Does a text have single meaning? Or does it have many meanings? Whether the derived or deduced meaning by a reader is right or wrong? Or it differs from one reader to other? Is there any definite meaning or not? These questions are still the subject of debate and discussion of the learned people, literati, linguists, psychologists, philosophers and common readers. No such definite answers of these questions are given. The answers of these questions differ from crities to critics, literati to literati, literary historian to literary historians and all who studt literature diligently, with attention and minutely.

Literature itself is a vague subject. It covers wide area or in a sense it includes all the subjects, time and space of the universe. There is no boundary/limitation of literature. Common people to every professional people love to read it. Literature doesnot only give pleasure. It teaches one way to another. It suggests various lessons for life. It reminds history helps to live in the present and guides to go forward in the future. It is the nutritious food to mind, luxurious bed to tried body, painkiller to the sufferer, friend to the solitary person and a lot.

People want peace but are violent

So literary text doesnot simply narrate a story but provides references to the reader from various ways, to live happily and satisfy. After reading the text reader generally try to get meaning of the text and generalize it according to his or her life.the analogy between the text and the life of the reader determines the readers likes and dislikes of the text. There is no such text as meaningless. From the very beginning of literature there is significance of it in human life. Before written form of literature began there was the oral literature survived by telling and retelling from mouth to ear and one generation to another.for examples fables, parables, fairy tales were the oral literature later on different collector collected and wrote what they heard.

“Meaning” is a difficult issue, so to derive meaning reader should study a text from various perspectives. Reading a text only reading purpose is not important ; the reader must cope with different aspects, style and approaches. How do we know what a work of literature is ‘supposed’; to mean, or what its’real’ meaning is? There are several ways to approach this:

• That meaning is what is intended by the author;
• That meaning is created by and contained in the text itself;
• That meaning is created by the reader.

Meaning of text depends on various factors such as time, context, place, mood, situation, and competence of the reader. For example the sentence, “The door is open”, has its own literal meaning and various contextual meanings too. Simply it says that the door is not shut that is open. But it has many meanings.in what context it is spoken similarly its meaning can be derived. If somebody is in the room and the door is locked, at that time somebody knocks the door from outside, the man in the room says that the door is open to mean come in .

if there is storm outside, at that time somebody calls the door is open this means close the door the rain might come in. if the two friends are in hot debate at that time if a friend says the door is open that means go outside immediately. If somebody is in neighbor’s house that is in hurry and they are requesting him to say for a while, then the person says the door is open to mean I have to return home immediately, may be the thieves or animals might enter in.

Another example proves that where the sentence is spoken. The place also affects the meaning of a sentence. For examples, “the fish is ready to eat”, has its literal meaning but the meaning becomes clear where it is spoken, if the sentence is spoken in the kitchen then it means fish is cooked and cone to eat. If the sentence is spoken near the pond it means that the fish in the pond is ready to eat something.

E.D. Hirsch argues that most literary work have a meaning which the author intended. But they also have a significance which readers experience in relation to these texts. This significance, for Hirsch, should be directly related to the meaning and not be merely idiosyncratic; that is, it represents for him the cinema of legitimate interpretation in literary criticism.

The meaning of any text might be repeated time and again the way of expression, style diction, syntax and so on is different . this happens in every genre of literature. This is so due to “writers are always borrowing, or as T.S. Eliot says- stealing from one another. This is a basic element of textuality. Texts are produced through a combination of the writer’s experiences as a human beings and the writer’s knowledge of earlier texts. Translation, interpretation, adaptation and parody are the examples of intertextual relationship.

Meaning of text can be derived from various ways such as as interpretation and analysis, discussion, application, adaptation of different theories, isms, transformations, criticisms, translations and various aspects that are psychological, political, religious, social, cultural, scientific, and traditional and so on.

Writing and rewriting a text might have its own originality with some short of significant changes; it is similar to the new decoration in the old room with same future or some old furniture positions are changed, some are thrown out or some new are brought and brought and added in the room. Adaptation in literature assumes that original elements still has some life in it, some certain aspects of it are modified, others eliminated and some new things are added.

Umberto eco commented about text is that, ” texts are lazy machines that sks someone to do part of their job”. After readers reads and finds meaning, criticizes it according to his or her understanding. In a sense a text becomes complete when the readers reads it and comment about it sincerely. According to Eco no text is read independently of other texts. Each readers brings a unique model of competence to a text. There are a numbers of readers, may be a number of meanings and a number of readings of a text is possible as well.

The meaning of a text may be connotative or denotative, apparent or underlying, contextual or situational. Any person or text can only ‘mean’ within a set of preexisting, socially supported ideas, symbols, images, ways of thinking and values. In a sense there is no such thing as a ‘personal’ meaning; although we have different experiences in our lives and different temperaments and interests, we will interpret the world according to social norms and cultural meanings—there’s no ther way to do it.

Meaning of a text is also affected and influenced by the writer’s childhood experiences, interests, nostalgic events or memories, family background, education, profession, religion, culture, political inclination, life philosophy and experience, contemporary social background or system, relationship to friends and family members, environment of home, reading experience of other writers texts, literary trend of the time, nature, the place where the writer lives and travels and so on. This is also applicable in reader’s case to get meaning of literary text. Various factore augment the meaning of text. The writer’s intention may not be understood by the reader or the reader’s analysis may not be related to the writer’s intention; on the other way there is mutual understanding between the reader and the writer.

Hence the meaning of literary texts is derived by the reader from various perspectives. No such single factor is dependable to deduce the meaning. Numerous factors are liable to find out the meaning of literary text. The triangular relations i.e. the writer, the text and the readers and their total background information helps to bring out the meaning. Meaning is not the thing that we get spontaneously without any effort. There must be a lot analysis and discussions. Some critics give importance to the writer, some other give importance to the text itself and other insist on the reader response for obtaining the meaning of text. Anyway meaning depends on various factors. There is no unanimous view about it.

Human being is the most intelligent and social animal in the entire solar system. As we all know that we are social animal, being a social animal it is necessary to stay in peace. I think violence means fighting or protesting to get something that is very difficult to get by other way.

But nowadays, everyone wants peace. It does not mean that ancestors wnt violence. Every moment, rules and many more are the peace. But I don’t think so, because we used to fight for very minor thing. It is believed that humans are originated around 40,000 years ago. Before that age violence was there to, this is not our fault. This happened before the origination of human being. Every living beings are fighting with each other for something.

From the birth violence is our main weapon to grt what we want. In each and everyday we teach them about loving each other, even in book we learn them about peaceful activities. Even great persons like Siddhartha Sakya, Gandhi and such persons protest violence & teach about love, be in peace and so on but they also did violence. These all violent ctivities are due to hormonal impact or simply we can say personal ego satisfaction. Everything people do for ego, satisfaction, due to unsatisfied ego there was big war occurred that we know first and second world war.

After second world war some scientists think about fighting people in between 1950 To 1985 A.D. They did an experiment to know that why people fight each other whether they learn from elder or by their nature. They did their experiment in Pakistan. They brought 30 infats from different families from different countries like rich, Poor, middle clas, gentle and criminals. It was told that the experiment last for 15 years with 3 groups contained 10 children in each groups named ‘Group A’, ‘Group B’ and ‘Group C’. In group A children were tought good manners, love and respect to other. In group B there was environment like as we have i.e. common society environment and group C there was very vulgar and rough environment.

After 15 years all the children were gathered together to know what are the difference in those children behaviour. They got mixed response like respect, love, emotions and manners but they got same result about the violence. This experiment showed them that not only humans but also animals are violent in nature before birth. The experiment was secret so most people did not know about it . after the experiment the matter was closed with few witness and proof.

At last I want to conclude that we humans will never change. Either our mind is filled with pece but there is violence in our blood.