When interpreting a literary piece through a reader response criticism lens according to theorist and critics the reader can be viewed as a co-author to the piece. That is the reader holds just as much say in the meaning of the text than the author of the text. As Lois Tyson states "...reader-response theorists share two beliefs: 1) that the role of the reader cannot be omitted from our understanding of literature and 2) that readers do not passively consume the meaning presented to them by an objective literary text; rather they actively make the meaning they find in literature" (Purdue Writing Lab). To further break down Tysons two criteria in a reader response approach in interpreting a literary piece a reader will fill in ambiguous areas in the text with personal experiences and add a piece of oneself to the text. For example: if a group of critics were given Uncle Tom’s Cabin to analyze and one critic has grown up wealthy with servants such as maid or butler while another found themselves personally victimized by slavery or sexual assault it would be expected for the 2 critics to have very different critics on the piece. For readers to remain completely objective in critiquing a text as some approaches do can hold to be a very daunting task. As much as we can try to remain unbiased in our interpretations a text will pull a piece of each of us out that we may not even realize, hence making us co-authors. This logic is the foundation of the reader response theory that Louise Rosenblatt, Stanley Fish, Wolfgang Iser, and others used in the 1960s to create and introduction the theory (Mart, 81-83) as a counter to the new criticism theory where critics believed a text should be analyzed objectively and a text only has one true reading. Their theory held that while the author may have one very set view of what he or she writes it is up to the reader to then decipher for his or herself and recreate the text through their lens, and that there is no one best reading of a text. It is neither the reader or text alone that create meaning, but rather both together. While certainly not objective this approach to literature holds key values in the literary world in understanding a text and also reader analysis.
So why reader response theory? What benefits does this theory hold in interpreting and analyzing a text? Using this approach may prove most beneficial in the middle school to college level arenas as the readers have to engage and become part of a narrative. In this range readers are learning to question why they believe what they believe, and a commonly asked question is “does the text change your view on the issues at hand?” In a 2017 experiment conducted at Wright State’s Lake Campus Doctors Junker and Jacquemin students ability to gain empathy through reading text were evaluated. The finding found no increase in empathy over a semester, however there was correlation between higher scores in the class and empathy (Junker, 85-86). This correlation could potentially show that the more understanding a student has on an emotional level with different literature the more they analyze text in a reader response style. In order to hold empathy when reading a text, a reader would need to engage and put themselves in the story line with their beliefs, which gives more room to empathize than with an objective analysis, like in new criticism, leaving an emotional stake out of the picture. For young adults this engagement is critical in growing a willingness to see the world and society, and create a strong ability to critically think questions morals of both society and one’s self. In a reader response atmosphere readers are also lessened of the burden of finding and interpreting the text as the one objective reading of the text. Granting readers, the freedom to read a text as they see fit lowers the stress of being ‘right’ and allows a reader to simply be themselves with the text. By doing so other critics can learn about one another and also start and engage in conversations to better one another on subjects brought out by the text, which for many literary pieces holds a main objective.
References
Junker, Christine R., and Stephen J. Jacquemin. “How Does Literature Affect Empathy in Students?” College Teaching, vol. 65, no. 2, Apr. 2017,
pp. 79–87. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/87567555.2016.1255583.
Mart, Cagri Tugrul. “Reader-Response Theory and Literature Discussions : A Springboard for Exploring Literary Texts.” New Educational Review, vol. 56, Apr. 2019, pp. 78–87. EBSCOhost, doi:10.15804/tner.2019.56.2.06.
Purdue Writing Lab. “Reader-Response Criticism // Purdue Writing Lab.” Purdue Writing Lab,
owl.purdue.edu/owl/subject_specific_writing/writing_in_literature/literary_theory_and_schools_of_criticism/reader_response_criticism.
html.
Junker, Christine R., and Stephen J. Jacquemin. “How Does Literature Affect Empathy in Students?” College Teaching, vol. 65, no. 2, Apr. 2017,
pp. 79–87. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/87567555.2016.1255583.
Mart, Cagri Tugrul. “Reader-Response Theory and Literature Discussions : A Springboard for Exploring Literary Texts.” New Educational Review, vol. 56, Apr. 2019, pp. 78–87. EBSCOhost, doi:10.15804/tner.2019.56.2.06.
Purdue Writing Lab. “Reader-Response Criticism // Purdue Writing Lab.” Purdue Writing Lab,
owl.purdue.edu/owl/subject_specific_writing/writing_in_literature/literary_theory_and_schools_of_criticism/reader_response_criticism.
html.