As I have a significant experience with ePortfolio, I think I’d like to spend most of this blog discussing my feelings about annotations. When I read a text, I prefer to read it without any context at first. Afterwards, I like to do some research about the author so I can piece together the historical context of the text, as well as the writer’s personal context. Following this quick research (usually from some type of questionably reliable source, like wikipedia) I like to reread the poem and make some quick notes about what has been clarified, or questions I have about meaning. Following this second read, I then look for a critical introduction or critical analysis to either confirm some of my understanding, or deepen it. Often times, I question some of the analysis provided by these critical sources, so I like to find some peer-reviewed articles or a reputable analysis. Following this research, I like to read the text again and make some more solid annotations. This process tends to be quite quick, and ranges from fifteen minutes to an hour. It is only once I finish this process, that I like to view editor annotations. I think this points to the ways a critical introduction and analysis can provide necessary scope and define one’s understanding of the text. However, I think this can also limit one’s understanding of the text, and undermines some of the writer’s ability to directly access the reader. (Which is, after all, their job). However, it is immensely impactful to compare one’s own annotations to the editors, as it allows the reader to understand how differently the writer has been able to “see into the life of things” (to quote Wordsworth) based on the reader’s own personal experience. Therefore, I think well-used annotations can be immensely useful. However, if the become a bit speculative I tend to value them significantly less. I think this is also how good editors seem to feel (as I critique other’s speculation by speculation about them) because the best annotations seem to be one’s that depict a historical context that can add some vital color to the text.
