Reader Response Theory  

Outline 

• ·          Introduction
• ·        Job of Reader Response Critic
• ·        Views of different theorist
• ·        Types of reader
• ·        Purpose of Reader Response theory
• ·        Conclusion 

Reader response theory focuses primarily on the reader and their relationship to the text to create or produce meaning. It became known in 1960. It was a reaction to existing theories such as formalism and new criticism. Before thinkers understand that only the text matters, they ignore the reader and the historical context. However, gradually the attention shifts from the text to the reader. According to Reader Response Theory, text does not have a clear meaning, it depends on individual interpretations. "Only text and text," they says, are important. Readers are not just consumers, they are producers and they are actively building meaning. The RR theory asserts that there is no point in reading a reader's experience or text before reading it. The meaning of the text varies from reader to reader and from time to time. For example, the meaning of the text is different for 1800's readers than for the 20th century reader. This differs from other theories such as post structuralism and semiotics, which attribute the construction of meaning to the ultimate authority of textual features. The French poststructuralist wrote a book, Death of the Author, in which he says that the author has nothing to do with the text after he has written something. Now it is up to the readers to decide what they mean by that.

The purpose of the reader response critic is to examine the breadth and variety of reader reactions and to analyze the differences that the reader encounters. In addition, they examine how "interpretative communities" signify both personal responses and culturally conditioned (inherited) responses. For example, different readers from different geographical locations at different times interpret Shakespeare’s text differently. Criticism of reader reactions applies to psychologists experimenting to find the principles of reaction and to psychoanalytic for those who want to study individual reactions. Therefore, this theory has to do with these two areas. 

The theory is popular in both United States and Germany; its main theorists include Stanley Fish, Norman Holland, David Bleich, Wolfgang Iser, Hans Robert Jauss, Wayne Booth, Louis Michelle, Rosenblatt and Roland Barthes. Louise Michelle Rosenblatt (1904-2005) says the reader's tendency. There are many characters in each story and they say that in the story we try to connect with one character or another as if we were in that place and it happened to us once. Because of the way we look at the world and how we have passed, we have to relate to these characters. Our problems and needs will allow us to focus on the roles and situations through which we can find satisfaction. 

Stanley Fish (1938-82 years old) came up with the idea of interpretive community, saying that the text depends on each reader's social context, as each reader has their own thematic experiences in their community. Each reader from a different society will react differently to the text. Not everyone is proficient in the language, so some readers may be able to get more accurate meanings based on their linguistic competence. People from a given community speak a language and understand each other, allowing us to characterize a language system as they all share the same language. The path to the text will be the same since the people know the language in which they interpret it. Therefore, Fish do not call it very subjective. The default is that all languages ​​suit you according to your culture. Furthermore, Fish Theory states that the meaning of text does not go beyond the set of cultural assumptions. Text reading is culturally structured. For example: When Charles Dickens wrote, he put all of these things in context. Like child labor, industrialization and all that. Therefore, his writing is a cultural structure. This cultural context often includes, although not limited to, the author's intent. Fish argues that we interpret text individually because each of us is part of an interpretive community that provides us with a unique way of reading text. He says that if we want to understand who part of our interpreting class is, then we can know that. His points have been interpreted from the point of view of relativity, that words have no meaning. However, the fish actually meant that the reading of the text was culturally arranged.

Louis M. Rosenblatt, a critic of Transactional Reader Response, emphasized that both the reader and the text must work together to create meaning. They participate or share the transactional experience. The text serves as a stimulus for the reader to capture the various experiences, thoughts, and ideas of the past, reflected both in our everyday experiences and in past reading experiences. The reader brings their individual personality, their memories of past events, their present concerns, their specific physical condition, and their whole personality to the study of the text.

The German phenomenologist, a leading exponent of German reception theory and a member of the so-called Constance School, Iser was directly influenced by Roman Ingarden. He addressed two different types of implied and actual readers. The implied reader embodies all the predictions necessary to harness the effects of a literary work. Its roots are firmly embedded in the texture of the text. The implicit reader is the reader who creates the text for himself, and corresponds to a network of responsive structures that prepare us to read in certain ways. The implicit reader is redefined as a text element that acts as an ideal reader that requires a specific text structure. The implicit reader is the informed reader who can grasp the meaning, narrative and practical potential of the text. The actual reader, on the other hand, is the person who physically picks up and reads the text. It depends on texts with specific cultural and personal principles and prejudices. The reader's experience is influenced by his experiences. While reading, the real reader gets some mental pictures. However, images are inevitably colored by the reader's actual experience.

The process of reading is closely related to the thematic construction of the meaning of the texts in the reader's mind. Confusing active reader and active text creates meaning for the reader. Meaning is always avoided and one should refrain from clear and unambiguous interpretations. Therefore, much of the importance of the reading process stems from the very central role of the reader. Reader reaction perspectives provide a generally important perspective for reading texts in contemporary literary and cultural studies. As a critical point of view, the reader-centered critique is thus fully developed in view of the new specific terminology of recent statistics. Reader reaction theory can be categorized in a number of ways, including transactional, historical context, inspirational styles, and psychological, thematic, social, and textual perspectives. In this way, the method of reading can be further clarified when exploring the basic concepts of the receptionist approach. Accordingly, when analyzing the reading process, reference should always be made to the central role of the reader in the reading process and the importance of the reader for the construction of meaning.