READER-RESPONSE CRITICISM
The Role of the Author, Text, and Reader in Interpretation
Abstract
Reader-Response Criticism (RRC) examines how meaning is derived from texts, emphasizing the roles of the author, text, and reader in interpretation. Traditionally, RRC scholarship has focused on the interaction between text and reader, with minimal attention to the author’s role. This paper broadens the scope to include the author alongside the text and reader, offering a more comprehensive analysis of RRC in biblical interpretation. Using historical and contemporary RRC perspectives, this study categorizes interpretive approaches into conservative, moderate, and liberal, each with varying emphases on the author, text, and reader. The article analyzes key theories in conservative RRC, which prioritize the author’s intent, moderate RRC, which balances reader and text, and liberal RRC, which centers the reader’s interpretation. Findings reveal significant implications for understanding scriptural and literary texts, where the choice of RRC approach shapes interpretive outcomes and highlights potential conflicts between subjective and objective readings. This study contributes to the field by providing a structured framework for RRC, underscoring the complexity of meaning-making and advancing critical discourse on the interpretive process.
Downloads
References
Barthes, Ronald. “From Work to Text.” In Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism. Edited by Josue Harari, pp. 83–84. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979.
Barton, John. “Thinking about Reader-Response Criticism.” The ExpTim 113 (2002): 147–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/001452460211300502.
Derrida, Jacques. Of Grammatology. Translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976.
Derrida, Jacques. “Living On Border Lines.” In Deconstruction and Criticism, 83. London: Routledge and Kegan, 1979.
Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.
Fowler, Robert. “Who is ‘the Reader’ in Reader-Response Criticism?” Semeia 31 (1985): 5–19.
Frye, Northrop. “Literary Criticism.” In The Aims and Methods of Scholarship in Modern Languages and Literatures. Edited by James Thorpe, pp. 59. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1963.
Hirsch, Eric. Validity in Interpretation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1967.
Iser, Wolfgang. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980.
Lategan, Bernard. “Reader Response Theory.” The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, ed. David N. Freedman. Pp. 626–627. New York, NY: Doubleday, 1992.
McKnight, Edgar. “Reader-Response Criticism”. In To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticisms and their Application. Edited by. S. McKenzie and S. Haynes. Louisville/ London: Westminster John Knox, 1999.
Palmer, Richard. “Hermeneutics.” In Contemporary Philosophy. Edited by Guttorm Fløistad, 2:470. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1981.
Parry, Robin. “Reader-Response Criticism”. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. pp. 658–661. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005.
Poirier, John. “Some Detracting Considerations for Reader-Response Theory”. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 62, no.2 (2000): 250–254.
Ricoeur, Paul. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press, 1976.
Ricoeur, Paul. Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences. Edited and translated by John Thompson. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Schleiermacher, Friedrich. Hermeneutics: The Handwritten Manuscripts. In Friedrich Schleiermacher: Pioneer of Modern Theology. Edited by Keith Clements, pp. 167. London: Collins, 1987.
Steiner, George. “‘Critic’/‘Reader.’” New Literary History 10, no. 3 (1979):423–452. https://doi.org/10.2307/468921.
Thiselton, Anthony. New Horizons in Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992.
Vanhoozer, Kevin. Is There a Meaning in This Text? Grand Rapids, MI: Harper Collins, 1998.
Wimsatt, William, and Monroe Beardsley. “The Intentional Fallacy.” In The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry, pp. 3–4. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press, 1954.
Copyright (c) 2025 Fitzroy Willis
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
