The dialectical idea of ​​self-development in literary studies and art studies

There is a verse in "Faust" that can be translated as: "Our first step is free, with the second we are slaves!" This thought is all too appropriate for the artist, who, having once given free rein to his own imagination in "inventing" a new composition, soon becomes dependent on it. Should the same be said of the writer and art critic? How far does his freedom of choice extend? Is he not a slave to his own, previously preferred or subsequently guessed method? Such questions go so far in today's literary and art studies that they cast doubt on the possibility of a scientific interpretation of the work of art, or at the very least - treat this interpretation as something not quite as certain and expedient as was previously thought. Some contemporary authors believe that the methodological basis of artistic interpretation is only just being formed or is yet to be formed; others are convinced that a scientific analysis of the work is possible only insofar as it does not feed interpretative claims, i.e., insofar as it renounces interpretation in the traditional sense of the term. All those who today argue for "modern" literary studies and art studies, however, mercilessly attack attempts to reveal the meaning of artistic images by establishing historical, biographical, etc. facts. This was yesterday's word for dubious knowledge.