Epstein has laid a very important point when he states that the criticism allows the authorship as multiple, involving culture, psyche, and intertextuality which leads one to think that the interpretation of the authors writing involves multiple mixture of influenced factors. These factors involve culture, psyche, and intertextuality which define the individual interpretive capabilities and forms rigid views about the quality of their perception to form conception of an author’s written piece. It is more intelligent to consider persona criticism rather than the writing material criticism because the writing may remain the same once on paper, but the author or the writer may and will change his or her thoughts about the same material from a distant time frame. Similarly, Kingston will have made and is abound to make renewed assumptions about the incidences of her aunt and refresh her perception of those moments and formulate a new conception about the Chinese America culture.
Kingston’s other texts do not stand testimony for their relation and relevance to the biography that she wrote because there are primary changes that may have taken place. These changes may that she changes her perception abilities and conception formation abilities after experiencing life events which enforces her to rethink her previous stand of the same event. There are authors and literary composers who tend to defend biographical criticism, such as Benson (pp. 107) who defends the writing of John Steinbeck whose life story and biography was taken as resembling the flair in his future writings and that biographies are perfect lens of viewing and interpreting the various texts of authors. Benson must not have considered the various changes of cognitive growth and perceiving abilities that Steinbeck must have experienced internally to give rise to the new external writings. One of the strongest contentions of the biography criticism is that the process during which the author changes his or her perception and conception capabilities is an intrinsic process, hidden from everyone and not measurable by all except the author. Thus, once biography cannot be used as a lens to interpret the other texts of the writer.
The lens of the author’s biography to interpret his or her texts is detrimental to the growth that the author endows on the reader through giving full freedom in interpreting the written work. However, if the reader is using a single piece of biographical assumptions to assume other writings, the reader is bound to remain handicapped in a limited scope of possibility thinking. Kingston herself will experience different moods and emotions while analysing the same event twice at two different times of her life because she is looking at it through different eyes of enhanced perceptive abilities which challenge her previous stand which surprisingly was as firm footed as the new one.