Jackson liked to leave things unsaid. Stories like "The Daemon Lover" end without telling the reader exactly what happened to the man the protagonist is looking for. Students fill the gap in different ways, and some of their readings will surprise you.

The title of "Seven Types of Ambiguity," another story in the collection, nods to William Empson's well-known work of literary criticism on the subject. Whether or not students know the reference, the story reminds us that ambiguity is a deliberate feature, not a flaw. Teaching students to see it that way is half the job.

The grading question is how to treat readings that differ from yours. Some are perfectly defensible, some are stretched, and some contradict the text. Your feedback should distinguish among them, and your rubric should give you room to do so.

A bad habit is to grade the conclusion instead of the argument. If a student's reading matches yours, the essay feels right. If it does not, the essay feels off, even when the evidence is strong.

A Test for Defensible Readings

Ask two questions of any interpretation. Is it supported by specific details in the text? Does it contradict anything the story clearly states? A reading that passes both tests deserves credit, even if you would not have chosen it.

• Does the student point to particular lines or events rather than a general impression?
• Does the interpretation account for details that seem to complicate it?
• Is the claim consistent with what the story states directly, such as dates, actions, and speech?
• Does the student acknowledge another possible reading, even briefly?
• Is the level of certainty appropriate, or does the essay claim more than the text can bear?

Feedback for a Reading That Does Not Hold Up

When a reading is contradicted by the text, say so plainly and point to the passage. Frame it as a question, such as "how does this fit with what the narrator says on the second page?" Students can then revise their claim or their evidence.

Avoid telling them what the story really means. It shuts down the thinking you want to encourage. Let the evidence do the correcting.

Rewarding Interpretive Courage

Some students will take a risk with an unusual argument. Reward the ones who back it up carefully, even when they land somewhere unexpected. That kind of work shows real engagement, and it is what literature classes are meant to produce.

Build this into your rubric with a line about the quality of interpretation, separate from agreement with any single reading. It reminds you and your students that the goal is reasoning. It also makes grading a little more interesting.

Consistency When Interpretations Vary

Papers with unusual arguments are the ones where graders drift most. Use anchor examples that include a strong essay with a nonstandard reading. Having that model on hand keeps you from penalizing creativity by accident.

If you use AI feedback, check how it responds to essays with less common interpretations. A tool that always pushes toward one reading is a poor fit for this material. Review those cases yourself before feedback goes out.