In reading “Dead Again” by Norris and Pecora, I became interested in the validity of using Joyce’s biography as grounds for interpreting his writing. In class on Tuesday we briefly discussed how scholars often base interpretations of Ulysses off of relationships they find between the text and Joyce’s own life, and Professor Simpson explained that this isn’t necessarily the best way to go about interpreting literature.

“Dead Again” spends a lot of time discussing this idea, particularly in relation to the role of the reader vs. authorial intention in finding meaning in a text, and Pecora cites Walter Benn Michaels as a scholar who holds almost the exact opposite opinion as we discussed in class: “that is, if you don’t believe that authorial intention is the same thing as textual meaning, then you don’t believe that people are defined by what they say and by their beliefs, and you must believe that people (not just readers) are defined by what they are, by a cultural essence (that is, something independent of rational beliefs), which effectively makes you a racist” (350).

While Pecora certainly expresses his own skepticism regarding Michaels’ claim, I’m wondering if there is any validity in the idea that authorial intention plays at least somewhat of a role in determining a text’s meaning. While it does seem extreme to call any interpretations other than those based on authorial intent “racism,” does Pecora’s change of heart regarding his interpretation of “The Dead”’s ending lose validity because it is expressed as extremely personal in nature? What significance or weight does his personal emotions regarding the story’s ending bear on us as readers?