Robert Frost's poem "The Road Not Taken" sends a positive message

There are no authorities for literature? Precondition accepted.As a "precondition" for taking this debate, my opponent clearly stated: "there are no authorities for literature." This strongly implies a theoretical framework of interpretation in which the meaning of texts are located in the reader's experience, not the author's intention (as the author's intention would be an "authority").By way of response, my opponent claims: "nowhere in the resolution does it say I must prove that every individual's subjective interpretation of this poem is negative in all circumstances." In saying this, my opponent completely ignores the substance of my argument and refuses to clarify what exactly is implied by the "precondition" for taking the debate.As such, my opponent has fully dropped my argument that the lack of authorities in literature implies a theoretical frame in which the meaning of texts is located in the experience of individual readers. There is no single correct reading because there are no authorities on literature, and therefore, multiple readings may be correct. What's more, as long as the poem can produce a positive message in a reasonable reading, the poem can be said to send a positive message. Hence, my opponent's reading of the poem is irrelevant because the only relevant question is whether a reasonable reading of the poem can lead to a reader believing the poem sends a positive message. By instigating this debate, my opponent accepted the burden of proving there are no reasons to believe Robert Frost's poem sends a positive message.Some good reasons to believe the poem does send a positive messageMy opponent's argument rests on the assumption that, because two distinct paths lead to the same outcome (supported by line 11 in which the speaker states both paths "equally lay"), the "choice" to take either path makes no difference.But my opponent's reading of line 11 is inconsistent with the rest of the poem. Read in conjunction with the final lines of the poem ("I took the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference"), it seems more reasonable to say equality does not imply sameness. In other words, just because two paths are "equal" does not mean they are the same or that the choice to take one over the other makes no difference. According to the last lines, the choice makes "all the difference."This produces a reading of the poem that sends a positive message, as it affirms the meaning inherent in the act of making a choice, regardless of whether the outcomes are the same. Even if the universe is deterministic, and all our actions produce the same results, the fact that we had the ability to make a choice is affirmed as something that makes a difference. Our inherent ability to choose is inherently meaningful, so much so that it evokes a "sigh" from the poem's speaker when he thinks about it.My opponent claims the "sigh" in line 16 demonstrates the speaker's sarcasm/inauthenticity when saying the final lines. But think about it: does the "sigh" in line 16 signify sarcasm/inauthenticity, or does it signify sincere personal feeling? To me, it seems more reasonable to say the "sigh" represents the speaker's sincere emotional anxiety as he recalls and relives a powerful memory.The "sigh" is a sign, not of inauthenticity, but of the deepest, most sincere authenticity the poet can muster. Indeed, the "sigh," as I pointed out in the previous round, is associated with "love" and "nostalgia," and that clearly demonstrates the huge emotional importance the speaker gives to the final lines.Which is more reasonable: the speaker of the poem is lying at the end (because of the "sigh")? Or the speaker sighs because of a sincere experience of emotion and meaning before exposing his personal thoughts to the world? Either way, the point is that the poem contains the potential to send a positive message to readers who interpret the sigh as sincerely felt, and that is what matters for the purposes of this debate.