Reflections on Fishean Reader-Response Theory
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Fish’s early position of Reader-Response theory is that the meaning of the text is the reader's experience of the text. But the meaning in the text is not the ultimate, final meaning for him. Fishean reader's response to the meaning of the text is rather close to the process of going back and forth among possible interpretations. Therefore, the final and ultimate meaning of the text is created by the reader’s participating in deciding the meaning of the text. Because Fish places high value on the reader's response to the text and his or her cognitive process, Fish strongly insists that the reader writes the text and that by doing so he makes the text disappear. Because the “intended” readers who accurately interpret the text will discover what the author intended, Fish radically argues that all the author's intention is the reader's response to the text. Thus, he contends that there is no meaning in the text and all the meaning is coming from the reader. However, Fish does not give the reader freedom unlimitedly in creating the meaning of the text. The reader's response can be controlled by interpretive communities. All the meaning is not from the text itself but from the interpretive grid that reader projects upon the text. In sum, Fish adjusts his early theory by introducing the notion of interpretive communities into the theory of the late Fish. Namely, what Fish says is that all meaning is coming from the reader does not mean that each individual reader makes up his or her own unique, absolutely original meanings for the texts. What the reader does, instead, is participate in various interpretive communities already out there. He or she shares paradigms for interpretation with others. Even if Fish gives the priority to the readers in writing the meaning of the text, he is ready to control the readers by regulator, that is, "the interpretive community" simultaneously. Here lies some unsolvable indeterminacy in Fishean Reader-Response theory.
Abstract
Fish’s early position of Reader-Response theory is that the meaning of the text is the reader's experience of the text. But the meaning in the text is not the ultimate, final meaning for him. Fishean reader's response to the meaning of the text is rather close to the process of going back and forth among possible interpretations. Therefore, the final and ultimate meaning of the text is created by the reader’s participating in deciding the meaning of the text. Because Fish places high value on the reader's response to the text and his or her cognitive process, Fish strongly insists that the reader writes the text and that by doing so he makes the text disappear. Because the “intended” readers who accurately interpret the text will discover what the author intended, Fish radically argues that all the author's intention is the reader's response to the text. Thus, he contends that there is no meaning in the text and all the meaning is coming from the reader. However, Fish does not give the reader freedom unlimitedly in creating the meaning of the text. The reader's response can be controlled by interpretive communities. All the meaning is not from the text itself but from the interpretive grid that reader projects upon the text. In sum, Fish adjusts his early theory by introducing the notion of interpretive communities into the theory of the late Fish. Namely, what Fish says is that all meaning is coming from the reader does not mean that each individual reader makes up his or her own unique, absolutely original meanings for the texts. What the reader does, instead, is participate in various interpretive communities already out there. He or she shares paradigms for interpretation with others. Even if Fish gives the priority to the readers in writing the meaning of the text, he is ready to control the readers by regulator, that is, "the interpretive community" simultaneously. Here lies some unsolvable indeterminacy in Fishean Reader-Response theory.
참고문헌 (11)
- Abrams, M. H, "A Glossary of Literary Terms" (1993), Harcourt Brace College Pub.
- Fish, Stanley, "Interpreting the Variorum, In The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism", pp.1974~1992 (2010), W. W. Norton & Company
- Fish, Stanley, "Is There a Text in This Class?: Authority of Interpretive Communities" (1980), Harvard University Press
- Fish, Stanley, "Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics", ~
- Tomkins, Jane P, "Reader-Response Criticism", pp.70~100 (1980), The Johns Hopkins University Press
- Freund, Elizabeth, "The Return of the Reader: Reader-Response Theory" (1987), Methuen
- Iser, Wolfgang, "The Reading Process: A Phenomenological Approach, In The Implied Reader", pp.274~294 (1974), The Johns Hopkins University Press
- Keitel, Evelyn, "Interpretive Community, In A Dictionary of Cultural and Critical Theory", pp.348~ (2010), Wiley-Blackwell
- Spikes, Michael, "Handout for the English Class of Literary Theory", (CRN-62424)at the Arkansas State University in the Fall Semester, ~ (2011)
- Spikes, Michael, "Understanding Contemporary Literary Theory" (2003), University of South Press
- Tomkins, Jane P, "Reader-Response Criticism" (1980), The Johns Hopkins University Press