18

2| Literary Criticism

UNIT 3: READER-RESPONSE CRITICISM

’Tis the good reader that makes the good book.
RALPH WALDO EMERSON, AMERICAN ESSAYIST, POET, PHILOSOPHER

3.0 Intended Learning Outcomes

a. Give the distinct features of Reader-Response Criticism.
b. Compare and contrast Reader-Response Criticism from Formalism.
c. Explain the relevance of the theory to one’s literary appreciation.
d. Evaluate a text using Reader-Response Theory.

3.1 Introduction
With the development of Literary Criticism, various theories with conflicting perspectives
keep on sprouting. One of these was the Reader-Response Theory which became popular
when many people began disagreeing with the ideas of the Formalist Theory.
To know more about Reader-Response Theory, this unit highlights the study on its
nature, historical background and list of critics who have notable contributions on the birth
and development of the said theory. This also focuses on the guide questions, and steps on
doing reader-response analysis.
The activities incorporated in this unit will help you understand better the theory that
would help in writing your own literary analysis using Reader-response approach.

3.2 Topics
3.2.1 Historical Background
Let us take a trip back in time. Think back, way back, to all of the books that you have read over
your lifetime. Think about the ones that you loved, hated, obsessed over, or threw away after the
first few pages. Think about what those books made you feel, and most importantly, why they made
you feel that way.
Now, I am going to introduce you to the Reader-Response Criticism…

Reader-Response theory officially began in the late 1960s, when a group of critics
including Stanley Fish, Wolfgang Iser and Norman N. Holland started asking questions
about how a reader's response to a literary text actually creates that literary text, although,
the real roots of Reader-Response theory can already be traced
further back to 1938, the year that Literature as Exploration, a book
by scholar Louise Rosenblatt, was published. In this book,
Rosenblatt deals at length with how the reader's response to a
text is fundamental to the understanding of a literary work. In
her Transactional Theory, she also stressed that the meaning of a
text does not reside exclusively within the text or within the
reader. Instead, she suggested the meaning of a text occurs as a
result of the transaction between the reader and the written word.
The transaction, or exchange between reader and text, suggests
a reciprocal, or mutual, relationship between the reader and the
Louise Rosenblatt literary text. During this transaction, the text acts as a stimulus

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 19
2| Literary Criticism
for the reader, who responds in a personal way, as feelings, personal connections, and
memories come into play during the act of reading.
These ideas did not catch on until the 1960s, but when they did, they
became the theory we know and maybe love today.
In the late 1960s and 1970s, a whole crop of critics emerged who
focused on analyzing readers' responses to texts. The most important of
these critics was Stanley Fish. He applied a Reader-Response perspective
to works like John Milton's epic poem Paradise
Lost, and he argued that we just cannot understand
a literary work like Milton's epic without
considering the reader's reaction to it.
Stanley Fish
Another important theorist was Wolfgang
Iser, a German scholar who wrote a lot about how the meaning of a
literary text is not in the text itself but can be found in the interaction
between the reader and the text. Iser also had a thing for "blanks," gaps
in a text that force the reader to fill in with his or her own imagination.
Wolfgang Iser

Further, Norman N. Holland and David Bleich were into psychoanalytic theory. They were
influenced by the ideas of the psychoanalyst and theorist Sigmund Freud, and they argued that
understanding literary texts is all about understanding
the psychology of the person who is actually reading the
texts.
For instance, if you are a reader who has hang-ups
about mommy and daddy then you are probably going
to project those issues onto the text you are reading. So,
when you analyze a text, you do not only have to
understand the words on the page but you have to
understand the mind of the person reading those words.

Norman N. Holland David Bleich

3.2.2 What is Reader-Response Criticism?

 READER-RESPONSE THEORY - focuses on the importance of the reader in relation to

their reaction to the book that they have read. What makes this theory so interesting is the
fact that no reader will ever have the same reaction to a book. The importance is in the details.
No single person on this planet has lived the exact same life as another person. We all have
different morals, beliefs, and experiences that set us apart from one another. This is why the
Reader-Response Criticism is so important, because the reaction of the reader is what helps
determine the actual meaning of the text.
To put it more simply:
“Reader-response suggests that the role of the reader is essential to the meaning of a text, for only
in the reading experience does the literary work come alive”
- Smith O’Hare and Hines

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 20
2| Literary Criticism
At its most basic level, Reader-Response Criticism considers readers' reactions to
literature as vital to interpreting the meaning of the text. However, reader-response criticism can
take a number of different approaches. A critic deploying reader-response theory can use a
psychoanalytic lens, a feminist lens, or even a structuralist lens. What these different lenses have
in common when using a reader-response approach is they maintain "...that what a text is cannot
be separated from what it does" (Tyson 154).
Tyson also explains that "...reader-response theorists share two beliefs:
1. The role of the reader cannot be omitted from our understanding of literature; and
2. Readers do not passively consume the meaning presented to them by an objective
literary text; rather they actively make the meaning they find in literature" (154).

Reception of a Text
The term Reception Theory comes from the 60s. It had its beginning in the work of Hans-
Robert Jauss, who was a member of a research group known internationally as "The Constance
School" of literary studies.
Reception theory is a near equivalent of American term "Reader-Response Criticism". Both
these theories emphasize the importance of participation of a reader in interpreting literary texts.
They were a reaction against the formalist approach, concentrating only upon the text.

Subjective vs Objective
Reader-Response was a reaction against the formalist approach that concentrates only on
the text. It is subjective because it takes into consideration the personality of the reader and the
ways he contributes to the making of the text. Reading reveals more about the reader’s
personality than about the text.

The Text and Meaning

Meaning does not solely reside in the text. Texts do not have
meaning apart from the reader. Meaning is partly the result of the
reader’s interaction with and interpretation of the text. As they say, the
apple does not taste good if nobody tastes it.
Because the meaning of the text depends on the reader’s
understanding of and feelings towards it, we can have more than one
meaning, more than one valid interpretation.

The Reader
▪ The text remains incomplete without the
reader.
▪ The reader is not the passive recipient of
ideas included in the text by the author.
He/she is active in giving meaning to the
text.
▪ The reader’s life experiences, his/her
personality, social and cultural background,
education, gender, and personal taste
influence his/her reading of the text.

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 21
2| Literary Criticism
Limits of Interpretation
▪ Different interpretations – but not all are valid as long as the reader can provide evidence
in the text.
▪ In each text there are limits to its possible interpretations.
For example, we cannot change the setting, the plot, or redefine the characters.

Textual Gaps
Wolfgang Iser’s (1972) argues that texts contain gaps (or blanks) – things that are not
expressed – which invite the reader to interfere actively in order to find their meaning.

3.2.3 Key Debates about Reader-Response Criticism

Upon knowing the definition of Reader-Response Theory, have you wondered of the kind of
criticism that we could write? Is there a possibility that we can come up with a consensus literary
analysis given the fact that we have different interpretations to a text? To shed light on this issue, let us
read this …

Reader-Response theorists really do not like the New Critics’ perspective on literary
analysis. The New Critics thought that the meaning of a literary work could be found in the
work itself. According to them, you do not need to know anything about the social or cultural
context of the work, or about the author's biography. For the New Critics, the reader was not
important, because in their “New Critic-y minds”, the reader had nothing to do with the actual
meaning of the text.
However, according to Reader-Response critics, meaning is not something that is just
sitting there inside a literary text, waiting to be discovered. For them, meaning is something
that is made as a result of the interaction between the reader's mind and the text. Reader-
Response theorists argue that the reader is actually as important as the author.
One criticism Reader-Response theorists often get is this: if everyone reads differently, then
how can we come to any consensus about a literary work? If everyone has a different interpretation of
the same text, that means that we can never agree about what the text's saying or doing, right?
Different Reader-Response critics would answer this criticism differently. There are those,
like Norman N. Holland, who would say: "Yes, we are all different, and yes, our readings are all
going to be different. But that is okay. Why do we have to agree on what a text is telling us? There's no
need for agreement."
Further, there are also other Reader-Response critics, like Wolfgang Iser, who would argue
that texts guide our responses to some extent. “Yes, each of us responds differently to texts, but our
responses cannot be that drastically different. To go back to the cake analogy: we can't make a carrot
cake if we are given the ingredients for a cheesecake. Yes, we might each make the cheesecake differently,
but at the end of the day it will be a cheesecake – our response as readers is determined, to some
extent at least, by the ingredients that a text gives us to work with.”

3.2.4 Writing a Reader’s Response Analysis

Getting Started
For some people, a reader-response approach is startlingly different from the approach
they are accustomed to taking. Instead of memorizing historical information, recognizing
literary forms and techniques, or learning a prescribed interpretation, you will be asked to look
inside and around yourself for ways to make the work meaningful

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 22
2| Literary Criticism

Prewriting
To find a starting point for exploring where your personal experience and the text
converge, you will find it helpful to make a few personal observations before, during, and after
reading the text. These observations will help you discover interpretive points for discussion.
It is easy to begin; simply ask questions such as these before you even pick up the book:
▪ How do I feel about reading this piece? Am I eager to begin? Curious about what I will find? Reluctant?
▪ What do I already know about this work or this author?
▪ What do I already know about the time, place, or characters depicted?
▪ What does the title suggest to me?

Noting your responses in a journal or log during a first reading can help you make
generalizations later. You may still be at the questioning stage when you do this, or your ideas
may have reached an advanced degree of development. Regardless of how far along you are in
your thinking, here are some suggestions to consider during the initial reading:
▪ Does the work include quotations that I would like to copy and save?
▪ What questions would I like to ask the author?
▪ What objections can I raise to what I am reading?
▪ Where do I experience confusion, disagreement, approval, or any other attitude or feeling?
▪ What experiences does the text bring to mind that I can describe or narrate?

You can also make short responses after the first reading. These responses may be
appropriate for a journal entry, or you may write them as separate texts.
▪ As soon as you finish reading the work, describe how you feel about it.
▪ Write a brief summary of the plot.
▪ Free write about a single line from a poem or about a sentence from a piece of prose.
▪ Identify a line or an image that immediately caught your attention or that you remember clearly. Why do
you find it to be powerful?
▪ Think of someone or some experience that a character or situation in this work brings to mind.
▪ List the things you like about the work. Why do you like them?
▪ List those aspects of it that bother you. Why do they bother you?
▪ Identify any passages you do not understand.
▪ Choose what you would tell someone about this work if you could make only one comment.
▪ Consider how you might have acted had you been one of the characters.
▪ What else would you like to know about the characters or events?
▪ What values, beliefs, or assumptions of your own does this work affirm? Which of your values, beliefs, or
assumptions does it challenge?
▪ Speculate on who should play the various roles in a filmed version of the work.

Drafting and Revising

The Introduction
Because you are making a reader-response analysis, it is appropriate to involve your
audience in the introduction to your essay. In other words, try to provoke a strong response from
your own reader. One way of doing so is to begin by recounting an incident from the work that
elicits a particularly powerful reaction or quote a passage that holds strong emotion for most
readers.
For example, Edgar Allan Poe’s description of the mysterious stranger who suddenly
appears at the ball in “The Masque of the Red Death”— “The figure was tall and gaunt, and
shrouded from head to foot in the habiliments of the grave”—is not likely to provoke an

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 23
2| Literary Criticism
inattentive yawn from anyone who reads it. It can send shivers down the spine of even the most
passive reader. An essay that begins by quoting such a line will catch a reader’s attention; it can
also effectively lead into a more detailed examination of how the reader and text are responsible
for making the literary work.

The Body
The core of your paper will explain how the text controls the reader’s understanding and
sympathies, identify the personal material you have put into the text, and describe how the two
interact to create the text. In other words, it will show how you acquired information about the
text and what responses that information created.
Part of your discussion, then, will center on the guidelines embodied in the text. It will
note stereotypes, points of view, connotations, patterns, metaphors, foreshadowing, and images
that guide your responses. It will question the accuracy of the information that is given and the
reliability of the various characters who provide that information. It will remark on those
instances in which only partial information is provided and where the reader knows more than
the characters know. Even points at which the reader is misled will be significant.
You may want to describe your general impression of the work or how your initial
impression of it changed to become your final judgment. You may even want to point out what
you have found that was recognizable from your own experiences, both personal and literary.
Note any incidents and characters that produced either validation of or challenge to your sense
of the world (noticeable because of your own comfort or discomfort on meeting them). It may be
helpful to profile the character with whom you most closely identified or the incident that gave
you the most pleasure or pain. If you found yourself remembering a personal experience that
made the text more credible or moving, you will want to include it here. If you supplied material
by imagining events that did not actually take place, you should mention any fantasies or
speculations that helped explain a character’s motivation or enhance a bit of action. If you made
adjustments in how you initially saw the text so that it was more in keeping with your usual way
of seeing things, you will have a direct means of discovering your part in making this text. Even
the expectations you had before reading it may be significant in explaining how you created the
work.
Finally, you should explain what resulted when the text and the reader came together.
You may want to note how the text invites responses by predisposing the reader to read in certain
ways, and you might examine how the images provided by the text are modified by the reader’s
personal experience. Although the text proffers certain norms or values, it is the reader who
decides whether or to what degree they should be accepted or rejected. The critic’s job is to raise
meaningful questions and to look for meaningful answers. In the process, a new reading of the
text may emerge, and the reader may be changed as well.

The Conclusion
The body of your analysis will have presented numerous observations backed up by even
more citations from the text. The conclusion, then, is the place to pull all the disparate pieces of
information together into generalizations about the text. It need not be lengthy, but it should state
the major effects the work has had on a reader and the causes that produced those effects. Finally,
the conclusion should include an evaluation of how effectively the text elicited the desired
responses, how deeply the reader became involved in constructing the text, and how the work
was enriched by the mutual participation of text and reader. In other words, how well did the
process work?

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 24
2| Literary Criticism

ALRIGHT! You are already equipped with the necessary tools for analysis. Are you excited now
to write your own Reader-Response literary critique? To make sure that you are 100% prepared, a sample
of Reader-Response analysis is given below. 😊

3.2.5 Model Student Analysis

A READER-RESPONSE ANALYSIS on
The Road not Taken by Robert Frost

The Road Not Taken is more than a poem

that is choosing between two roads. It is a
reflective poem that revolves around the idea
that life is full of choices which will define our
destinies. The fork in the path symbolizes a
person’s life and introduces readers to the
theme of a life journey.
Frost’s use of extended metaphor
grabbed my attention. I was drawn to the idea
that the diverging roads represent life. Frost’s
decision to take “the one less travelled by” is
definitely something to think about. But I did
not feel the need to judge his decision, because
any path would have made a difference in his
life. I valued his optimism and his positive
attitude towards his path, and this made me
engaged throughout the text. As for me, the
poem sends a powerful message of self-respect.
It inspired me to face the challenging realities of
life and to have the courage to choose the right
way, despite adversities. I came to a realization
that every teenager faces a fork in the road at
some point in their lives, and the only way to
look back on a decision with relief is to truly
believe in your choice. This may not be what
society thinks is right, or even what my friends
and family think is right. However, the most important opinion is what you think is right and taking the
path based on your own will is what makes all the difference.
The poem left me in a dilemma. I questioned myself. Are the two roads the same? I saw Frost,
struggling at the start because he declares that the path: “Grassy and wanted to wear” looks better as it
appeals more to him, however, changes his mind and acknowledges that both are equal: “Had worn really
about the same”. Frost knows one thing. He knows he cannot go back. He knows “How way leads on the way”
and that one road will lead to another and another until he ends up too far from the beginning. I was fully
in agreement with his stance because everyone has faced the reality of not being able to choose both
options. Ultimately, his purpose is to make readers think about making good life decisions and that once
a decision is made, we cannot go back. In reality, in any life decision, we leave thinking that we can always
come back, and try different routes in another time. What really happens is that our choices lead on to
other opportunities and therefore would be impossible to retrace our steps back to the beginning. In the
poem, Frost’s approach to his decision is positive; however, in the end, he expresses regret, as he knows
he cannot travel the other road. The untaken road represents ‘lost opportunities’ in his life, yet also who he
is today.

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 25
2| Literary Criticism
My understanding of the text helped me to learn important life lessons that are relevant in society.
He demonstrates self-respect, courage, faith, and confidence throughout the poem. I admired Frost’s
encouraging attitude towards his chosen path, regardless of losing opportunities. Personally, his path ‘the
less travelled’ sensibly symbolizes a way few have been which implies greater hardships. This aspect made
me think about leaders in society and how they motivate us to explore more of the world and go to places
we have never been. Here, Frost encouraged me to take my own lead into new directions. Additionally,
Frost raises a warning that once a decision is made, it cannot be undone. He hints at teenagers, to be
careful when making decisions and making the most of our time. However, wrong decisions can also help
individuals to make better decisions which are portrayed by Frost’s reflective tone throughout. This poem
left me with a strong and deeper understanding of life choices despite giving me the impression of an
ordinary person choosing between two roads. More deeply, Frost talks about meaningful morals and life
lessons that I should embrace.

******************************************************************************************************************

ASSESSMENT
Name: _________________________________________ Program, Year & Section: ______________
Professor: _______________________________________Date of Submission: __________________

I. COMPREHENSION CHECK
1. What makes Reader-Response theory distinct from other literary theories? (5 pts.)
2. Using a tabular presentation, enumerate the similarities and differences between
Formalism and Reader-Response Criticism. (10 points)
3. How do Reader-Response lens help you in understanding and appreciating literary
piece? (5 points)

II. APPLICATION: Using the Reader-Response lens, write a literary analysis on the
poem, “Three Friends” by Yoruba. Please be guided by the model literary analysis on
p. 24. (Take note: This count towards your Midterm Project)

Three Friends
by: YORUBA

I had three friends, CRITERIA:

One asked me to sleep on the mat, • Application of the theory - 20
• Organization and Coherence - 10
One asked me to sleep on the ground;
• Grammar & Convention - 10
One asked me to sleep on his breast • Originality - 10
I decided to sleep on his breast TOTAL 50
I saw myself carried on a river
I saw the King of the river and the King of the sun,
There in that country I saw palm trees.
So weighed down with fruit.
That the trees bent under the fruit,
And the fruit killed it.

C. M. D. Hamo-ay
 26
2| Literary Criticism
III. EVALUATION: After critiquing the poem, “Three Friends” by Yoruba, which between
the two theories (Formalism and Reader-Response) is more appropriate to the poem?
Justify your answer by citing evidence. (10 points)

HOW TO SEND OUTPUTS for PART II?

1. Encode your answers in a legal-size paper (specification: font: Arial 12, double-space)
2. After proofreading your paper, save it in PDF file. File name of the document must follow this
format: ENG 20 UNIT 3 OUTPUTS (your surname e.g. DELA CRUZ).
3. Email your final outputs @ manilyn.serpajuan@ssu.edu.ph
4. Deadline: Monday, March 29, 2021 @ 5:00PM

3.3 References

Dobie, A.B. (2012). Theory into Practice: An Introduction to Literary Criticism (Third Edition).
___Cengage Learning
Grades Fixer. (2021). Reading Response to the Road not Taken by Robert Frost.
___https://gradesfixer.com/free-essay-examples/reading-response-to-the-road-not-taken-by-
___robert-frost/
MegaPixl. (2021). Stock Photo: Diet Nutrition. Happy Man-Eating Apple.
___https://www.megapixl.com/diet-nutrition-happy-man-eating-apple-fruit-stock-photo-42040907
Minding the Campus, Inc. (2021). Stanley Fish Looks Postmodernly at Academic Freedom.
___https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2014/10/24/stanley-fish-looks-postmodernly-at-
___academic-freedom/
Pagliawan, D.L. (2017). Literary Criticism: A Resource, A Guide, A Reader. Texts and Visuals
Shmoop University Inc. (2021). Study Guide: Reader-Response Theory Basics.
___https://www.shmoop.com/study-guides/literary-schools-of-theory/reader-response-
___theory/basics
Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. (n.d.) Photo of Louise Rosenblatt.
___https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Rosenblatt

3.4 Acknowledgment
The images, tables, figures and information contained in this module were taken from the
references cited above.

C. M. D. Hamo-ay