Literary theories

The following section presents and discusses two main branches of literary theory. These are text-oriented theory and reader-oriented theory, with their basis in New Critical theory and Reader-response theory, respectively; they both have implications for the work on literary texts in the EFL classroom even though and maybe because they have different

characteristics.

2.4.1 Text-oriented theory: New Criticism

A central idea in text-oriented theory or New Criticism is that the text is autonomous, that it has a value in itself and is independent. As tried shown in the following section, all elements that can take the focus away from the text itself and its signs must be left out of the reading.

This could for example be information about the author or the personal feelings and opinions of the reader.

New Criticism as a literary theory focuses on the internal characteristics of the text itself. This theory describes a specific way of approaching and interpreting a text by performing a close reading revolving around the formal aspects of the text, directly contributed to its meaning.

Traditionally, American and British⁷ literary studies have had this focus, and furthermore, literature is in the Anglo-American tradition thought to be of great importance because in poems, plays and novels one can find ‘the best that has been thought and said’ (Matthew

7 In the United Kingdom this literary theory and its movement is referred to as ‘Practical criticism’ (Bertens

2001: 15, 27)

16 Arnold, cited in Bertens 2001: 27). Moreover, this form of literary criticism sees the

individual (the reader, the pupil) as fundamentally free in technical terms, and not determined and defined by social and economic circumstances. “We create ourselves, and our destiny, through the choices we make” (Bertens 2001: 27) and in a close study of a text, we must choose to set external and emotional influences aside in order to detect the text’s true meaning, according to this theory or literary criticism. The close examination of the connections between idea and form is of uttermost importance in a New Critical or text oriented approach to a given text. The process of such an exhaustive textual scrutiny, as implied here, is most common applied to poetry, but also to other genres such as the short story and (excerpts of) novels, in order to investigate the text’s themes, motifs, composition and other characteristics. When applying this theory to a poem for example, a method can be to investigate the structures such as meter and rhyme, but also themes, imagery, allegory and metaphor. The outcome of the close reading will serve to support the structure of meaning within the poem. The aim of the New Critical close analysis is to dismantle an accurate hierarchical structure of significance or meaning, and to guide the reader towards a certain reading of the text.

2.4.2 Reader-response theory

In reader-response theory or ‘reception theory’ the reader and his or her response is the focus of attention, in contrast to New Criticism and its text-oriented focus. Two important names in reader-response theory are Louise Rosenblatt (1978), Wolfgang Iser (1978) and Stanley Fish (1980a). Iser represents the idea that meaning occurs in an inter-play between the reader and the text, while Fish maintains the idea that the reader is the one who brings meaning into the text. There is no text without a reader; it is non-existing until the reader encounters it (Fish 1980a).

Iser represents a branch in reader response theory called reception theory (1978). He made a division between effect and reception. From the viewpoint of the text, it is the text’s potential which is released through the reading (effect), but from the side of the reader it is the text being realized through the reading (reception) (Iser 1978: 8). According to Iser, the process of reading is a dynamic process – an interaction between reader and text. Continuing, he found that as readers, we have an urge to find connections in order to understand and seek meaning.

17 Even in a meaningless construction of words,⁸ we will try to find meaning, and even end up finding some.

Texts will likewise challenge the reader by not explicitly giving all information, Iser claims.

The uncertainties of the text and the degree to which they occur will have impact on the process of reading and interpretation. The way the text challenges the reader will then form the basis of the reader’s understanding and conception of it.

If everything in the text is explained in detail, the reading will most probably become boring to most readers, as the reading of literature is much more than just decoding words. The act of reading literature is additionally both relaxation and de-connection from reality, where the active contribution of the reader in terms of interpretation and search for cues and answers is an important ingredient. The journey into the text is for many readers the whole point of reading it. Additionally Iser focuses on the reader’s sociocultural background, personality, interests and other important factors, with impact on the reading. Owing to this, no reading of any given text will ever be identical with any other, not even the ones carried out by the same reader (Iser 1978).

Louise Michelle Rosenblatt⁹ quite early launched the idea that the act of reading consisted of an inter-play between reader and text. In 1938, she published her book Literature as

Exploration (Rosenblatt 2005) where she presented this idea, and where she launched the term “transactional theory”, exploring the personal, cultural and social contexts of reading.

She later elaborates on this theory in The Reader, the Text, the Poem (1978), where she also explains “efferent” and “aesthetic” reading. These terms will be returned to in section 2.5.2 and 2.5.3.

The teacher of literature will be the first to admit that he inevitably deals with the experiences of human beings in their diverse personal and social relations. The very nature of literature, he will point out enforces this. Is not the substance of literature everything that human beings have thought or felt or created? […] No one else can read a literary work for us. The benefits of literature can emerge only from creative activity on the part of the reader himself (Rosenblatt 2005: 25-30).

8 In the preface to The act of reading Iser employs an example from Noam Chomsky: “Colorless green ideas sleep furiously” as an example of such a ‘meaningless phrase’ which still has been interpreted in meaningful ways

9 Both Iser and Rosenblatt acknowledge the active role of the reader in the reading event. Rosenblatt adopted

Dewey’s term “transaction” to explain the reciprocal relationship between reader and text (Pantaleo, S. (1995) in Reading Horizons, volume 36, #1)

18 Rosenblatt underlines the value of reading as a means to stimulate the reader’s feelings and involvement, furthermore to achieve insight, to strengthen values and to change perspectives.

Rosenblatt employs the term “transaction” in an attempt to describe the act of reading as a dynamic process – a play between reader and text. All readers – she says – are different due to previous reading experience, socio-cultural background and personal experience. The reader must be ‘touched’ by the text to be able to understand a literary work. With this scope in mind, Rosenblatt was sceptical towards the idea of reading literature as “transmitting knowledge” (Rosenblatt 2005). The understanding, she claims, will be something else if the pupil can encounter the text and express her experiences with the text.

The other branch of reader response theory is constructivism – where the reader plays the most prominent part and is the one in focus. Stanley Fish is a leading figure in this group of reader response theorists. Is there a text in this class? (1980a) is considered as his major work and contribution to reader-response theory. What Fish says is that the reader should ask herself not what the text means, but what it does. Different readers will come up with

different experiences, - even though some aspects of every text may be interpreted similarly.

Fish employs the term “informed reader”, which is not a real reader in the sense of a pupil of flesh and blood, but rather an idealized or ‘imagined’ reader with knowledge about language, genres, culture etc. The informed reader is similar to an experienced reader, but even the most experienced readers, Fish claims, can interpret a given text differently because of personal taste, personality and/or different expectations (Fish 1980a). Two readings of the same text carried out by the very same reader can never be identical, this is impossible according to Fish. In contrast to Iser, Fish does not want the reader to search for meaning in the text, but rather to slow down the pace and ask herself: What does the text and the words do (with me)?

2.4.3 Implications for the EFL classroom: text-oriented and reader-oriented approaches With the classroom in mind, there can be many advantages of employing text-oriented approaches when reading and working with literary texts. Learners may encounter unfamiliar texts that are distant in terms of time, place and situation, and without having any specific knowledge about the author. The pupils can investigate the text, and this can be of interest and have a value in itself. A close examination of the text can bring forth “hidden” meanings for the inexperienced reader, revealing the beauty and value of the literary work. Furthermore, it can provide learners with insight into useful techniques by following a given recipe,

19 something that can be very useful for the inexperienced learner. Additionally, it can become a part of an awareness rising process, as it can open up for a more objective perspective on the text.

Nevertheless, with focus solely on the formal aspects of the literary text, such as describing its structure, its meter and rhyme and/or conveying meaning of imagery, the study of these can become an end in itself, denying the learner to discover and explore the text on a personal level. Many sets of textbook tasks and activities related to the interpretation of literary texts therefore include some activities with a text-oriented approach (describing the setting, the plot, the characters, the imagery) that are often followed by more open and reader-oriented tasks (relating the text to the pupil’s experiences, being one of the characters). The research of EFL textbooks conducted by Fjellestad (2012) supports this stance. The reason why both teachers and textbook authors of EFL often take on a text-oriented approach may be due to assessment and control (“checking answers”), and as a way of preparing the pupils for tests and exams. Rosenblatt takes a critical stand against this approach to literature because it does not help the pupil to reflect critically on her own response, she claims. In the worst case it can make the pupils learn to ignore or distrust their own responses to literature (Rosenblatt 1978, 2005). In accordance with the principles of this approach, the teacher can guide the pupils to familiarize themselves with the skills related to close reading in combination with activities and instruction related to imagery, symbols, composition et cetera. A relevant aspect that must not be ignored, is the value of learning about literature as a genre and being able to call the different devices by name. This is a positive side effect of working with literature in accordance with the text-oriented approach, which also can support and enrich this type of work in accordance with other approaches as well. However, one can argue that according to this approach the production of language is the goal and the end of the exercise of the literary text, that the process stops with ‘the answers found’.

Since the reader-oriented approach supports activities that encourage the pupils to become involved with the text and to draw on their personal experience, it can open up for

communication in a broad sense and on many levels in the EFL classroom. On the

background of the pupil’s former experiences and her emotions and feelings, she can enter the text and investigate it. Through a ‘personalization’ of the learning experience, the learner is encouraged to communicate a message, to ask questions and it will allow the pupils to read the literary texts aesthetically (2.6.2.). Furthermore, this approach consequently focuses on the

20 individual learner’s response to the literary text; the reader is the most important contributor to the meaning that emerges from the reading process.

Rosenblatt (1978) took a critical stand against a type of teaching literature where the pupils become a passive audience with the teacher interpreting it all for or to them. Rosenblatt states:

“As long as an artificial and pedantic notion of literary culture persists, students will continue in their indifference to the great work of the past and present” (Rosenblatt 1978: 65). In short:

Rosenblatt strives for a teaching of literature with space for the personal experiences of the readers. This requires communication between reader and text. She is also concerned with the literary dialogue, talking about the experiences with the reading of the literary text with others. Her ideas concerning the literary dialogue are still highly relevant and are both shared by and elaborated on by many, such as Laila Aase (2005), and in the context of English didactics, Fenner (2001). The latter argues that when we have a conversation about a (literary) text we are presented with the possibility to stop up and have a second look at our own

interpretation of it. She further explains how new conditions occur which allow us to

reconsider or take a closer look at our own reading/interpreting processes, as well as the ones of others.

Rødnes (2014) presents an overview of research on the use of literature based in the Scandinavian L1 classroom. The studies referred to show that learners often appreciate

reader-oriented approaches to literary texts because they relate closely to their development of identity. By employing this approach, the learners can use the texts to understand something about themselves and others. In this respect, classroom conversations about literature can become personal and have a foundation in the learners’ own experiences. A drawback with such conversations is that they can become quite limited, because they to a very small extent reach beyond the comfort zone of the participants (Rødnes 2014: 7). However, the same studies indicate that the learners find this approach to literature motivating. Finding ways to link a personal and experience-based reading with more analytical and text-oriented

approaches might be necessary to help the learners to develop their textual competence, and this is one of her concluding remarks. This study aims to provide insight into approaches employed in FL classrooms, and in that matter, it may be possible to shed some light on whether this confirms or contradicts Rødnes’ findings from a L1 setting.