www.researchvistas.

com

ISSN2277310X

Using Reader-Response Theory in the Classroom Activities

--Faiz Ahmed Saleh AL-Gobaei Ph.D. Scholar School of Lang. Lit. & Cult. Studies S.R.T.M. University Nanded, (M.S) Abstract: Reader-Response Theory lays full stress on the idea that reader actively contributes something to the meaning of the text. This theory opposes the former theories perspectives of a literary text and transfers the task of the meaning of the text to the reader. The literary work is more than the text, for the text only exists on life when it is realized (read). The convergence, the union, of text and reader brings the literary work into existence. The reader is an active agent in the meaning creation for the text is full of gaps that the reader must fill in by a creative act. So, this theory is a means of getting students to interpret, to evaluate and to interact with literature. Therefore, the role of the teacher is to inform the students that they can reach the meaning of the text without having to depend on other information outside the text; understanding the meaning of the text lies behind their reading of the text only. This motive will create curiosity among students and help in building the students confidence as readers, as well as helps them understand the benefits of working on their own.

Keywords: Reader Response Theory, reader, text, gaps, activity, interpretation, discussion. Many different hues can set up the critical evaluation of a literary text. Theories, such as Psychoanalytical Theory focuses on the author and his life as decisive element in understanding the meaning of the text. Other theories, such as Formalist Theory, admire the form of a literary text and spotlight on the use of language for the literariness of a text lies beyond its autonomous nature. Like formalism, New Criticism asserts the importance of the literary text as an autonomous entity that a literary text, for the sake of its objectivity, should be tackled in an atmosphere away from its author or his society. However, in 1970s, a new hue of criticism, known as Reader-Response Theory, came into existence to oppose the former theories perspectives of a literary text and transfer the task of understanding the meaning of the text to the reader. The foundational concept of Reader-Response Theory has its

philosophical origins in the doctrine known as phenomenology. It has been suggested that the individual human mind is the center and the origin of all meaning. Thus, for Roman Ingarden, (1893-1970) understanding a literary text

23 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012

www.researchvistas.com

ISSN2277310X

depends on the reader for the text is not autonomous in the meaning and it is not concrete. It has no meaning, if it is not read. A literary text is a combination of authors consciousness and readers consciousness. The meaning of a literary text does not exist, if it is only in a book without anybody reads it. All books are considered as dead objects until someone reads them. The book needs the readers consciousness to exist. (Raman Selden, 1985) Fishs essay Interpreting the Variorum (1976) introduced his concept of interpretive communities; he attempts to situate the reading process in a broader institutional context. He points out that the responsibility for judgment and interpretation is transferred from the text to its readers. For Jauss, reading a text evokes for the reader the horizon of expectations which the reader tries to connect them with earlier texts. This horizon differs from generation to another. (Habib,M. A. R. 2008) In The Implied Reader, Iser outlines his approach in a section of this book entitled The Reading Process: A Phenomenological Approach. Iser begins by pointing out that one must take into account not only the actual text but also the actions involved in responding to that text. He describes how interaction between the text and the reader can occur, and focuses on the literary/narrative text. Iser states that a piece of literary work consists of two poles, in equal measure; one is the artistic pole and the other is the esthetic, the author and the reader respectively. Therefore, the production of meaning results, when these poles come to interaction. Iser asserts that it is the text that determines the meaning. However, he suggests that the text is full of gaps which motivate the reader to construct meaning. He also mentions Sterners conception of a literary text: It is something like an arena in which reader and author participate in a game of the imagination. If the reader was given the whole story, and there were nothing left for him to do, then his imagination would never

24 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012

www.researchvistas.com

ISSN2277310X

enter the field, the result would be the boredom which inevitably arises when everything is laid out cut and dried before us. A literary text must therefore be conceived in such a way that it will engage the reader's imagination in the task of working things out for himself, for reading is only a pleasure when it is active and creative. (Iser, 1972) Accordingly, it is the gaps that act as the main motivation for the interaction between text and reader. In reading a literary test, the reader will come across numerous gaps in the dialogue. These gaps denote that something is missing, something that has been concealed or implicitly made. Thus, this spurs and arouses the curiosity of the reader to make connections and implications. Then the outcome of what has been told and what has been speculated will complete and enable the production of meaning. The process of reconstructing the world of a literary text arises when the reader relates what has been written in the text to what he has in his consciousness. The reader, indeed, will reconstruct the world of the literary text in his imagination. Iser writes: This world, however, does not pass before the reader's eyes like a film. The sentences are 'component parts' insofar as they make statements, claims, or observations, or convey information, and so establish various perspectives in the text. (Iser, 1972) A reader, while reading a literary text, tries to relate a sentence to the next sentence. However, in every literary text there are always gaps between sentences. Through the process of reading, a reader is able to fill the gaps, creating the world in his/her imagination. Furthermore, when the reader re-reads the text, his/her interpretation of the same text might be different. This happens merely because the reader has already experienced the world in the literary text and it will affect his/her expectation in the second reading. More to the point, the readers

25 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012

www.researchvistas.com

ISSN2277310X

interpretation will be different because a text has potential multiplicity of interpretation. Iser says: Thus, the reader, in establishing these interrelations between past, present and future, actually causes the text to reveal its potential multiplicity of connections. These connections are the product of the reader's mind working on the raw material of the text, though they are not the text itselffor this consists just of sentences, statements, information, etc. (Iser, 1972) The process of perception of the meaning of a literary text will lead the reader to form gestalt of the text but gestalt is not the true meaning of the literary text. Gestalt is the result of the colliding of readers mind and the literary text. Gestalt is not the true meaning of the text; at best it is a configurative meaning. (Iser, 1972) Thus, gestalt can be identified as the complete visualized picture that lacks some elements. Gestalt is the complete frame that a reader constructed after reading a text; still this frame lacks some parts of its minor components. In rereading the text, the reader will visualize the text differently. Thus, text escapes reading. The meaning of a text is inexhaustible. In brief, any text has no existence until it is read. Literature depends on being read in a certain way in order to be effective and successful. Reader completes its meaning by reading it. The reader is an active agent in the meaning creation. Though the text controls the reader's response, there are nevertheless gaps that the reader must fill in by a creative act.

The Advantage of Reader-Response Theory in the Classroom

Critics and theorists create theories to account for how the literary text works. They do not discuss the role of a literary theory in classroom activities. Nevertheless, investigating Reader-Response Theory, their contributions serve to

26 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012

www.researchvistas.com

ISSN2277310X

the benefit of the students. For example, Iser emphasizes that a text can produce a response in case it is read; otherwise it is impossible to describe a text without reading. First, it is a theory of instruction to the reading. Then it gives the readers the freedom to interpret, to evaluate and to interact with the literary text. Reader-Response Theory can generally be a means of getting students to interpret, to evaluate and to interact with literature. Consequently, the role of the teacher is to inform the students that they can reach the meaning of the text without having to depend on other information outside the text. Understanding the meaning of the text lies behind their reading of the text only. This aims at giving students a purpose to read a literary text and helps students to invest their background knowledge in interpretation. By this the students will be involved in the process of learning. Aebersold and Field discuss the relations between the text and the reader. They emphasize that the more invested and involved students are in their learning, the more responsibility they will take for their learning. (Aebersold and Field, 1997) Reader-Response Theory invests the readers background knowledge in developing classroom activities, such as the group discussion. Students, of course, have different cultural backgrounds, skills and past experiences. This will give the classroom activities the clue of expressing perspectives. Moreover, using background knowledge may be the best way to obtain response, as it enhances the students ability to produce genuine response. This also generates debates among students, develops classroom activities, especially group discussion and promotes improvement of reading skills. Thus, students understand new concepts and get a scaffold for next reading. Using Reader-Response Theory in teaching English as a second/foreign language, teacher reduces anxiety and leads students to language development and culture adaptation of the English literary text. The students will be able to discuss their own interpretation and stories, for they do not feel stressed or pressured. This will strengthen their confidence. When students are asked to read

27 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012

www.researchvistas.com

ISSN2277310X

and report on their own response, they set themselves to goals, understanding the text and making sense out of it. This instruction helps in building the students confidence as readers, as well as helps them understand the benefits of working on their own. Furthermore, using Reader-Response Theory in classroom, the students will improve their critical analysis. The role of the teacher will be as a guide introducing questions that help in developing and sharpening the students critical senses. While teaching Passage to India, for instance, students when asked to think and speculate about what might have happened to Adela Quested in the cave, the result was of different views. Many comments and perspectives made by the group of readers discussing the particular chapter to fill this gap. Lars Gyllensten explains that it is the readers condition that plays a great role in understanding a literary text; for the interpretation or conception of a text resembles the interpretation or conception of the world in which we live in. (Sture, 1989) On one hand, the whole group endorsed that something happened in the cave. On the other hand, the students interpretation resulted in contrasting ways due to the multiplicity of their background. The outcome showed the students ability to observe and adopt a construction of the text-world of their own. Moreover, the discussion went on to discuss which perspective might be the true one. That is to say, the discussion created a desire to arrive at meaning. This showed a development of performance among students: confidently discussing their views: negotiating the differences, elucidating the ambiguity and willing to accept or change views. Here, the students furthered the discussion and came to the conclusion that this is the gap Iser talks about, and one couldnt impose his/her own on the students. Moreover, involving oneself in such activity, s/he will extend his/her realization of the text; for the students made sense of the text through different codes for understanding it. This is what Jauss calls a horizon of expectations. Since this horizon varies

28 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012

www.researchvistas.com

ISSN2277310X

with time, the literary text generates different "views" at different times. Each new generation and each new group of readers in a new setting brings different codes to a literary work for understanding it. In short, using Reader-Response Theory in classroom, the learners are in charge of their own learning. The goal of using Reader-Response Theory in classroom aims at developing independent readers of literature. References: Aebersold, J. A. and Field, M. L. (1997). From Reader to Reading Teacher: Issues and Strategies for Second language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge UP. Habib, M. A. R. (2008). A History of Literary Criticism and Theory: From Plato to the Present. Blackwell Publishing. EBook, www.blackwellpublishing.com. Iser, W. (1974). The Implied Reader: Patterns of Communication in Prose Fiction from Bunyan to Beckett. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Raman Selden (1985). A Readers Guide to Contemporary Literart Theory, University Press of Kentucky. Sture, A. (1989). Possible Worlds in Humanities, Arts and Sciences (Ed.) Volume 14 of Research in Text Theory. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Fish, S. (1980). Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities, Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.

29 Vol.1. Issue 06 Nov.-Dec., 2012