Comparing and Contrasting Critical Theories: The Emphasis on Text vs. the Emphasis on Reader

ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS:

Develop an essay that compares/contrasts two of these critical theories. The theories should have different focuses (e.g. a critical theory that emphasizes text, and a theory that emphasizes the reader.) Voice is typically in the third person and is an honest representation of what you learn.
In this essay, be sure to explain what the two different focuses are. Then explain what the particular theories are that you will be discussing. Be sure to mention at least one major author that contributed to the development of that theory. Finally, draw a direct comparison between these two theories. How do they differ from each other? How do these theories affect our interpretation of a text?
NOTE: You do not have to argue which theory is more valid than the other. This essay should focus more on presenting the facts regarding these two theories, discussing how they differ from each other, and how they would affect the reading of a text.
The essay should be five full pages in length (minimum). You must use at least 3 sources, and you must also have a “Works Cited” page. The entire paper and Works Cited page must be adequately and appropriately documented in the MLA style as stated on the “guidelines” page.
The essay should also have a creative title centered right below the heading and right above the text of the essay.

HOW TO WORK ON THIS ASSIGNMENT (EXAMPLE ESSAY / DRAFT)

A wide range of perspectives on the interpretation of literature is offered by the broad and multifaceted area of critical theory. Two of these critical theories, offering distinctive perspectives on the interpretation of literature, center on either the text or the reader. This essay will compare and contrast two critical theories that place particular emphasis on the reader or the text and how these factors affect how we comprehend and interpret literary works.

New Criticism, a theory that stresses the text, first appeared in America in the 1930s. To determine the meaning of the work, it relies on the inherent elements of the text, such as structure, shape, language, and symbolism. The premise of New Criticism is that a literary work is an autonomous, self-contained entity, and its meaning is independent of the author’s intentions or the historical setting. Cleanth Brooks is a key player in this idea. He claimed that books are “verbal constructs” with inherent coherence and logic that the reader may reach through close reading.

Reader-response theory, on the other hand, places a strong emphasis on the reader’s role in the interpretation of a text. This theory, which first surfaced in the 1960s and 1970s, contends that the reader constructs the meaning of the text rather than the author having a fixed or predetermined interpretation. According to reader-response theory, the reader’s experiences, values, and beliefs are brought to the reading process and have an impact on how they understand the text. Wolfgang Iser, who asserted that the meaning of the text is not inherent but is instead formed through the interaction between the text and the reader, is one of the key people linked with this theory.

Reader-response theory and New Criticism are distinct in several respects. First of all, reader-response theory concentrates on the reader’s perception of the text, whereas New Criticism concentrates on the text itself. The employment of literary devices in the text, such as form, structure, and language, and how they contribute to the overall meaning of the work, is highlighted by new criticism. The reader’s subjective reaction to the text and how their experiences, values, and beliefs influence their interpretation are highlighted by the reader-response theory, in contrast.

Second, while reader-response theory stresses the environment in which the text is read, New Criticism emphasizes the text as autonomous and self-contained. Regardless of the historical, social, or cultural context in which it was written, according to New Criticism, the meaning of the text can be found by carefully reading it. The reader-response theory contends, in contrast, that the reader’s context—such as their cultural background, social standing, and historical location—shapes the meaning of the text.

Finally, there are differences between reader-response theory and new criticism in how they view the author’s function. While reader-response theory contends that the author’s aim may be one of many elements influencing the reader’s interpretation, New Criticism holds that the author’s intention is irrelevant to how the text is understood. While reader-response theory stresses the reader’s active engagement in the interpretation process, New Criticism places a greater emphasis on the text’s independence.

In conclusion, reader-response theory and New Criticism offer various viewpoints on how to understand literary works. The reader-response theory emphasizes the involvement of the reader and their surroundings in the interpretation process, whereas New Criticism emphasizes the intrinsic features and autonomy of the text. Both theories have inherent advantages and disadvantages, and neither by itself can fully explain a text. However, readers can better comprehend how literature can be interpreted by opposing and comparing these two critical approaches.

ORDER A SIMILAR PAPER NOW