Final answer:
The intentional fallacy relates to the mistaken belief that a work of art's meaning is solely determined by the artist's intention. It suggests that art should be considered on its own merits and that audience interpretations also contribute to its meaning. The biographical fallacy similarly limits interpretation by focusing too much on the artist's life rather than the artwork itself.
Step-by-step explanation:
The intentional fallacy is the erroneous belief that the author's intended meaning is the sole determinant of the meaning of a work of art. This concept challenges the notion that only the artist's intention provides the true interpretation of the artwork. Instead, it suggests that the work itself should be the focus, and meanings derived from its formal qualities and how it is received by audiences are also valid. It raises the idea that art takes on a life of its own once it enters the public sphere and interacts with audiences in various ways. Moreover, exclusively relying on authorial intent could also limit the interpretive activities of the reader or viewer, and the author's own understanding of their work is not necessarily the definitive one.
Another key point is the related biographical fallacy, which occurs when an author's life is used predominantly to interpret their work. The ‘New Critics’ aimed to separate the artistic work from the artist's biography, insisting on analyzing the work in its own right. An analogous idea in music is brought up with Igor Stravinsky, suggesting that even a composer's own understanding of their music may not be the only or best interpretation.
By exploring other reasons why it might be problematic to limit interpretation to author's intent, such as the many meaningful reactions from audiences that can diverge from what was intended and the valuable dialogues that can arise about art as a cultural artifact, we highlight the complex nature of interpreting art and literature.