ABSTRACT
In recent times, quite a few publications have noted the problem which seems to be virtually inherent in scholarly interpretation. One of the leading semioticians, Umberto Eco, wrote a series of articles under the significant title I limiti delV interpretazione (Eco 1990). In this collection of studies, Eco is returning to an almost classic model when he introduces the notion of the intention of the work, ‘intentio operis\ as the main constituent in interpretative research. Eco argues that the literary work or the work of art itself sets its own limits to the ways we may be able to unravel its meaning. To establish this ‘intention of the work’, it is essential that a complete text or corpus of texts be taken into account. In Eco’s view, the meaning of a part should not contradict the intention of the whole. This prescript from a semiotician is remarkable, as semiotics is essentially a theory of reception, and not of intention. Eco’s viewpoint is useful for all those who study South or Southeast Asian art, as in most cases the intentions of the artist can no
1 Enquête: Anthropologie, Histoire, Sociologie 3 (1996).
