Reader-Response Criticism and Understanding Myself as a Reader
Permalink for this paragraph 3
In thinking of what method I want to use critique future papers, to me, the most challenging of the critical theories presented in Chapter 2 of Texts and Contexts is the idea of reader-response criticism. It seems much more feasible to form my own opinions about politics, religion, or the basic presentation of a piece of literature opposed to trying to gauge my opinion of the reader’s experience and opinion. I am not always conscious of what I am thinking as I read. A continuing challenge for me in college is the act of predicting what I think will happen next in literature; I either get lost in what I am reading and do not have space in my mind for predicting or I simply have no clue as to what is going to happen next. As a reader the most natural part of engaging with literature is analyzing it afterwards, so for me to attempt gauging what other readers’ immediate responses are seems quite daunting. I especially find this challenging when I struggle to understand my own responses to literature. When professors ask if their class likes the book assigned I can usually answer with a “yes” or a “no”, but occasionally I have difficulty articulating why.
I imagine the obvious benefit of reader-response criticism is through the practice of reading my personal response to literature. The essay “The Reader’s Surprise in an Excerpt from Here at ‘The New Yorker’” is a helpful example of reader-response criticism as a tool for both practicing the form of criticism and as a template of how readers think. Reading that essay made me realize that when readers are surprised by what they read, obviously their expectations were elsewhere; I was surprised to find that Gill’s confidence progressively shrank throughout his career. This seems so obvious, but that thought never occurred to me. I have always loved how literature is a form of expression but I now realize I never paid attention to how literature really has made me feel. I do not consider myself a passive reader, but maybe I am only conscious of what I am reading and not how I am reading.
The enjoyment of assigned books as opposed to books that I read in my free time has always been measured on different scales for me. If I “enjoy” an assigned book it usually means that I thought the discussions in class about the book were interesting; if I “enjoy” a book that was not assigned to me I usually think of how the book made me feel, surprised me, and made me want more. I, like you, never thought of how a book makes me feel as a critical approach. I am now starting to rethink that opinion
I completely agree that the experience of a book rests on the context of the reading. It is as if when reading for school there is an immediate disconnection from a work. You are going to have to analyze it right? No need to get too attached. Whereas when you read for fun there is an easy emotional connection. Reader-response seems to be combining these two methods in a constructive way.-
I forgot to consider the context of my reading literature in the first place. When I am reading for leisure, I am much fussier about how amused or transfixed I am with the work before I commit to finish reading. But when I read for assignments in class, I commit instantly because I know the class discussion can be very rewarding when we analyze the work. I am realizing more as I mature how much I read just to critique and form opinions.