Ricceur makes a point about the transition from speaking to writing by the following“It is not necessary here that we consider at length the notion of the speech event in terms of its complete description as a speech act……each of these acts gives way to the dialectic of event and meaning.”The above statement maintains that the author when writing is generally transferring the speech act which is more visual and internal into written and external and that each of the acts of this transition gives birth to an event and meaning. Kingston describing her biography and the way she grew up makes one think about the various events that one goes through in growing up. The process of growing up is none different from the general theory of growth of one’s cognition and thinking and perceiving abilities. Kingston when writing her biography will have remembered certain experiences of her life and must have forgotten some. So judging her other texts with the lens of her biography will limit the interpretive abilities of the reader.
There is a very high chance that the reader may not explore the possibility of interpreting something different which the author is relentlessly trying through the written content. Role of judgement in interpreting a written piece is also derogatory to the actual interpretation that the author really expects the readers to perceive. When the reader does not get the actual interpretation, it is a big loss to the author as her writing has not been able to make the essential message pass to the reader as desired. Epstein contests the biographical criticism with the following affirmation:“The strategy I have chosen is what I call persona criticism, a form of criticism that focuses on patterns of ideation, voice and sensibility linked together by a connection to the author. Yet persona criticism allows one to speak of authorship as multiple, involving culture, psyche, and intertextuality, as well as biographical data about the author.”