Indeterminacy in literature can be simply defined as when components of a text call for or require the reader to make their own decisions about the text’s meaning. (Baldick 2008) This can be when the text’s ending does not provide full closure and there are still questions to be answered, or when ‘the language is such that the author’s original intention is not known.’ Baldick (2008, p. 1 of 1) further describes the concept as ‘a principle of uncertainty invoked to deny the existence of any final or determinate meaning that could bring to an end the play of meaning between the elements of a text.’ Therefore, indeterminacy is, in a nutshell, the belief that it is not possible to decide entirely what a word means when used in a certain circumstance; which quite obviously means that we also cannot decide exclusively on the meaning of a whole text.
In literature, indeterminacy is sometimes confused with the idea of ambiguity, as the two are very alike. However, as opposed to ambiguity, indeterminacy is ‘applied by its practitioners not only to literature but also to the interpretation of texts.’ (Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011, p. 1 of 1) Nevertheless, the presence of dominant indeterminacy of meaning does not mean that decisions about meaning cannot be made at all, but only that there will be no final official judgement or approval on any individual interpretations. (Balidick 2008) Furthermore, the presence of indeterminacy does not result in all interpretations being of equal legitimacy, but instead that all meanings drawn from an indeterminate text are ‘partial and provisional, and that what we write about it itself as a text, is open to further interpretation.’

Indeterminacy and reader imagination

A slightly different approach to indeterminacy is the idea that the reader’s ‘concretization is left to a large extent to... imagination.’ (Stanzel 1988, p. 116) This becomes clear when comparing narrative fiction; which is commonly indeterminate, to film; which often presents an almost complete determinacy of its setting. Stanzel (1988, p. 116) quotes proclaimed writer John Fowles in regards to the indeterminacy of narrative as an advantage;
There are hundreds of things a novel can do that a cinema can never do. The cinema can’t digress, above all it can’t exclude... you’ve got to have a certain chair, certain clothes, certain decor. In a novel... you don’t have to “set up” the whole screen. The delight of writing novels is what you can leave out on each page, in each sentence.
Furthermore, McHale (1992, p. 36) highlights the ‘partial indeterminacy, the “gappiness” of fictional objects, including fictional characters’, by pointing out that no depiction of a fictional character or object could ever be as absolute as what actual human beings consider themselves and their objects to be. ‘It is always as if a beam of light were illuminating a part of a region, the remainder of which disappears in an indeterminate cloud.’ (McHale 1992, p. 36)

Deconstruction theory

This literary meaning of indeterminacy is often associated with deconstruction theory, namely the notable post-structuralism theorist Jacques Derrida, and is best described as ‘a philosophically sceptical approach to the possibility of coherent meaning in language.’ (Baldick 2008, p. 1 of 1) However, Royle (1995, p. 46) quotes Derrida as saying ‘I do not believe I have ever spoken of “indeterminacy”, whether in regard to “meaning” or anything else... deconstruction should never lead either to relativism or to any sort of indeterminism.”

Indeterminacy theory

According to indeterminacy theory, all texts can have the ‘multiplicity of possible interpretations of given textual elements, because the author’s meaning or intent may be unclear, or distorted by pop culture.’ So, indeterminacy is not always purposeful. However, it should always be remembered that while some indeterminacy in literary fiction is permanent; the gap will never be filled or closed; other areas of indeterminacy are temporary, and deliberately planted by the author with the intention of leaving a gap that the reader themself can fill, by ‘process of realizing or concretising the text.’ (McHale 1992, p. 36)

Sources

Baldick, C 2008, ‘Indeterminacy’, The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, (online Oxford Reference Premium).

Encyclopaedia Britannica 2011, Indeterminacy, viewed 7 March 2011, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/285153/indeterminacy
McHale, B 1992, Constructing postmodernism, Routledge, London.

Royle N, 1995, After Derrida, e-book, viewed 7 March 2011, http://books.google.com.au/books?id=8RkNAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq=derrida+indeterminacy&source=bl&ots=BKoLCRd3a-&sig=upbxZmJv1Vq5mo_v5Xg_15y2e6g&hl=en&ei=moh0TZ-CJsqXcbzhzfgC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=derrida%20indeterminacy&f=false

Stanzel, FK 1988, A theory of narrative, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.