The Intentional Fallacy¶
Wimsatt, W. K. J., & Beardsley, M. C. (1946). The Intentional Fallacy. The Sewanee Review, 54(3), 468-488.
Retired. This entry was not a citation. Our extractor stored an inline prose definition from the article as though it were a bibliographic record, so its title is the name of a concept rather than of a published work. The page is kept because links to it still resolve, but it is withdrawn from the reference list. This entry is kept so the citations that pointed at it still resolve, and so the correction is visible rather than silent.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Mechanisms¶
- Blind Interpretation Critique
- Anchoring the elicitation is the discipline of the intentional fallacy: what the artist meant is not the same as what the work does, and the blind reading measures the latter.
This sourceArgues that an author's intention is neither available nor desirable as the standard for judging a work.
- Anchoring the elicitation is the discipline of the intentional fallacy: what the artist meant is not the same as what the work does, and the blind reading measures the latter.
- Close Reading Protocol
- It is the disciplined core of the New Critical tradition of practical criticism, which insisted that the poem on the page — not the poet's reported intention — is the evidence.
This sourceArgues that a poem should be judged from the public work itself rather than the author's reported intention.
- It is the disciplined core of the New Critical tradition of practical criticism, which insisted that the poem on the page — not the poet's reported intention — is the evidence.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:6835ee9f6889 · see in the full table