M. H. Abrams, and A Glossary of Literary Terms

When a grown child says to his or her parents, "I remember nothing of my childhood," is it a great insult to the parents who brought the child into the world and took care of that child until he or she was able to take care of himself or herself? Or is it the truth?

Such a statement could be an insult and it could be the truth, and it could be both insult and truth.

The intention of such a statement is crucial to its interpretation, as crucial to the parent's understanding of the grown child's response to his or her childhood as it is to the writer of a work of literature: has the writer fulfilled his or her intention in creating the work in the first place? And how much of that creative intention, however successfully fulfilled, is incumbent on the reader to fulfill?

There are those who believe that authorial intention has little or nothing to do with the value or lack of value in a work of literature. If you were to Google intention in literature, you would find many more disagreements with the notion of intention being crucial to the judgment of literature than you would find agreements, though the disagreements seem to be spurred by and correspond to the chronological development of different literary movements and genres--surrealism, for instance, and meta-fiction to name just a few--as much as anything else.

There was a time, as I first became a conscientious reader, when authorial intention was a stalwart beacon in judging the literary worth of whatever I was reading. That time has passed, I no longer see intention as a completely reliable guide; in this age of 'child led parenting, many other factors may or may not be at work. It is now impossible to delve completely into another's mind and emerge with the truth of it clearly shining, whether he or she be a writer or a family member.