독자반응비평적 관점에서 본 <무정>

한승옥(Seung Ok Han) 한국현대소설학회 2009 현대소설연구 Vol.- No.42

This paper discusses the angle of reader-response criticism and finds the way to analyze Moo Jung corresponding to that view. Reader-response criticism has not been noticed enough compared with other criticisms by reason of its drawback, that it can be too subjective, in spite of its unlimited range of application and validity. However, no criticism can avoid reader-response criticism. The point is how to present it reasonably and provide analytic framework. The paper explores the possibility of reader-response criticism in four ways: transactional reader-response theory, affective stylistic, psychological reader-response theory, and social reader-response theory. Subjective reader-response theory is excluded because of its subjectivity. To examine how important the narrator`s function is in reader-response criticism, this paper also investigates positive and negative images of characters those are depicted by the narrator. Readers accumulate their own reading experiences by responding to events or characters described by the narrator, who is created by the author. Through these experiences, readers bring their reading experiences to completion, reflecting their desires.

Reflections on Fishean Reader-Response Theory

( Hee Sun Kim ) 한국영미문화학회 2012 영미문화 Vol.12 No.1

Fish`s early position of Reader-Response theory is that the meaning of the text is the reader`s experience of the text. But the meaning in the text is not the ultimate, final meaning for him. Fishean reader`s response to the meaning of the text is rather close to the process of going back and forth among possible interpretations. Therefore, the final and ultimate meaning of the text is created by the reader`s participating in deciding the meaning of the text. Because Fish places high value on the reader`s response to the text and his or her cognitive process, Fish strongly insists that the reader writes the text and that by doing so he makes the text disappear. Because the "intended" readers who accurately interpret the text will discover what the author intended, Fish radically argues that all the author`s intention is the reader`s response to the text. Thus, he contends that there is no meaning in the text and all the meaning is coming from the reader. However, Fish does not give the reader freedom unlimitedly in creating the meaning of the text. The reader`s response can be controlled by interpretive communities. All the meaning is not from the text itself but from the interpretive grid that reader projects upon the text. In sum, Fish adjusts his early theory by introducing the notion of interpretive communities into the theory of the late Fish. Namely, what Fish says is that all meaning is coming from the reader does not mean that each individual reader makes up his or her own unique, absolutely original meanings for the texts. What the reader does, instead, is participate in various interpretive communities already out there. He or she shares paradigms for interpretation with others. Even if Fish gives the priority to the readers in writing the meaning of the text, he is ready to control the readers by regulator, that is, "the interpretive community" simultaneously. Here lies some unsolvable indeterminacy in Fishean Reader-Response theory.

Reflections on Fishean Reader-Response Theory

김희선 한국영미문화학회 2012 영미문화 Vol.12 No.1

Fish’s early position of Reader-Response theory is that the meaning of the text is the reader's experience of the text. But the meaning in the text is not the ultimate, final meaning for him. Fishean reader's response to the meaning of the text is rather close to the process of going back and forth among possible interpretations. Therefore, the final and ultimate meaning of the text is created by the reader’s participating in deciding the meaning of the text. Because Fish places high value on the reader's response to the text and his or her cognitive process, Fish strongly insists that the reader writes the text and that by doing so he makes the text disappear. Because the “intended” readers who accurately interpret the text will discover what the author intended, Fish radically argues that all the author's intention is the reader's response to the text. Thus, he contends that there is no meaning in the text and all the meaning is coming from the reader. However, Fish does not give the reader freedom unlimitedly in creating the meaning of the text. The reader's response can be controlled by interpretive communities. All the meaning is not from the text itself but from the interpretive grid that reader projects upon the text. In sum, Fish adjusts his early theory by introducing the notion of interpretive communities into the theory of the late Fish. Namely, what Fish says is that all meaning is coming from the reader does not mean that each individual reader makes up his or her own unique, absolutely original meanings for the texts. What the reader does, instead, is participate in various interpretive communities already out there. He or she shares paradigms for interpretation with others. Even if Fish gives the priority to the readers in writing the meaning of the text, he is ready to control the readers by regulator, that is, "the interpretive community" simultaneously. Here lies some unsolvable indeterminacy in Fishean Reader-Response theory.

문학 교육에서의 `반응 중심 학습`에 대한 이론적 재고

정정순 ( Jung Jungsoon ) 한국문학교육학회 2016 문학교육학 Vol.0 No.53

반응 중심 학습은 문학 교육의 이론과 실천을 매개하는 핵심적인 도구 중의 하나이다. 독자 반응 이론을 바탕으로 고안된 반응 중심 학습 모형은 문학 텍스트 읽기에서 독자의 역할을 중시한다. 하지만 실제 반응 중심 학습의 실행 단계들을 살펴보면 독자 반응 이론의 교육적 지향을 제대로 구현하고 있다고 보기 힘들다. 이는 두 가지 점에서 그러하다. 반응 중심 모형은 문학 텍스트의 의미가 독자와 텍스트의 거래를 통해 형성 된다는 로젠블랫의 이론에 기반해 있다. 이때 독자와 텍스트의 거래를 통해 독자 개개인마다 개별적으로 의미가 형성되는 `환기`가 이루어지고, 반응은 이 환기에 대해서 이루어진다. 반응 중심 학습 모형은 이 환기의 과정적 중요성을 고려하지 않고 있다. 독자가 텍스트를 읽는 과정에서 환기하는 의미는 내적 대화의 과정을 통해 형성되므로 임의적이며 관계적이다. 따라서 모든 개별적인 독자들은 스스로 고유한 관계적 의미를 형성해 간다. 반응 형성 과정에서는 이러한 의미의 특성을 고려하여 읽기의 위치를 재정립할 필요가 있다. 반응 명료화 단계는 앞서 형성된 반응을 조정하고 의미를 검증하는 과정에 해당한다. 하지만 이러한 단계의 설정은 임의적인 관계적 의미 형성 자체의 의미를 축소함으로써 반응 형성 단계에서 독자의 능동적인 의미 형성을 어렵게 할 뿐만 아니라, 설령 독자 개개인의 목소리가 발현되었다 하더라도 해석 공동체를 통한 일반화의 구조 속에서 독자의 개별적인 목소리들을 추상화한다는 점에서 문제가 있다. 그러므로 반응 명료화 단계는 의미 검증을 통한 일반화 과정이 아닌, 대화를 통한 의미 공유의 과정이 되어야 한다고 본다. 대화는 더나은 방향(혹은 정해진 답)을 탐구하기 위한 과정으로서가 아니라, 왜 다른가를 확인하는 과정으로서의 의미를 지닐 필요가 있다. Response-centered teaching and learning model is a critical tool that mediates theory and practice in teaching literature. Response-centered teaching and learning model invented on the ground of reader response theories puts much more emphasis on the role of reader rather than text in interpreting literature. However activities suggested in the stages of the model for practice don`t reflect the pedagogy of reader response theories in two regards. The model doesn`t celebrate the meanings readers construct while they transact with text, and it places agreement to the pre-determined meaning over dialogic meanings. Response-centered teaching and learning model is basically based on the theories of Louis Rosenblatt, who emphasized the meaning of literary text is actualized by the transaction between text and reader. Evocation in the process of constructing meaning that arises from the transaction precedes the response. Putting response of reader at the center of teaching and learning in classroom therefore means that this evocation should be a core process in the model. Meaning reader determines by one`s inner dialogue while reading is relational, so is very different by readers. The stage of response formation in the model doesn`t see the process of constructing meaning by evocation in transaction as the core. Stage of response clarification needs reader to rationalize and modify his(her) own meaning constructed in previous stage. This clarification forces readers to deny their own determined meaning by the process of questioning and discussion, and finally ends up with the agreement about pre-determined meaning of text with the approval of interpretive community. The stage of response clarification should be replaced by response sharing that encourages reader to voice their different responses in dialogue.

독자반응이론의 반응범주 체계에 대한 연구

성수진 한국국어교육학회 2022 새국어교육 Vol.- No.133

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to establish a comprehensive category system for response categories, which are criteria for analyzing the response types seen by readers in reading, by reviewing previous studies based on the reader-response theory. Methods: The category system is classified and synthesized by reviewing domestic and foreign prior studies that established and studied the category system for response types. Results: Previous studies were classified into two types. First, foreign studies that extracted response categories and established category systems through inductive methods based on readers' responses. Second, domestic studies that conducted analysis after reconstructing the framework or system of the response category based on previous studies. As a result of synthesizing the category systems of these previous studies, five categories of 'descriptive, interpretive, evaluative, personal response, and others' were extracted. Various classifications of individual researchers were clustered and presented under the extracted five categories, and the category system was explained on a continuous line in the figure. Conclusion: The contents of the review of the established response category system were presented in a figure, and the item to be added was proposed. This study can provide basic help in class design and evaluation on what response types are appropriate to derive and how to categorize and evaluate them when applying the reader-response theory in the field of reading education.

문학교육 연구에서 독자 반응 이론의 행방(行方)과 향방(向方) - 1985년 이후 국내 연구를 중심으로 -

강민규 ( Kang Min-kyu ) 한국문학교육학회 2020 문학교육학 Vol.0 No.66

이 연구는 문학교육의 주요 이론인 독자 반응 이론이 국내 연구에서 활용되어 온 양상을 분석하고 이를 바탕으로 향후 해당 이론의 활용 가능성을 모색하였다. 1985년 이후 국내 연구 검토 결과, 독자 반응 이론은 교수·학습 방법설계 및 실제 독자 반응 분석의 토대로 활용되는 한편 문학 수용 현상을 설명하는 수단으로도 널리 이용되어 왔으나 그 영향력은 정체되어 있었다. 이는 이론에 내재한 한계라기보다는 로젠블랫 중심의 이론적 편중과 이론 수용의 피상성으로부터 비롯한 문제로 판단되었다. 이에 독자 반응 이론 내 다양한 쟁점들을 재조명하여 문학교육적 함의를 발견하고 그 교육적 변용 방안을 제안하였다. 이를 통해 문학 독서 경험에 대한 설명을 정교화하는 데 독자 반응 이론이 여전히 유효하며, 통념과 달리 이 이론이 집단으로서의 독자에 관한 교육적 구상을 마련하는 데 유용하다는 점을 밝혔다. This study analyzed the aspects that the reader-response theory, which is the main theory of literature education, has been used in domestic studies, and explored the possibility of applying the theory in the future. As a result of domestic research review since 1985, We proved that reader-response theory has been widely used as a basis for teaching and learning method design and actual reader response analysis, and as a means of explaining the phenomenon of literary acceptance, but its influence was stagnant. This was judged not as a limitation inherent in theory, but rather as a problem originating from bias to Rosenblatt and the superficiality in accepting of the theory. This study reexamined the various issues in the reader-response theory to discover the implications of literature education and proposed the educational transformation method. In this process, We proved that the reader-response theory is still valid for elaborating the description of the literary reading experience, and it is useful for developing educational ideas about readers as a group.

Reader-Response Theory in Literature Circles

Erik Robb Thompson(에릭랍탐슨) 새한영어영문학회 2017 새한영어영문학 Vol.59 No.1

Literature Circles, which are collaborative and student-centered reading groups, are becoming more popular as a teaching method that draws students into increasingly abstract and relevant discussions about literature. In classrooms structured around collaborative discovery of the ideal reader, the question of what role experts will play still needs to be adequately addressed. To that end, this article will explore and evaluate Wolfgang Iser’s and Stanley Fish’s approaches to reader-response theory as they apply to collaborative learning practices, particularly those informed by the “faith”-based teaching philosophy of Parker J. Palmer. Reader-response theorists, especially Iser, show how literary understanding emerges through the temporal process of reading rather than through a reader-expert translating the meaning that is already contained in a literary work. In a less technical and more spiritual pursuit of a similar process-based understanding of educational subjects, Palmer advocates for communitarian models of truth that are engaged with the indeterminate “otherness” of great things, and argues against objectivist models of truth that do not serve the interests of readers or the literature itself.

독자반응전략의 지도가 초등영어 학습자의 쓰기 반응 양상 및 쓰기 능력에 미치는 영향

김다슬,김태은 한국외국어대학교 외국어교육연구소 2022 외국어교육연구 Vol.36 No.3

The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of explicit teaching of reader response strategy on student's written responses. Participants in this study were 22 fifth graders from an elementary school in Seoul. To begin with, the aspects of reader responses were selected for proper use to primary English language learners, which comprises eight aspects including responding to a topic, a character, an illustration, and a literary technique, and making connections to self, other texts, society, and author. These eight aspects of responses were explicitly taught as reader response strategy in the experimental classes. Students' written response journals were evaluated before and after the experimental classes and analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. During the experimental classes, students read a picture storybook every week, learned two response strategies and wrote a written response journal. As a result of the study, the frequency of the eight response aspects represented in their written response journals increased. In addition, students' responses were enriched in quality, which led to the growth of their writing abilities. In conclusion, these results revealed that the application of the reader response strategy to elementary English language learners in EFL environment can lead to the production of better written response and the improvement of writing abilities. 본 연구의 목적은 독자반응전략의 명시적 지도가 학생들의 쓰기 반응에 미치는 영향을 확인하는 데 있다. 본 연구 참여자는 서울의 초등학교 5학년 학생들 22명이다. 실험 수업에 앞서 학생들에게 적용할 만한 독자반응의 양상을 8가지로 분류하였다. 8가지 반응 양상은 주제에 대해 반응하기, 인물에 대해 반응하기, 그림에 대해 반응하기, 표현에 대해 반응하기, 나와 연관 지어 반응하기, 다른 텍스트와 연관 지어 반응하기, 사회와 연관 지어 반응하기, 작가와 연관 지어 반응하기이다. 8가지 독자반응 양상은 이후 실험 수업에서 독자반응전략으로써 학생들에게 명시적으로 지도되었다. 학생들의 실험 수업 전후에 학생들의 반응 쓰기 평가지를 작성하게 하여 이를 양적, 질적으로 분석하였다. 실험 수업 중 학생들은 매주 1권의 이야기 그림책을 읽고, 2가지의 반응 전략을 학습한 뒤 반응 표현 쓰기 활동지에 자신의 감상을 서술하였다. 그 결과 학생들의 8가지 독자반응 양상의 빈도수가 증가하고, 학생들의 반응이 질적으로 풍부해졌음을 확인할 수 있었다. 이는 곧 학생들의 쓰기 능력의 성장으로 이어졌다. 결론적으로, 본 연구는 독자 반응 전략의 적용이 EFL 환경의 초등영어 학습자의 쓰기 반응 양상과 쓰기 능력의 성장을 이끌 수 있음을 시사한다.

『딕테』에서의 독자

손혜숙,최보윤 한국현대영미시학회 2014 현대영미시연구 Vol.20 No.2

This paper aims to examine the reader’s position in Dictee. For Cha, the reader is not only the receptor but also the activator of her works. Her aesthetic vision is very much like that of the reader-response theory, in which the reader casts himself or herself in the role of co-writer of the text. Like most reader-response critics, Cha conceives reading as an active process of regenerating meaning. The relationship between the reader and the narratee in Dictee is very precarious and unpredictable, so the reader is, in many cases, abruptly equated with the narratee by the narrator though being left uninformed about the narrative process. Dictee is also invested with many blanks, visual as well as conceptual, which will eventually lead to many halts and hesitations on the part of the reader. All this considered, Dictee can be counted as a “writerly text,” liberating the reader from the passive reception of commodified meaning and providing a space of interfusion between the author and the reader.

유아 대상 반응 중심 문학교육의 방향성 탐색

한은형(Han, Eunhyeung) 이화여자대학교 이화어린이연구원 2020 영유아교육: 이론과 실천 Vol.5 No.3

본 연구에서는 독자반응 이론의 흐름을 재정립하여 유아교육에 주는 함의를 도출함으로써 반응 중심 문학교육의 방향성을 탐색하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 이를 위해 독자반응이론이 대두된 배경부터 독자반응 이론의 흐름을 세 갈래로 구분하여 재정립하는 과정을 거쳐 유아교육적 함의를 도출하였다. 그 결과 독자반응 이론은 유아가 그림책에 대해선택적 관심을 가진 이후 교류, 환기, 반응의 과정을 유기적으로 거치며 의미를 형성하고 재구성하는 전 과정에 초점을 맞춘 교육적 지원의 필요성을 함의하고 있었다. 이를바탕으로 유아 대상 반응 중심 문학교육의 방향성을 탐색한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 독자와 텍스트의 관계에 대한 교사의 관점 수립이 필요하다. 둘째, 선택적 관심의 기회확대를 지원해야 한다. 셋째, 심미적 읽기 과정 속 텍스트와의 교류를 독려해야 한다. 넷째, 환기와 반응을 통하여 문학작품 속 틈을 스스로 메워나갈 수 있도록 지원해야 한다. 이를 바탕으로 논의점을 교수방법 설계의 측면, 유아에 대한 관점 재정립의 측면, 환기와 반응의 명료한 구별의 측면에서 제시하였다. The purpose of this study is to discover the direction of literature education for young children by re-establishing the flow of reader response theory and deriving the implications for earlychildhood education. For this purpose, the researcher derived the educational implications of early childhood education through the process of re-establishing the flow of the reader responsetheory into three categories from the background of the reader response theory. As a result, the reader response theory implies the necessity of educational support focusing on the wholeprocess of forming and reconstructing meanings through organic exchanges, ventilation, and reactions after infants had selective interest in picture books. Based on this, the results of discoveringthe direction of response based literature education for young children are as follows: First, it is necessary to establish a teacher s perspective on the relationship between readers and texts. Second, it is necessary to support the expansion of opportunities for selective interest. Third, it is necessary to encourage the exchange with texts in the aesthetic reading process. Fourth, through ventilation and reaction, it is necessary to support the gap in literary works to fill themselves. Based on this, the discussion points were presented in terms of the design of teaching methods, the reestablishment of the viewpoint of infants, and the clear distinction between ventilation and response.