142
MAIN APPROACHES OF THE READER-RESPONSE THEORY
Urazaliyeva Madina G’ofurovna
(mustaqil tadqiqotchi)
O’zbekiston Davlat Jahon Tillari Universiteti
Toshkent , O’zbekiston
Email: madinaurazaliyeva4@gmail.com
Tel: +998915655615
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12644128
Abstract:
This article discusses peculiarities of the reader response theory within the
main approaches of it. The literary text, reader and interpreting the text being the key notions
of the theory are studied within the approaches mentioned in the article.
Key words
: Reader-response criticism, Transactional approach, Historical context,
Affective stylistics, Psychological approach, Subjective approach, Social approach,Textual
approach.
One of the main critical schools in modern culture and literary studies, reader-response
criticism, has contributed significantly to the way we read the texts. Often called the criticism
of consciousness, it originated with the phenomenological approach of renowned philosopher
Edmund Husserl in the 20th century. In line with this, it was also modified by the use of
hermeneutics in Hans-Georg Gadamer's conceptual framework
1
. Late in the 1971s and early
in the 1981s, reader-oriented techniques gained popularity. To a large degree, this strategy
was established by individuals such as Gerald Prince, Louise M. Rosenblatt, Norman Holland,
Stanley Fish, and David Bleich. This form of critique was also greatly aided in its growth by the
writings of the Constance school critics, such as Wolfgang Iser and Hans Robert Juass. As a
result, the reader-response approach to reading the texts was given access to a new toolbox of
extremely technical terms, including the Implied/Actual Reader dichotomy, Concretization,
Negation, Assimilation, Creation, and Horizons of Expectation. Within the context of current
figures' new theoretical frameworks, reader-response criticism has been extensively studied
over the past few decades. There are multiple approaches to classify reader-response theory:
Louise Rosenblatt and Wolfgang Iser's transactional approach, Hans Robert Juass's preferred
historical context, The affective stylistics by Stanley Fish, Norman Holland used a
psychological approach, Subjective method in David Bleich's works, Stanley Fish's mature
works employ a social approach, while Gerald Prince's work employs a textual approach.
Transactional‖ approach. A Transactional reader-response critic, Louise M. Rosenblatt
asserts that both the reader and the text must work together to produce meaning
2
. They share
or take part in a transactional experience. The text serves as a catalyst for the reader to recall
a variety of prior encounters, ideas, and thoughts from both prior reading experiences and
our daily lives. Upon reading the text, readers bring with them their unique personalities,
recollections of past events, current problems, unique physical conditions, and their entire
individuality. But the text also acts as a blueprint, picking, reducing, and prioritizing thoughts
that best fit the book's framework in order to mold the reader's experiences in its image. She
1
Guerin, Wilfred L. et al. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Fifth edition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2015.
2
Rosenblatt, Louise. The Reader, The Text, The Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work.
Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1978.
143
refers to the new work that the reader and the text create together as a poem. This is the
result of their transactional interaction. The two main divisions of reading, according to
Rosenblatt, are: Engaging in efferent reading occurs when we read for information.
Conversely, when we interact with the text, we read in an artistic way. A conversation
between the reader and the text is what happens when we read beautifully. Between an
efferent and an aesthetic mode of reading, a reader may alternate between them during the
reading process.
Historical approach. Hans Robert Jauss, an important German exponent of ‗reception
theory,‘ gave a historical dimension to reader-oriented criticism. Literary works are not
standalone objects that present the same perspective to every reader at every time, according
to Jauss in Toward an Aesthetic Reception. The monument doesn't convey its timeless core in
a monological manner
3
. He goes on to say that when understanding a text, one must take its
social history into account. Furthermore, Jauss employs the phrase "horizons of expectation"
to delineate the standards by which readers evaluate literary works within a specific age. He
contends that since every historical era creates its own expectations, the text's meaning can
never be definitive or universal. Because a text's meaning might vary depending on the
historical context, there is no one right way to interpret it.
Affective stylistics approach. An American exponent of reader-response criticism,
Stanley fish examined the differences between the affective and reception aesthetics. He is
one of the practitioners of affective stylistics
4
. Rather than being an object that exists in place,
they contend that a literary text is an event that occurs in time and comes into being as it is
read. A thorough analysis of the text is conducted to determine how (stylistically) and
(affectively) the reader is affected while reading it. Fish believes that because the text is made
up of the effects it generates, which happen inside the reader, it cannot be viewed as an
objective, autonomous entity with a fixed meaning that exists independently of readers. The
structure that Fish describes in his analysis of a book is the structure that emerges from the
reader's response as it happens in real time. Affective stylistics is a cognitive study of how
particular brain processes create
Psychological approach. A psychological reader-response critic, Holland‘s method is
transactive in the sense that reading involves a transaction between the reader and the text.
When we read literature, we project our identity theme, or variations of it, on to the text
5
. The
world we envision in our minds is unintentionally recreated in the text. We project our needs,
wants, defenses, and fears onto the text, which results in our interpretations. The reader's
psyche is thereby revealed through the psychological process of interpretation. Holland
claims that the process of interpretation has three phases, or modes: The text triggers defense
mode, which increases our psychological barriers. We decipher the material in a way that
3
Juass, Hans Robert. Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press,
1982.
4
Fish, Stanley. ―Faulty Perspectives.‖ Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Ed. David Lodge and Nigel
Wood. New York: Longman, 2011. P 287-116.
5
Holland, Norman. ―Unity Identity Text Self.‖ PMLA (6975): 869-822. Rpt. In Reader Response Criticism:
From Formalist to Post-Structuralism. Ed. Jane P. Tompkins. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1981. P 118-99.
144
calms those defenses in the dream mode, satisfying our need to be shielded from dangers that
could upset our psychological balance.
Lastly, we turn the first two steps into an abstract interpretation in the transformation
mode in order to achieve the psychological fulfillment we seek (without admitting to
ourselves the guilt-inducing fantasies and anxiety-inducing defenses that underpin our
interpretation of the text). Holland suggests DEFT as the most appropriate acronym to
represent the defense-fantasy-transformation paradigm of the literary experience.
Subjective approach. An American subjective reader-response critic, David Bleich
argues that the text is created by readers‘ responses, in the sense that there is no literary text
beyond the meanings created by readers‘ interpretation; the text the critic analyzes is not the
literary work but the written responses of readers
6
. The sensation, connections, and
recollections that arise from our subjective response to the written words on a page are what
he refers to as symbolization in reading. As we read, a mental universe of concepts is created
by our perception and identification of the reading experience. As a result, when we
understand the text, what we are really understanding is the meaning of our own
symbolization or the meaning of the conceptual experience we developed in reaction to the
text. One can develop the meaning of the text through discussions and agreements. The group
determines what constitutes a legitimate reading of the text.
Social approach. In Interpreting the Variorum‖ Fish delineates that interpretive
communities are made up of those who share interpretive strategies not for reading (in the
conventional sense) but for writing texts, for constituting their properties and assigning their
intentions
7
. Put differently, these reading techniques are in place before the act of reading and
hence influence the content that is read. A readership that uses similar interpretative
techniques is therefore referred to as an interpretive community. Interpretive methods are
learnt rather than innate, according to Fish, who also claims that "interpretive communities
grow and decline, and individuals move from one to another." Since the reader's reading
community is where a piece acquires its meaning, social media plays a big part in Fish's more
mature works.
Textual approach. Prince states that by observing and analyzing various signs in the text,
such as pronoun reference, direct address, gender, race, social class references, and writing
styles, it is possible to identify the narratee
8
. The study of stories with an emphasis on
narrator, voice, style, and other aspects of storytelling is known as narrative analysis. The
term "narratee" refers to the individual the narrator is speaking to. The storyteller is created
by the story itself. Three distinct types of narratees exist: The Real reader, who is the person
who is actually reading the book; The Virtual reader, who is the reader to whom the writer
feels they are writing; and The Ideal reader, who is the person who knows every word and
structure of the text both explicitly and implicitly. Prince belongs to the reader-oriented
school of criticism even if his method is based on textual analysis because of his consideration
for the reader.
6
Bleich, David. Subjective Criticism.‖ Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978.
7
Fish, Stanley. ―Faulty Perspectives.‖ Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Ed. David Lodge and Nigel
Wood. New York: Longman, 2011. P 287-116.
8
Gerald, Prince. A Dictionary of Narratology. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987. ---. Narrative as
Theme: Studies in French Fiction. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1992.
145
Reading and the reader's subjective interpretation of the texts' meaning are closely
related processes. For the reader, meaning is produced through the confusion between the
active reader and the active text. Interpretations should not be set and immutable because the
meaning is always delayed
9
. Hence, the reader's pivotal function remains a primary factor
contributing significantly to the relevance of the reading experience. For reading texts in
modern literary and cultural studies, the reader-response technique offers a highly significant
approach. With the introduction of new specialized language by prominent players in this
manner of inquiry, reader-oriented criticism has completely evolved as a critical approach.
Reader-response theory could be categorized into several modes including transactional,
historical context, affective stylistics, psychological, subjective, social, and textual approaches.
To sum up, by examining the mechanism of reading in terms of the primary ideas of the
methods of reception theory, the process might be further developed. As a result, when
analyzing the reading process, it is important to regularly take into account the reader's vital
position in the reading process as well as their value in making meaning.
References:
1.
Bleich, David. Subjective Criticism.‖ Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press,
1978.
2.
Fish, Stanley. ―Faulty Perspectives.‖ Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Ed. David
Lodge and Nigel Wood. New York: Longman, 2011. P 287-116.
3.
Fish, Stanley. ―Faulty Perspectives.‖ Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Ed. David
Lodge and Nigel Wood. New York: Longman, 2011. P 287-116.
4.
Gerald, Prince. A Dictionary of Narratology. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987.
---. Narrative as Theme: Studies in French Fiction. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1992.
5.
Guerin, Wilfred L. et al. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Fifth edition.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
6.
Holland, Norman. ―Unity Identity Text Self.‖ PMLA (6975): 869-822. Rpt. In Reader
Response Criticism: From Formalist to Post-Structuralism. Ed. Jane P. Tompkins. Baltimore:
The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981. P 118-99.
7.
Juass, Hans Robert. Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Minneapolis: The University of
Minnesota Press, 1982.
8.
Rosenblatt, Louise. The Reader, The Text, The Poem: The Transactional Theory of the
Literary Work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1978.
9.
Махмудова Н.А. Жанр роман воспитания: проблемы методологии анализа
//Ўзбекистонда хорижий тиллар. — 2021. — № 1 (36). — С. 242-256.
9
Махмудова Н.А. Жанр роман воспитания: проблемы методологии анализа //Ўзбекистонда хорижий тиллар. —
2021. — № 1 (36). — С. 242-256.
