TMI

Jameson quotes in his essay in relation to “interpretation proper” that:

“This is the place to answer the objection of the ordinary reader, when confronted with elaborate and ingenious interpretations, that the text means just what it says. Unfortunately, no society has ever been quite so mystified in quite so many ways as our own, saturated as it is with message and information, the very vehicles of mystification (language, as Talleyrand put it, having been given us in order to conceal our thoughts)” (184).

I believe that the point he is making here is one of awareness. Not having knowledge about mystification is a great hindrance to the “ordinary reader.” It seems to me naive to think that someone might think that a text meant exactly what it says. In the sentences before the quote, Jameson talks about “interpretation proper” and “strong rewriting,” so is it that the critic must determine what the text is really saying to present to the reader, or should the reader already be doing this? Also, does the reader believe what the critic is saying or should the reader look even deeper into the text interpreting another text?

I will agree that our current age is complex in terms of information and one can be easily tricked into only seeing surface information or don’t care enough to interpret due to the constant stream of information. Jameson's essay brings to mind memes, as they are propagated by information that is recurrent.