I'm Always Right.... Or Am I?

I actually enjoyed reading this article because it brought up a question that a lot of people have "How do you know what is right/wrong when interpreting poetry?" I think a lot of times people just assume that you really can't be wrong about how you interpret a poem. I don't agree with this assumption. If a poem is all about flowers and someone decides its really about nuclear warfare, that is clearly wrong. However, I did like the comparison Perrine made in his paper. He compared poems to inkblots - in the fact that it is really up to the reader to decide what they believe the poem is about. Another thing I found interesting in this article was the way in which the poets seemed to react towards the topic of interpretation. Perrine says, "No poet, however likes to be caught in the predicament of having to explain his own poems. He cannot say, 'What I really meant was. . .' without admitting failure, or without saying something different (and usually much less) than what his poem said." This part really stuck out to me, maybe because it reminded me of the ending of The Sun Also Rises in the way that the author uses ambiguity to create more of an effect. After reading this it seemed to me that Perrine says Poets don't want to be too clear on the meanings of their poems so that readers may interpret them however they really want.
In his paper, Perrine lists the two criteria used for interpretation: that the interpretation is not contradicted by any other details within the poem and that if there are multiple interpretations then the most accurate one is the one that "relies on fewest assumptions not grounded in the poem itself." At first i really had no clue what the second one meant. However, after reading the example listed by Thomas Huxley the idea seemed to register. Any interpretation can make sense but the one that is most accurate is the one that is most likely to happen- which almost seems like common sense. After reading these criteria though i wondered how many people really use them when they are reading a poem? I think most people just use word association to determine the subject of a poem. For example, the poem we received in class "THE NIGHT - MARCH" By Herman Melville can be interpreted using just that. When I read it i assumed, because of all the military words, that it was actually about an army: army, salute, ranks.. etc. But, after listening to other people's interpretations- using the same method as I, other people thought that it was about the stars: night, beaming, bright, gleam, twinkling. I really don't believe it is necessary to use the "criteria" Perrine suggests. I think that, as the authors said, whatever way the reader interprets a poem is okay. As long as what you think makes sense and is possible, it may be a correct interpretation. And who is to say it is wrong? As Perrine stated, a poet in unlikely to admit what they really meant in the poem anyways.