Reader-Response Criticism and The Scarlet Letter

Murfin, Ross C.

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-12934-8_5

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reader-response criticism views readers’ reactions to literature as vital to interpreting the meaning of the text. Murfin suggests that it ‘focuses on what texts do to - or in - the mind of the reader, rather than regarding a text as something with properties exclusively its own’ (1991, p.253). Furthermore, Tucker has argued that this approach involves students in ‘an active, not passive, encounter with the literature…[and] validates them as critical readers who are capable of determining meaning in texts’ (2000, p.199).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One problem I find with Seranis’ work and that of reader-response theorists more generally is their arguments are predicated on the presumption that the students will indeed have a personal reaction once presented with a text. Muir suggests that ‘most ancient literature does not awaken an immediate response in pupils…there are barriers of remoteness, sophistication [and] means of expression’ (1974, p.515). I have found that my A-level students needed a catalyst of provocation beyond the text in order to be able to identify and articulate their responses.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using classical reception to develop students’ engagement with classical literature in translation

Forde¹

2019

J. of Class. Teach.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While observing A-level students at my PP2 school, I noticed that their responses to classical texts largely consisted of the identification of stylistic tropes. The students could identify a text's stylistic features but they struggled to articulate and develop their own personal reactions to the text. They had been well-trained in this sort of ‘feature-spotting’ and therefore their reading experience was narrowly mechanical rather than genuinely exploratory. Every passage they encountered was put through the same analytical process with the unsurprising result that every classical author ended up sounding much the same. This seemed to me to be fundamentally passive way of engaging with literature. I was struck by Muir's contention that ‘the pupil should not be a passive recipient in the study of literature’ (!974, p.515). Hence, I wanted to devise a teaching strategy that would enable my students to be more active in the formulation of a personal response to the text.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%