Reader Response Criticism

Reader Response Criticism

I enjoyed this much more than I did New Critical Theory.  Initially, I was skeptical.  I was thinking, "Who cares about the response of readers, other than book clubs?"  I kept reading, and got to this sentence: "Reader response theory...maintains that what a text is cannot be separated from what it does" (162).

Transactional reader response theory:

I liked this type of criticism, because it focuses on the relationship built between the text and the reader.  The idea of the text being a stimulus, causing us to all react in our own ways.  We all have our own story, our own triggers, our own experiences, and it makes sense that our reactions to a text would all be different.  The term blueprint is also interesting; as we are drawing our own conclusions and meanings, we hit something within the text that will invariably bring us back from our own reading, redirecting us back to the facts of the story.

Psychological reader response theory:

Again, our own triggers and baggage effect the way in which we read a text.  The concepts of defense mode, fantasy mode, and transformation mode are fascinating.  I like that our own analysis comes from our fears and anxieties, which we calm by looking at alternate readings of a text, and then we can finally integrate our fears with our coping mechanisms to formulate a final analysis.  I like that we can read a text and finally get back to my comfort zone by thinking about the author, but I am reluctant to think about people reading my analysis and getting too far into my own head.

Social reader response theory:

This form of criticism should be an obvious one, but it isn't one that I've thought of before.  Of course I bring all of the things I've been taught, both in my own life and in educational situations, to my own interpretation.  I'll have to read The Great Gatsby again, or maybe The Catcher in the Rye, this time forgetting everything I've ever learned about them.

Affective Stylistics and Subjective reader response theory:

I'm pretty shaky on these two forms.

In affective stylistics, I understand that it is considered to be a "slow motion" read through, considering each line and the way it affects the reader. I'm having trouble understanding exactly how this is useful, or even relevant.

In subjective reader response criticism, I understand that the reader responses are the text to be analyzed.  Again, I'm not seeing the use for this.

Transactional, psychological, and social reader responses I get.  If used by a reader, thinking of these while reading will help you become a better reader, and will help you to see things differently within a text.  If used by critics, it can be used to understand the types of readers of a book as well as the author, and meaning can be drawn from that.  I'm not sure about these other two.