snap!crap!pop! ... this preparation is a flop

In the discussions of George Will, Stephen Greenblat, and Aime Cesaire, one controversial issue has been the interpretations of literary readings. The right of whether to include political perceptions  and understand writing to be an art form  as an alternative to an objective reading of the material. On one hand George Will argues that the text in contact with should be approached with a conservative technique, only addressing the objective issues and internalizing the information presented as black and white. However on the other hand Stephen Greenblat perceives literary work as art. He takes a liberal stance on the issue and believes that the work can be interpreted as grey. Greenblat encourages individual opportunity to create own opinions on the material as well as welcome political viewpoints to be presented.  Others, Aime Cesaire, even maintain through his script of The Tempest that the underlining issues become apparent and obvious through it. This brings forth an objective view by providing what he believes should be gained through the work as well as allowing leeway for opinions. Nonetheless my opinions on this issue contrast from those presented in these articles. I believe that all literary work should be presented as a grey canvas and open to all perceptions. Authors have do have a purpose for creating their “masterpiece” however not everyone sees the world through the same light. In retrospect politics make any conversation more inviting to arguments as well as the opportunity to express individualistic opinions to shed light on the mindset of the reader. With that said literature in my opinion isn’t a black and white subject and cannot function with only objective intentions. Politics make it more controversial and open to freethinking but mustn’t over shadow the author’s purpose. Therefore it should convey all views and give room for all mindsets to be expressed. There are endless opinions to any one given question.