Interpreting a text

Text and Context: 
Reading and 
Interpreting A Text 
1.6.2 Mythology of Coherence 
The historian’s preconceptions and expectations also leads to second type of 
mythology, a mythology of coherence. The first historical absurdity is the 
tendency to find or even supply, by filling in gaps, a coherence to a text which 
may actually not be present. For example, in reading Gandhi’s 
Hind Swaraj
, 
historians and political scientists try to bring in a coherence across all his 
writings. Whereas Gandhi himself never tried for such coherence. Similarly, Karl 
Marx is criticised for lack of coherence across his writings. While criticising, 
historians and scholars forget that certain ideas evolve and reform over the 
lifespan of an author and break in ideas is normal in such circumstances. 
The mythology of coherence assume that it may be quite proper in the interests of 
extracting a message of higher coherence from an author’s work, to discount the 
statements of intention which the author itself may have made about what s/he 
was doing, or even to discount whole works which would impair the coherence 
of the author’s system. For example, Locke who set out in the beginning to 
defend an authoritarian position is portrayed as a ‘liberal’ political theorist for the 
sake of coherence. It is also common for historians to see contradictions in a 
writer’s work as barriers which should be accounted for to fit in the coherent 
system.
1.6.3 Mythology of Prolepsis 
The mythology of prolepsis is characterised by a description of a work, being 
influenced by its significance and in such a way that it leaves no place for an 
analysis of what the author actually meant to say. This often happens when the 
historian is interested in the retrospective significance of the work s/he is 
analysing.