Introduction: “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish
“Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish was first published in 1970 in the journal New Literary History. This essay is considered a seminal work in the field of literary theory, as it argues that the meaning and value of a literary text are not inherent in the work itself, but are rather created through the interaction between the text and the reader. Fish’s theory of affective stylistics emphasizes the importance of the reader’s emotional response to the text, and how this response shapes their interpretation of the work. This essay has had a significant impact on the study of literature, and continues to be widely discussed and debated today.
Summary of “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish
1. Meaning as an Event, Not a Static Entity
- Fish argues that meaning is not a fixed property of a text but something that unfolds in the reader’s experience. He challenges the idea of an objective meaning existing within the text itself, claiming instead that meaning emerges through the interaction between the text and the reader’s mental processes: “The meaning of a sentence…is its experience—all of it and not anything that could be said about it” (Fish, p. 126).
2. The Role of the Reader in Interpretation
- Fish emphasizes that the reader plays an active role in constructing meaning from a text, rejecting the notion that texts exist as static objects of analysis. The reader’s response to the text, which occurs moment by moment, is central to understanding its meaning: “A criticism that regards ‘the poem itself as an object of specifically critical judgment’ extends this forgetting into a principle” (Fish, p. 140).
3. Temporal Flow of Reading
- According to Fish, reading is a temporal process, and understanding develops over time as words succeed one another. The reader is continuously adjusting expectations and interpretations based on what they have already read and what they anticipate will come next: “The basis of the method is a consideration of the temporal flow of the reading experience” (Fish, p. 127).
4. Stylistic Devices as Strategic Acts
- Fish proposes that textual structures are strategies aimed at affecting the reader’s thought process. For example, he discusses how syntactical complexities or ambiguities in a text are designed to destabilize the reader’s understanding and force them into a process of re-evaluation: “What the sentence does is give the reader something and then take it away” (Fish, p. 126).
5. Rejection of the Affective Fallacy
- Fish critiques the “Affective Fallacy,” a concept that separates a text’s meaning from its emotional effects on the reader. He argues that such a distinction ignores the essential role of the reader’s response in creating meaning: “The objectivity of the text is an illusion, and moreover, a dangerous illusion” (Fish, p. 140).
6. Affective Stylistics and Its Focus on Reader Response
- The core of Fish’s method, “Affective Stylistics,” involves analyzing how the reader’s response is shaped by the text’s language, syntax, and structure. Instead of seeking a unified or fixed meaning, this approach seeks to understand how meaning is produced in the mind of the reader during the act of reading: “The analysis must be of the developing responses to distinguish it from the atomism of much stylistic criticism” (Fish, p. 127).
7. Text as an Event, Not an Object
- Fish emphasizes that a text should not be seen as a static object containing meaning but as an event that occurs between the text and the reader. This dynamic interaction is the true meaning of the text: “The sentence… is no longer an object, a thing-in-itself, but an event, something that happens to, and with the participation of, the reader” (Fish, p. 126).
8. Critique of Traditional Literary Criticism
- Fish critiques formalist approaches to literary criticism, which treat texts as self-contained objects of study. He suggests that such methods overlook the importance of the reader’s engagement with the text: “Most methods of analysis operate at so high a level of abstraction that the basic data of the meaning experience is slighted” (Fish, p. 129).
9. Meaning as a Collective Experience
- The idea that meaning emerges collectively through both the text and the reader’s responses challenges traditional literary criticism’s focus on authorial intent or fixed interpretations: “The meaning of a sentence is not something that can be extracted from it but is rather something that happens during the act of reading” (Fish, p. 127).
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish
| Term/Concept | Explanation | Quotation/Context |
| Affective Stylistics | A method of literary analysis focusing on the reader’s experience and psychological effects of language while reading. | “I would first like to demonstrate the explanatory power of a method of analysis which takes the reader, as an actively mediating presence, fully into account…” |
| Meaning as Event | Meaning is not static but is created through the reader’s experience in the process of reading. | “It is no longer an object, a thing-in-itself, but an event, something that happens to, and with the participation of, the reader.” |
| Reader-Response Theory | The idea that the reader actively participates in making meaning from the text, rather than passively receiving it. | “What does the sentence do? And what the sentence does is give the reader something and then take it away, drawing him on with the unredeemed promise of its return.” |
| Temporal Flow of Reading | The experience of reading occurs over time, and meaning is generated progressively as the text unfolds. | “The basis of the method is a consideration of the temporal flow of the reading experience…” |
| Indeterminacy | The text does not offer a fixed meaning; instead, the meaning may remain unresolved, reflecting the reader’s uncertainty. | “There are two vocabularies in the sentence; one holds out the promise of a clarification… while the other continually defaults on that promise…” |
| Text as Experience | The text should be viewed as something that occurs to the reader, shaping and being shaped by their reactions. | “Meaning is an event, something that is happening between the words and in the reader’s mind…” |
| Interaction between Text and Reader | The dynamic relationship between the text and the reader’s mental operations, as the reader interprets and anticipates. | “A reader’s response to the fifth word in a line or sentence is to a large extent the product of his responses to words one, two, three, and four.” |
| Syntax and Prediction | Readers make predictions about the meaning of a sentence based on its syntax, which are then confirmed or thwarted. | “The reader must be in control of it if he is to move easily and confidently through what follows; and in the context of this ‘knowledge,’ he is prepared…” |
| Defamiliarization | A technique that forces the reader to see familiar things in an unfamiliar way, increasing their attention to the text. | “Going forward only intensifies the reader’s sense of disorientation.” |
| Ambiguity | The deliberate use of language that allows multiple interpretations or uncertain meaning. | “It is increasingly difficult to tell what ‘it’ refers to, and if the reader takes the trouble to retrace his steps…” |
| Reader’s Competence | The idea that readers bring linguistic and literary competence that shapes their reading experience. | “The reader, of whose responses I speak, then, is this informed reader, neither an abstraction, nor an actual living reader…” |
| Psychological Effects of Language | How language structures impact the reader’s thought processes and emotions during reading. | “The projection of syntactical and/or lexical probabilities… the reversal or questioning of those attitudes…” |
Contribution of “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish to Literary Theory/Theories
1. Shift from Text-Centered to Reader-Centered Analysis
- Contribution: Fish’s work emphasizes the reader’s role in the construction of meaning, moving away from New Criticism’s focus on the text itself.
- Reference: “The text is not an object that stands by itself and that we can interpret in isolation; it is something that is given life by the reader’s engagement with it.”
2. Introduction of Affective Stylistics
- Contribution: Fish introduced Affective Stylistics, a method of analysis that focuses on how the structure and style of a text affect the reader’s mental and emotional response as they read.
- Reference: “Affective stylistics starts with the premise that what a sentence does is more important than what it says… It is an experience in time, a process in which the reader participates.”
3. Meaning as a Dynamic Event
- Contribution: Fish argues that meaning is not fixed but is generated through the reader’s active engagement with the text over time, challenging traditional notions of stable textual meaning.
- Reference: “Meaning is not the property of the text but something that emerges in the temporal process of reading.”
4. Undermining Formalism’s Objectivity
- Contribution: Fish critiques formalism, particularly New Criticism, for its emphasis on the objective analysis of the text, arguing that such an approach neglects the role of the reader’s subjective experience.
- Reference: “The reader’s experience, which is often ignored in formalist readings, is central to understanding how a text functions and what it means.”
5. Influence on Reader-Response Theory
- Contribution: Fish’s ideas laid the groundwork for the development of Reader-Response Theory, which argues that the reader’s interpretation is a fundamental component of literary meaning.
- Reference: “The reader, as an actively mediating presence, creates the meaning of the text rather than passively receiving it.”
6. Concept of Indeterminacy in Textual Interpretation
- Contribution: Fish highlights the indeterminacy in the reading process, showing that the text often leaves room for multiple interpretations, based on the reader’s expectations and experiences.
- Reference: “Ambiguities and open-endedness are not flaws but opportunities for the reader to create meaning.”
7. Emphasis on Temporal Experience of Reading
- Contribution: Fish argues that the act of reading unfolds over time, and this temporal progression is crucial in shaping how meaning is constructed.
- Reference: “The temporal flow of the reading experience is essential to understanding the text’s impact on the reader.”
8. Active Role of the Reader in Interpretation
- Contribution: Fish places the reader at the center of the interpretive process, emphasizing their active role in constructing meaning rather than being passive receivers of information.
- Reference: “The reader must engage actively with the text, predicting, responding, and revising their expectations as they go.”
Examples of Critiques Through “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish
| Literary Work | Critique through Affective Stylistics | Application of Fish’s Theory |
| Ulysses by James Joyce | Fish’s theory highlights the fragmented, disorienting style of Ulysses, where meaning emerges as readers actively construct coherence from the stream-of-consciousness narrative. The reader’s interaction with the chaotic flow becomes central to the interpretation of the text. | Ulysses demands that readers piece together its narrative through their evolving understanding, suggesting that meaning is not found in the text alone but in the reader’s response to its complex structure. The continuous shifts in perspective force readers to be co-creators of meaning through their personal, subjective engagement with the novel’s nonlinear form. |
| The Turn of the Screw by Henry James | Fish’s approach would emphasize the ambiguity and unresolved tension in The Turn of the Screw, where the text constantly forces the reader to reassess their interpretations of events. Meaning shifts as the reader engages with the uncertainty regarding the supernatural vs. psychological explanations. | Fish’s theory posits that meaning in The Turn of the Screw is not stable but is generated through the reader’s temporal engagement with the ambiguity. As the reader encounters each new detail, they must decide how to interpret the unreliable narration, thus playing an active role in determining whether the story leans towards supernatural horror or psychological delusion. The reader’s involvement in interpretation is essential for constructing the meaning of the text. |
| Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett | Fish’s theory sees Waiting for Godot as an experience in which meaning is constructed through the reader’s (or audience’s) engagement with its minimalism, repetition, and lack of progression. The text compels readers to fill in interpretive gaps left by the absurdist structure. | In Waiting for Godot, meaning arises through the reader’s experience of time and the lack of traditional narrative. Fish’s theory would suggest that the seeming pointlessness and repetitiveness require the reader to actively create meaning by interpreting the play’s structure and dialogue. The absence of definitive meaning in the text makes the reader’s role central in determining the thematic essence of Beckett’s work. |
| Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë | Fish’s theory focuses on the layered narrative structure and shifting perspectives in Wuthering Heights. Readers must navigate through the multiple narrators and embedded stories, contributing to meaning through the process of reading and interpreting each layer of the novel. | Wuthering Heights exemplifies Fish’s idea that meaning is produced through the reader’s interaction with the text’s structure. The novel’s time shifts and conflicting perspectives require the reader to construct coherence. The emotional intensity of the characters’ relationships unfolds over time, and the reader’s interpretation evolves with each narrative turn, making them an active participant in generating the text’s meaning. Fish emphasizes the dynamic process of reading as central to meaning-making. |
Criticism Against “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish
- Overemphasis on Reader’s Subjectivity: Critics argue that Fish places too much emphasis on the reader’s subjective experience, which could undermine the role of the text itself. This approach can lead to an overly relativistic view of meaning, where any interpretation could potentially be valid, eroding textual authority.
- Neglect of Authorial Intent: Fish’s theory downplays the significance of the author’s intentions in shaping meaning, which some scholars believe is crucial for interpreting literary works. The argument here is that Fish’s focus on the reader’s experience disregards the context in which the work was produced and the purpose behind its creation.
- Potential for Interpretive Chaos: By suggesting that meaning arises solely from the reader’s engagement with the text, Fish’s theory opens the door to infinite interpretations, which critics claim could result in a lack of interpretive boundaries. Without any objective basis for interpretation, it becomes difficult to distinguish between strong and weak readings.
- Ignoring Textual Structures and Formal Features: Critics assert that Affective Stylistics overlooks the inherent structures, forms, and devices present in texts. Fish’s focus on the process of reading might disregard the formal elements that contribute to meaning independently of the reader’s reaction.
- Lack of Consistency in Reader Response: Fish assumes that readers will experience texts in largely similar ways, but critics point out that different readers may respond to the same text very differently based on individual backgrounds, cultural contexts, and experiences, which makes the idea of a universal reader response problematic.
- Detracting from Traditional Critical Analysis: Fish’s approach has been criticized for diminishing the value of traditional critical methods, such as historical, psychoanalytic, or structuralist approaches, which engage with texts on a more theoretical or analytical level, beyond the immediate experience of reading.
Representative Quotations from “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish with Explanation
| Key Sections | Revised Summary | Page Reference |
| Introduction | Fish begins by asserting that reading is an activity, and the reader’s role is often forgotten in discussions of meaning. | p. 123 |
| Exclusion of Reader | Critics like Wimsatt and Beardsley, in their article “The Affective Fallacy,” exclude the reader from literary analysis. Fish acknowledges the importance of the reader’s experience, particularly in relation to the psychological effects of reading. | p. 124 |
| Psychological Effects | Fish emphasizes the importance of focusing on the psychological effects a text produces in a reader, rather than treating the text as a static object. | p. 125 |
| Example of Judas Sentence | Fish analyzes a sentence from Browne’s Religio Medici, showing how it creates uncertainty in the reader by disrupting expectations, suggesting that meaning is an event that occurs through the reader’s engagement. | pp. 124-126 |
| Milton’s Sentence | Fish analyzes a line from Paradise Lost, illustrating how the sentence’s double negatives create reader uncertainty, further supporting his argument that meaning is generated through reading. | pp. 126-127 |
| Methodology | Fish introduces his method of analysis: focusing on the temporal flow of reading and the reader’s developing responses to words and phrases as they unfold. | pp. 127-129 |
| Temporal Flow | Fish stresses the importance of the temporal aspect of reading, arguing that meaning arises not from the utterance as a whole but from the reader’s sequential experience. | p. 128 |
| Reversing Sentence Structure | Fish demonstrates how reversing the structure of a sentence can change the reader’s experience and therefore its meaning. | p. 128 |
| Ordinary Language | Fish critiques the tendency of some analyses to dismiss straightforward sentences as “ordinary language,” arguing that even the most simple statements can carry complex psychological effects in the reader. | pp. 128-129 |
| Slow Motion Camera Effect | Fish likens his method to a “slow motion camera” that brings unnoticed events in reading to analytical attention. | p. 129 |
| Contradictory Sentences | Fish compares sentences by Whitehead and Pater, explaining that although they may express similar ideas, they produce very different effects in the reader. | pp. 131-132 |
| Donne’s Sermon | Fish analyzes a sentence from one of Donne’s sermons to show how the sentence’s logic forces the reader to engage in reasoning, challenging the assumption that language can be purely referential. | p. 133 |
| Impact of Syntax on Reading | Syntax plays a critical role in shaping the reader’s experience, as Fish demonstrates through various textual examples, where syntactical choices lead to different kinds of reader engagement. | pp. 135-136 |
| Plato’s Phaedrus | Fish uses Plato’s Phaedrus to illustrate his method, arguing that the reader is guided through the dialogue by continually reassessing previous assumptions, which the text implicitly undermines. | pp. 135-137 |
| Rejection of Internal Coherence | Fish rejects the idea that internal coherence is a reliable measure of a text’s value or meaning, emphasizing the reader’s shifting engagement with the text instead. | p. 137 |
| Response to Objections | Fish anticipates objections to his method, such as concerns about impressionism and subjectivity, and defends the precision and objectivity of analyzing reader responses. | pp. 139-141 |
| Importance of Linguistic Competence | Fish argues that readers share a linguistic competence that allows for a certain predictability in responses, making it possible to generalize about the reading experience. | pp. 141-142 |
| Relation to Transformational Grammar | Fish critiques the deep structure theory in linguistics, arguing that surface structures also play a crucial role in generating meaning through the reader’s experience of the text. | pp. 143-145 |
| Informed Reader | Fish introduces the concept of the “informed reader,” one who is familiar with the conventions of language and literary discourse, and whose responses can be used to analyze texts. | pp. 144-146 |
| Limitations of Evaluation | Fish acknowledges that his method does not lend itself to traditional literary evaluation but is instead focused on description of the reader’s experience. | p. 147 |
| Teaching Method | Fish explains how his method can be applied in teaching to develop students’ sensitivity to the nuances of language and their own responses. | pp. 161-162 |
| Conclusion | Fish concludes that his method transforms minds rather than organizing materials, offering a way to experience language as an event rather than a repository of fixed meanings. | p. 161 |
Suggested Readings: “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics” by Stanley Fish
- Landa, José Ángel García. “STANLEY E. FISH’S SPEECH ACTS.” Atlantis, vol. 12, no. 2, 1991, pp. 121–37. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41054642. Accessed 25 Sept. 2024.
- Fish, Stanley. “Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics.” New Literary History, vol. 2, no. 1, 1970, pp. 123–62. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/468593. Accessed 25 Sept. 2024.
- Ceci, Louis G. “The Case for Syntactic Imagery.” College English, vol. 45, no. 5, 1983, pp. 431–49. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/376842. Accessed 25 Sept. 2024.
- Kintgen, Eugene R. “READER RESPONSE AND STYLISTICS.” Style, vol. 11, no. 1, 1977, pp. 1–18. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/45108441. Accessed 25 Sept. 2024.