As I was reading Literature as Exploration I couldn’t help but love so many sentences that Rosenblatt wrote with humor, tenacity, and great insight. But then I got to a point where it became apparent that I was struggling with reader response theory and my own traditional conceptions of reading.
At some point there’s bound to be a right and wrong interpretation of a text. Right? I keep thinking that because the idea of there being a "wrong" interpretation is bashed so often, I must be wrong in thinking that there can be a wrong. All interpretations are right. Still, my experience tells me that there will be people (me included) who will read something into a text that simply isn’t there. So my struggle was this: how do I balance reader response with the plainness of there being wrongness (if you’ll allow me to make up words)?
I remember my favorite English professor. He often criticized high school English teachers for their love of reader response and did not shy from saying, "ummm . . . no," to interpretations. However, I never felt like I had to read literature objectively or only look at it from historical or other perspectives. So what’s happening here? And as a teacher (eventually) what should so I do?
Then came the AHA! moment as I got to pages 71 and 72. Rosenblatt articulated my struggle, reaffirmed my gut feeling, and assured me that she’d tell me what to do. So here it is: "honest recognition of one’s own reaction is not in itself sufficient to ensure sound critical opinion. . . .For he can begin to achieve a sound approach to literature only when he reflects on his response to it, when he attempts to understand what in the work and in himself produced that reaction, and when he thoughtfully goes on to modify, reject, or accept it." (72)
Getting students to interact personally with the text is only step one. I didn’t see that. I saw black and white. I love stepping into the gray. What a wonderful sensation!
Okay, so I have not finished the book yet, but I I’m absolutely loving it so far. The only complaint I have is her use of the word "trashy" to describe magazines and comic books. Geez, what's with all these open-minded writers being so snotty?
In all efforts to rid English classrooms of summaries, I have never heard someone explain it so well:
"Someone else can read the newspaper or a scientific work for us and summarize it acceptably.
No one, however, can read a poem for us."(33).
That’s all there is to it. Although I recognize that science can be just as available to subjectivity (as Applebee described in his book), the essence of a poem cannot be captured in a summary the way a newspaper article can.
It seems I’m going backwards in the book. In the first chapter Rosenblatt focuses on psychology and characters. The question arises, "What are the basic human traits that persist despite social and cultural changes?" (12). My immediate thought was what a wonderful "conversation" on which to base a series of readings. It could incorporate classic and contemporary works, and, in my opinion, it is a question worth asking.
Alright, back to reading. I have a long way to go . . .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
my experience tells me that there will be people (me included) who will read something into a text that simply isn’t there.
I felt so paranoid when I wrote my reflection to this book... wanting to interpret but stay true to the text. As Rosenblatt puts it, in our interpretation we have a "responsiblity to the text itself" (p. 108). I couldn't respond without going checking back with the book right next me. She got me there - no shortcuts on her homework!
"Getting students to interact personally with the text is only step one."
Like you, this comment was an eye-opener for me. It seems as if there are so many schools of thought on how to teach a piece of text. Personally, I have always been drawn to discuss my personal connections and listen to others, discussing varying thoughts and opinions. I notice that many teachers seem to skip over this part, only looking at text critically, or more often...focusing in on lower-level testable items, such as plot, characters etc.
I think there are many others that encourage connections, have the meaningful discussions, but don't continue the process, teaching students to relect on their opinions and "modify, reject, and accept" (72)them.
"Getting students to interact personally with the text is only step one. I didn’t see that. I saw black and white. I love stepping into the gray. What a wonderful sensation!"
I love how you expressed that, "the gray" being the true literary experience! I didn't have a teacher do that for me until I was in 8th grade and we were asked to read Margaret Mitchell's Gone With the Wind. Being in an all girls Catholic School, the idea of a woman stepping out of the "mold" was a perfect character to invest ourselves in. We were fighting the length of our kilts as Scarlett fought society's view of a woman place in the world. So fun!
It is not that there are not right or wrong answers; there are better interpretations. Ones that refer back to the text constantly to confirm our reactions. The interpretation is in the space between the reader and the text. Which I think Rosenblatt says in the next book. The poem is the space between the reader and the text that is evoked through the reading.
Post a Comment