solely within the text and the world it creates in the reader’s imagination.
The text addresses only that world, not referring to anything outside of it.
In reader-centered approaches , meaning really resides in minds: in the
mind of the biblical author as he was writing and in the mind of the reader
as she or he is reading. The signs on the page are resources that the reader
uses in constructing meaning, or instructions to the reader in how to
construct meaning. 21 Differences between readers will cause variation in
the meanings constructed from those signs, especially as different readers
(either consciously or unconsciously) fi ll in the gaps and resolve ambigui-
ties left by an author.
Reality-centered approaches might be summarized in the idea that “art
imitates life.” 22 Tate notes that this category is quite diverse and includes
several approaches having an ideological agenda or a psychoanalytic foun-
dation. In reality-centered approaches, meaning tends to be found in the
extent to which the text accurately portrays reality as understood by the
interpreter.
Literature-centered approaches point to other texts as the primary
source of meaning. New texts can only be understood because the inter-
preter already has an understanding of other, similar texts that provide the
conventions by which a text can generate meaning.
Language-centered approaches , according to Tate, take their cue from
the language that is the communication medium both of texts themselves
and for discussion of those texts. 23 Language, “a system of signs operating
according to codes,” 24 is essential for meaning. In more extreme forms,
language is viewed as an entirely self-referential system, pointing not to
reality but only to more language. A familiar illustration would be a dic-
tionary, where words are defi ned by using other words, and those other
words are defi ned by using still more words, and so on ad infi nitum.
Culture-centered approaches emphasize the social locations of authors
and readers and the layers of culturally conditioned interpretation
that readings of texts must therefore involve. 25 Keesey describes these
approaches as literary-critical forms of “poststructuralist history” that are
especially concerned with power relations and “the ideological power of
misrepresentation” of marginalized groups by dominant groups. 26
Strengths
Author-centered approaches tend to work best when the text involves
explicit cognitive communication more than artistic elements, since, as
SURPRISING BEDFELLOWS: THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE INTERPRETATION... 283