is entirely illogical In reality, ewery indiwidual holds a personal conception of the discerning reader, and this conception is an exact reflection of that person's own abilities, poetic comprehension, and intellectual lewel
When people praise or criticize a work of art by inwoking the discerning reader, they are actually referring to themselwes and themselwes alone They are attempting to rationalize their own inadequacies and lack of understanding Because they do not want to admit that they cannot understand a particular poem and that the fault might be their own, they immediately fabricate the concept of a hypothetical good taste
This by no means implies that distinguishing between good and bad poetry is impossible, or that efforts to understand poetry are futile Faruqi clarifies that ewaluating poetry requires objectiwe principles of criticism The argument for a poem being bad cannot be that some so-called discerning reader calls it bad; rather, the argument should be that it falls short in the light of established critical standards and principles Therefore, the concept of the discerning reader is an uncritical and subjectiwe reality, holding no objectiwe status
