Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Reader Response Criticism

Reader Response Criticism is a theory that "focuses on the readers' responses to literary texts (Tyson,).

Because readers cannot be separated from the text, they are always creating the meaning of any given text and the meanings they create for one text can change each time they read it

Attitudes, knowledge acquired and personal experience can all contribute to the reader's constructed meaning of the text.

In addition, different readers might interpret the same text in very different ways due to many variables.

5 Types of Reader Response Criticism

Don't forget Indeterminate meaning, which refers "'gaps' in the text" that can imply multiple meanings or no clear meaning (Tyson).

"The reader's' responses are the text" (Tyson).

In this theory, critics do not analyze the actual text, but the responses of the readers.

"Symbolization" is the meaning we make of the text and "Resymbolization" is the analysis of this response (Tyson).

David Bleich claims that this method is very affective because "self understanding is extremely motivating for students" (Tyson).

Although this theory does assert that an objective text exists, it focuses on "what readers' interpretations reveal about themselves, not about the text" (Tyson).

So Basically, "A literary interpretation may or may not reveal the meaning of the text, but to a discerning eye it always reveals the psychology of the reader" (Tyson).

Affective

Stylistics

Text does not exist unless it is read. There is no difference between the actual words on the page and the meaning constructed by the reader.

This theory, developed by Stanley Fish, states that "there is no purely individual response" to a text (Tyson).

"Readers do not interpret poems; they create them" (Tyson).

Zork: The Cavern of Doom

Just from the title of the book and knowing it was a CYOA, I immediately had some ideas on what the text would want me to do. When I was given the first choice, to either “Save the kingdom” or “go home and watch reruns,” I chose reruns, because I wanted to do the opposite of what the story was trying to get me to do (Meretzky, 1). However, I was forced into taking the adventure anyway; even after I chose not to save Zork, the text manipulated me into its intended story. In fact, the story has a tendency to do this throughout the tale. For example, I was given the choice of several activities, including “listen[ing] to Syovar’s stories”, but no matter what activity I chose, I ended up listening to his stories at some point (12).

Throughout the tale, I felt I went back and forth between choosing options that I felt would go against how the text was supposed to read and options that actually bought into the way the text is supposed to be read (the choices that will help the reader make it to a happy ending). Overall, I thought the story was pretty predictable.

As far as characters are concerned, I felt the ones portrayed in the story were pretty flat, although I’m assuming this is because the reader is expected to project his or her ideas onto Juranda and Bivotar (whose names are ridiculous, by the way). I also feel that the characters lacked depth because the focus of the story is on creation of the text by the reader and also because the text is meant for a young audience.

The themes of the story were also pretty simple—greed being the main topic. As a reader who has the power to literally make the story, I was asked by the text several times to evaluate my greed (or the greed I might project onto the characters). For example, in one scene I can either attempt to reach a “trunk of jewels” or continue through the cavern; the choice to try to reach the gems leads to an abrupt ending of the story (57, 60). Of course, I tried this to see if I would end the story, and I did, confirming my suspicion that the text is trying to teach readers a lesson about greed by having their adventure end whenever they are enticed by fictional riches.

1. Characterize my response: Mainly cynical, although at times my attitude shifted to one of optimism and excitement about the adventure.

2. Identify responses prompted by the text: I was annoyed when I had to continue the adventure even though I tried to manipulate my way out of it and later on when I realized the text wanted me to learn a lesson about greed and I could not find a way to finish the text without acknowledging this morality lesson.

3. Why did these responses occur? I believe these responses occurred because I do not fit the demographic for which this story was written and did not enjoy being manipulated into doing what the text wanted me to do. Because I have more experience interpreting literature than a child who would read this story might have, I would have preferred to read a CYOA that allowed me to have more options for constructing the narrative. Because I became annoyed with the text's manipulation, I attempted to manipulate it back. When this did not work and I was "forced" to follow the predetermined path, I decided I did not like the story because it was too simple-- in structure, character development and theme.

The Hunger Games

In their Article "Thematic Solutions Using Young Adult Literature to Increase Reading Comprehension," "Jill Adams and John. H Bushman claim that students need to study literature to which they can connect, so that they will want to continue to read throughout their lives. They state that students will have an easy time connecting to and will have a more positive response to young adult literature because their prior knowledge allows them to understand and relate to these types of texts.

Adams and Bushman claim that "Prior knowledge-- what the reader knows, feels, values, experiences-- plays a very important role in the reading process" (Adams and Bushman). This is especially important in the transactional theory, which asserts that text "acts as a stimulus" and previous knowledge and experiences "influence the way in which we make sense of the text as we move through it" (Tyson).

The Poem: The first chapter introduces a strong female protagonist who selflessly takes care of her mother and sister, because she is the only family member capable of doing so. Katniss seems to have a cynical outlook on life, which can be attributed to the poverty in which she lives. She also seems to be someone who has been deprived of love, which is symbolized on a small scale by her relationship with her sister's cat: "Entrails. No hissing. This is the closest we will ever come to love" (Collins, 4). Despite this deprivation, Katniss is capable of deep love for her sister, Prim. This is demonstrated by her willingness to sacrifice herself in place of her sister by volunteering for the Hunger Games. Because of her courage and sacrifice, Katniss is a good protagonist and can be a good role model for young readers.

  • What is the poem I have created?
  • What does my response say about me and my prior knowledge, experiences or preferences?
  • How might it be different from the response of someone significantly younger (or someone within the intended demographic)?

Adams, Jill and Bushman, John H. Thematic Solutions Using Young Adult Literature to Increase Reading Comprehension. Middle School Journal. Volume 37.4 (March 2006): 25-29. JSTORE, Oct 13, 2013.

A Transactional look at...

By Suzanne Collins

The Text: The Hunger Games, Chapters 1 & 2

What does it mean?

The Reader: Me (25 years old, female, Lit MA, GTA)

Louise Rosenblatt is given credit for this type of RRC that "analyzes the transaction between text and reader" and claims that "both are necessary in he production of meaning" (Tyson).

"Text" means the words on the page; "reader" is obviously the reader and "poem" is the meaning put together by the transaction between reader and text (Tyson).

Prior Knowledge

Tyson gives the example: "The situations that cause my defenses to emerge in life will cause my defenses to emerge when I read."

The texts acts as a stimulus to which the reader responds with emotions, associations or memories (Tyson).

Norman Holland, a critic who was influential in the construction of this theory, claims that even though our psychological issues appear in our responses to a text, we use interpretation to try to explain them in other terms so that we don't have to admit the deeply rooted issues that really cause us to have certain responses.

Transactional Psychological

Subjective Affective Stylistics

Social

What is Reader Response theory?

Text occurs in time, not space, "as it is being read" (Tyson).

There are 2 basic principle of RR Criticism that all schools believe:

The theory focuses on the "phrase-by-phrase analysis of how the text structures the reader's response" (Tyson).

The focus is not on what a particular passage says, but what it does (the experience of reading).

Fish Bases Social RR theory on communities and claims that any given community is pre-programmed to respond in a certain way (Tyson).

Some communities may be aware of these predetermined responses, but not all are.

A subjective look at...

By Steve Meretzky

What Does it Mean?

Response Statement

Works Cited

Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. New York: Scholastic Press. 2008. Print.

Meretzky, Steve. Zork: The Cavern of Doom. NA. 1982. Samizdat Drafting Co. Web. Oct 13, 2013.

Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. New York: 2006. Samsung Galaxy Tab II.

"(1)... the role of the reader cannot be omitted from our understanding of literature" (Tyson).

"(2)... readers do not passively consume the meaning presented to them by an objective literary text" (Tyson).

Transactional

Psychological

Subjective

Social

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi