As a Reader...

The Ideal Reader

Posted by  Stephanie De Los Santos  at Wednesday, January 28, 2015 9:20:58 PM CST

As a language arts teacher, I am consistently assuring my students that their thoughts and interpretations of a work matter.  Often I lead into discussions or assignments by reminding them that there are no wrong answers unless their response is unsupported.  In this way I continually oppose Brooks’ concept of the ‘ideal reader.’  Brooks describes the ideal reader as one who “instead of focusing on the varying spectrum of possible readings, he attempts to find a central point of reference from which he can focus upon the structure of the poem or novel.”  I certainly would not qualify as an ideal reader by this definition, though I understand the value of narrowing the focus or a reading to gain a different perspective.

The “anything goes” approach should certainly not be considered the only alternative to imagining the ideal reader.  Simply stated, all readings are not of equal value.  Some are based on sound logic, while others are more insightful or in-depth.  Those, for example who judge a work based on the sincerity of author are sincerelymisguided.  

Brooks makes one statement that stuck with me this week.  He said, [a literary work] “mirrors the past, it may influence the future.”  To me, the ideal reader and the critic both should bring this understand to a work.  How does the work reflect the past?  What insights can we gain? What new perspectives can we see? How will the work impact society, world culture(s), or the literary world? The ideal reader, then, is one who understands and values the varied lenses through which literature is viewed but is able to gaze through one lens at a time when appropriate.

If my understanding of Tyson is correct, New Criticism has replaced the biographical and historical criticisms.  This is a disservice to the reader.  While we may never be able to know the mind of the author, the intentions, true motivations, beliefs and ideals, we cannot and should not ignore the author, the time-period, or the audience for whom it was written.  Doing so only limits the depth of meaning that we gain from a text.