小说与文学2017washingtonpost.com
诗人：我答不出德州标准化考试中关于我自己诗作的题目
Poet: I can’t answer questions on Texas standardized tests about my own poems
导读
这篇报道讲德州标准化考试用诗人的作品出阅读理解题，诗人本人却答不出，引发对文学解读是否应有标准答案的讨论。对写作者的价值在于：它提醒你作者意图与读者解读之间存在鸿沟，也暴露了测试式阅读如何把丰富的文本压成单一选项。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
写作时别假设读者会按你的本意理解；关键意图要有足够的文本线索支撑。
- 02
文本可以允许多种解读，但合理解释仍应能回到具体词句，而不是靠作者身份裁决。
- 03
阅读或修改自己的稿子时，注意限定词和范围（如 mainly、某几行），它们决定哪些解释成立。
HN 评论精选
标准化阅读题把开放解读伪装成客观答案，写作者应警惕这种单一化思维。
如果她知道答案，这道题就会更好吗？我高中时总以为，我们被测诗歌的作者也答不出那些荒唐题。但即便答得出，我也一直不明白这些题在考什么技能。如果诗歌允许解读，两个同样有能力的读者得出不同结论不是很合理吗？也就是说：答案真的客观吗？总之标准化测试很糟，而且我听说国外更糟，这不应让人意外。
cderwin查看英文原文
If she had known the answer, would that make the question any better? I remember back when I was in high school, I always sort of assumed that the authors of the poems we were tested on wouldn't be able to answer the ridiculous questions on our assessments. But even if they did, I've never been able to figure out what skills these questions were testing. If poems are open to interpretation, isn't it reasonable to think that two equally skilled readers would arrive at different conclusions? Which is to say: Is the answer really objective? In any case, the state of standardized testing is miserable, and unfortunately from all accounts I have heard it is worse abroad. I don't think this should be much of a surprise to anyone.
题目有“mainly”、行数范围等限定，作者未必能答对；阅读和写作都要重视文本限定与证据。
我读了文章部分，跳过一些，读了32—36题和她的评论。我不觉得题目有问题。也许她太想证明观点，但很多情况下她似乎读不懂题。比如36题问诗人主要如何揭示说话者的感受，她说多数选项都成立，但题目明确说“mainly”，应选F“用明喻和隐喻描述”，因为这类手法更多。35题问16—19行的意象帮助读者理解什么，她说A也有道理，我今天确实转向这种情绪；但题目问的是16—19行，那里没提态度变化，A显然不对。抱歉，作者身份不保证满分。
literallycancer查看英文原文
I read parts of the article, skipped a bit, read the questions 32-36 and her remarks. And I don't think there is anything wrong with the questions. Maybe she's just trying too hard to make a point, but in many cases it seems like she just can't read or doesn't understand the question(?). E.g. 36 - "The poet reveals the speaker’s feelings mainly by –", then she goes on to say that most of the answers are viable, but clearly the question says "mainly", indicating you are supposed to choose the "F using similes and metaphors to describe them" since there's much more of those. About 35 - "The imagery in lines 16 through 19 helps the reader understand –" she says that "And of course there’s an argument to be made for A, I did shift into this mood TODAY." But the question is about lines 16-19, which don't mention any attitude changes, so A clearly can't be the right answer. Etc., etc. I'm sorry, but being the author doesn't and shouldn't guarantee a perfect score.
作者身份不等于标准解读，经典作品也难逃测试式误读。
1954年阿西莫夫基本预言了这件事：时间机器把莎士比亚带回现代，他上自己作品的课却挂科。
dsr_查看英文原文
Predicted, mostly, by Isaac Asimov in 1954: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortal_Bard (TL;DR with spoiler: Time machine brings Shakespeare back to the current age, where he takes a class on his own work and is flunked.)
同类还值得读
乔治·奥威尔1940年对《我的奋斗》的书评
George Orwell’s 1940 Review of Mein Kampf
这是奥威尔 1940 年对《我的奋斗》的书评，他没有简单谴责，而是认真分析希特勒的宣传手法为何奏效、又暴露了哪些思维特征。
小说与文学2022 · 499 分 · 545 评4 条写作要点编辑精选我们都是极客：尼尔·斯蒂芬森的文学作品
We are all nerds: The literary works of Neal Stephenson
这是一篇讨论 Neal Stephenson 科幻小说的文章，评论区读者围绕《Anathem》《钻石年代》《Snow Crash》等作品，聊世界构建、结尾处理和写作风格的变化。
小说与文学2022 · 307 分 · 220 评4 条写作要点编辑精选又一部我不会再去写的小说
Yet another novel I will no longer write
科幻作家 Charles Stross 讲述自己为何放弃一部已经构思好的小说：COVID-19 疫情让他的病毒灾难设定显得多余，现实给所有人上了一堂生动的疫情应对课。
小说与文学2020 · 304 分 · 169 评4 条写作要点编辑精选用图画写作：理查德·斯卡里与儿童文学的艺术
Writing in Pictures: Richard Scarry and the art of children's literature
这是《耶鲁评论》上漫画家 Chris Ware 写的文章，分析童书作家 Richard Scarry 如何用图画而不是文字来讲故事。
小说与文学2024 · 297 分 · 131 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何写一部小说
How to Write a Novel
这篇来自 The Millions 的文章讨论写小说的两种路径——“计划派”（planners）与“即兴派”（pantsers，即“跟着感觉走、边写边编”）。
小说与文学2016 · 238 分 · 112 评4 条写作要点编辑精选