One text, many stories: The (ir)relevance of reader-response criticism for apocryphal literature in the Septuagint

S Philip Nolte

doi:10.4102/hts.v68i1.1092

Abstract

This article investigated the value of reader-response theory for the reading of apocryphal texts in the Septuagint. The groundbreaking work on reader-response theory developed by Wolfgang Iser in his book The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response, written in 1978 served as the theoretical point of departure. Although the reader-response theory has been scrutinised and criticised heavily during the last three decades, Iser made a very valuable contribution to the reading of literature. My assumption is that religious texts have to be read in the same way as other literature and therefore literary theories such as Iser’s can be conducive for responsible interpretation. The article consists of the following parts: introductory remarks on the value of reader-response theory for the interpretation of apocryphal texts; a short overview of reader-response criticism; a discussion and evaluation of three different aspects of Iser’s theory, namely ‘gaps’ in texts, ‘asymmetry’ between readers and texts and the concept of ‘the implied reader’. The findings of the investigation will be given in part five (Findings).

Highlights

It is accepted in literary theory that different readers interpret the same texts differently, the history of literary criticism shows that there has been, and still is, much debate about this issue (Fowler 1991:1−58; Fish 1980; Hendrix 2006:199−228; Iser 1978; Lategan 1992; Tompkins [1980] 1981a; Tyson 2006)
The debate relates to questions such as: do texts have or possess meaning; how do readers produce or create meaning when they read texts; is a text a stable or unstable entity; who is the reader; do readers read texts as individuals or as part of larger communities of interpretation; who are the readers in reader-response criticism; is a reader more important than a text, or vice versa?
New Criticism set itself up against what became known as biographical-historical criticism, which interpreted texts by studying the lives and times of authors, and was the prevailing literary theory during the nineteenth century and the first part of the twentieth century

Summary

Introduction

It is accepted in literary theory that different readers interpret the same texts differently, the history of literary criticism shows that there has been, and still is, much debate about this issue (Fowler 1991:1−58; Fish 1980; Hendrix 2006:199−228; Iser 1978; Lategan 1992; Tompkins [1980] 1981a; Tyson 2006). Reader-response criticism and reception theory rest upon the assumption that texts have to be read to come to life and to have meaning.

Results

Conclusion