Witnessing vs. Interpreting – A Post-Interpretive Comparative Exercise

Witnessing vs. Interpreting – A Post-Interpretive Comparative Exercise By Dorian Vale In this comparative essay, Dorian Vale contrasts two approaches to viewing and writing about art: traditional interpretation and Post-Interpretive witnessing. Using a single artwork as case study, the essay demonstrates how meaning shifts—not within the work, but within the viewer—depending on the posture they bring. Interpretation is presented as a mode of extraction: the attempt to decode, categorize, or assign value based on historical precedent or theoretical frameworks. In contrast, witnessing emerges as a discipline of restraint—one that prioritizes moral proximity, reverent attention, and the refusal to explain what resists language. By moving between both lenses, Vale makes visible the subtle violences of over-interpretation and the ethical alternative proposed by Post-Interpretive Criticism (PIC). The result is not a verdict, but a deepened awareness of the responsibility of presence. This essay functions as both a philosophical comparison and a demonstration of PIC in action, offering a rare glimpse into how criticism can shift from possession to presence. Post-Interpretive Criticism, Dorian Vale, ethical art criticism, witnessing vs interpretation, presence in art, restraint in art writing, trauma-informed criticism, aesthetic ethics, non-extractive criticism, moral proximity, contemporary art theory