Monday, October 14, 2013

McCormick - Blog 2


For your assigned theory please discuss the following:  How would you define the theory/model? What are the main components? How does it differ from the other 2? Who are the key players?

Expressivism!

Based on my understanding of Chapter 2, the Expressivists are the primary proponents of “reader-response” in which “readers create their own ‘person’ or ‘subjective’ meanings from the texts they read” (30). Some expressivists take this to the point of disagreeing with any conception of a “reading program” that includes readers and schema and questions for understanding a text. Rather, a student should read stories and react to them in the “close reading” assignment.

A pro, of course, is the potential democratization of reading, because any reader can have a deep, heart-felt response literature.  On the other hand, a problem with expressivism that McCormick points out is that a lot of the “reader response” pedagogy in fact holds to a rather objectivist point of view, for “only readers with an educatedsensibility were regarded as being able to apprehend that meaning of a text from the language itself” (34) – a reader had to be trained to do correct close reading.

Furthermore, the Brits didn’t particularly like American reader-response pedagogies because it removes the text from any social or cultural context, placing the individual’s experience and interpretation above all else. This is the same problem the Brits likely have with Americans in general, that we value the individual above all historical perspective or social interest.

Huckleberry Finn example: Another concern with expressivism is that asking students to give true, honest reactions to texts ignores the fact that a classroom is still a specific context for reading, and students are certainly aware of its constraints—no truly honest reaction is likely to be volunteered. Similarly, when students are told simply to be introspective for their response rather than learning any historical, social or cultural contexts for the text (or for themselves), how many potential readings of a text are ignored, and to what end?

In the end, McCormick sees 3 drawbacks to expressivism:
1.    no theory of the text, reader is sole participant
2.    does not investigate social conditions/context
3.    does not carry over to non-literary texts (can’t very well to reader response to an anatomy book)


No comments:

Post a Comment