Texts are not completely open to interpretation but assert a preferred reading

Evidence

In that interview, he flatly denies that he ever intended to suggest that texts are polysemic to the extent of being completely open to interpretation, and he militantly defends the necessity of serious textual analysis. In his view, this is essential as a method of identifying the internal structure of a text—through which its framing devices construct what he calls its “preferred reading” and its attempt (if only provisionally) to assert their hegemony over the audience. For him, the “preferred reading” is the point where power and discourse intersect in the text, and it is the responsibility of the analyst to determine this structure via careful study of the text itself. — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 758

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines ‘preferred reading’ as where power and discourse intersect in a text; clarifies encoding/decoding’s scope against readings that treat texts as endlessly polysemic.
• XREF: Connects to Althusser’s interpellation and Gramsci’s hegemony as used across Volume 1; ‘preferred reading’ is a textual instantiation of hegemony. — connects to: All texts position readers and serve some author’s interests — James D. Kirylo (ed.), Reinventing Pedagogy of the Oppressed:…, 604; Reading is never a neutral event — James D. Kirylo (ed.), Reinventing Pedagogy of the Oppressed:…, 605