Key Questions of Reader-Response Theory

Charles Bressler divides the basic points of Reader-Response Criticism into three titles: reader, text, and meaning. While these points are essential to all Reader-Response critics, the value attributed to each of them and the way they are evaluated differ from one idea to the next. And these different ideas divide reader-response theory into different categories. However, even though there are different points of view on the subject, three questions based on the previously mentioned titles are fixed while analyzing a text for reader-oriented critics.

The first question is, "Who is the reader?" It is a very broad question that includes many questions that can be asked about the reader, like "What is the reader’s psychological state?" or "Where is the reader from?" In Lois (Loez) Tyson’s book Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide, it is stated that "As we read a text, it acts as a stimulus to which we respond in our way. Feelings, associations, and memories occur as we read, and these influence how we make sense of the text as we move through it" (173). This means that everything about the reader affects the way they interpret a literary text. That is why reader-response critics refuse New Criticism’s idea of considering only the text while interpreting it and excluding the reader from the process. Because they believe that there is a natural interaction between the text and the reader that partly depends on every element of the reader’s life and existence.

Let me give an example to make my point clear. Last week, we made a presentation in Drama Studies about Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett. In that presentation, I mentioned how the response to the play from a sophisticated audience in Europe differed from the reaction of a group of prisoners in the US when it was staged for the two groups. This first audience was not able to relate to the play because they were unfamiliar with the subject and the theme. They did not have the personal data to make sense of the play. In the case of the second audience, on the other hand, even the meaningless parts of the play meant something to them since they were familiar with the concept of waiting and other elements the play offered. This shows that different aspects of a reader are quite effective in influencing their understanding of a text, so Reader-Oriented Criticism focuses on the identity of the reader.

The second thing the critics of this theory focus on is the question of what the text offers. That is, "How does the text affect the reading and interpretation processes? What are the limits the text sets? At what points the text allows free interpretation?" The reading process gets affected by the text as much as it does by the reader. The language, plot, characters, and many other elements in the text create a restricted area for the reader. While the reader is free to make varying comments on the text inside this area, their comments cannot go beyond these borders. "At various points while we read [...] the text acts as a blueprint that we can use to correct our interpretation when we realize it has traveled too far afield of what is written on the page" (Tyson, 173). Whenever a new reader reads a text, a new meaning is created. But these meanings always carry some common points, which are provided by the author of the text. This is why analyses that exceed the information and focus of a text are usually accepted as false.

For example, while analyzing Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, some people interpret it as a tragic story of lovers, and others think of it as a tragedy that arises from the feud and hatred between two families. That is, some focus on the romantic side of the play, while others focus on the didactic part, which warns the reader about the possible consequences of unnecessary hate. Both of these opinions revolve around the story and the elements in it that were presented by Shakespeare. As two common opinions, it is suggested that the tragedy of the play comes from either the loyalty and love the main characters have for each other or the feud that goes on between their families. Not many people get the idea that the tragedy arises from the immaturity and youth of the main characters since they are underage Shakespeare does not give age as a fatal point in the story; it is not the focal point. The interpretation made by the reader stays within the pattern provided by the text.

The last question is about how the reader and the text interact with each other to create meaning. As the type of data about the reader and the text changes, the interpretation process alters. By data, I mean the psychological state, culture, religion, personality, and other qualities of the reader as well as the content of the text. Interactions between the text and the reader occur based on these factors. We can take Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Caroll as an example to explain this. If the reader interacts with this text by taking their childhood memories as a basis, they will interpret it as the progression of a child through life. On the other hand, if the interaction occurs on a religious basis, the reader will interpret some characters and events in the text as allusions to Christianity and the Bible, as I did when I read it. So, the meaning will change because of the different transactions. In conclusion, the cooperation between the data of the reader and the text matters as much as it does for each separately to detect meaning.