Reader-Response Criticism + Others = Understanding
“A reader today seeking meaning in the way Harold Bloom outlines that process might note, of course, a fleeting resemblance between the upstairs chamber in Gilman…and Poe’s evocation of the dungeon chambers of Toledo; in fact, a credible argument might be made for reading ‘The Yellow Wallpaper’ as Gilman’s willful and purposeful misprision of ‘The Pit and the Pendulum.’”
- From Annette Kolodny’s “A Map for Rereading: Or Gender and the Interpretation of Literary Texts” in Donald Keesey’s Contexts for Criticism, page 197
The first thing I noticed about Kolodny’s work is the title; she refers to using gender as a way to assess the text. I was confused because this is supposed to be a chapter on Reader-Response theory, not on Mimetic criticism in the form of Feminist criticism. I kept thinking about this idea as I read, but when I got to the above quote it sort of clicked for me. I realized that this article was placed within this section in order to show how Reader-Response criticism must sometimes involve other schools of criticism. It seems to me that, at least in a case such as this one, another school is necessary in order for the argument to work. One cannot discuss or psychoanalyze the roles of men and women a reader could find in a work without using another form of criticism as well, such as Mimetic criticism as in the title or Intertextual criticism as in the above quote. I really enjoyed this article, not so much for the interpretation, but for its use of multiple schools of criticism in order to prove an argument based on Reader-Response criticism. It is really going to help a lot when I write my casebook essay.
3 Comments
Leave a comment
Recent Comments
Katie Vann on Reader-Response Criticism + Others = Understanding: I agree with Angela, Erica you
Angela Palumbo on Reader-Response Criticism + Others = Understanding: To be honest with you, Erica,
To be honest with you, Erica, I did not understand why we had to read this either. I didn't feel like it fit, but after reading this, it is becoming clearer. I did like the intertextuality of the text, especially because it was related to Poe.
It is still weird to me though how much the different styles overlap. I guess it takes more than one tool in a toolbelt to build most things (to use Dr. Jerz's little analogy badly).
I agree with Angela, Erica your blog helped to clear things up a little. For every form of criticism there are always overlapped, I think this one hit us in the face a little harder because we weren't sure how to fit it in at first. However, it seems like you made that connection quite easily. Thanks for sharing, you always blog something that helps me with my own reading!
I'm glad I was able to help you both this time, because the two of you are always helping me with your explanations!