In effort to really look into the reader response style of analysis, I will use examples of a word that is sure to entice controversy but must add that I am in no way attempting to use any of this as a means of offense or hate. Take a sketch by a comedian, Louis CK. In the clip presented, he uses the word “faggot.” Now as the word is presented either in the clip or through the symbols that write the word, the receiver (reader or viewer) will begin to interact. Through this interaction the receiver applies a plethora of catalysts to what is being received. These catalysts range from emotional connections to social ideologies also taking into consideration the context of the situation as well as gauging the tone or manner in which the word is presented. These elements together create an end product, a meaning so to say.
Some receivers will take offense to Louis CK's use of the word “faggot” while others will laugh and still others will have no opinion of the matter. This all boils down to the catalysts the person applies to the word. To some it holds a very negative connotation of anti-homosexuality and hate, while to others it has a completely different meaning as slightly explained by CK himself. South Park also dealt with the meaning of the word in an episode where they labeled loud and obnoxiously intrusive motorcycle riders as being “faggots.” It should be said that the creator of the object of interpretation must know how it may possibly be interpreted by the public before releasing it into the wild. This is why Louis CK explains his use of the word as well as South Park going into detail to attempt to avoid a negative backlash from potential receivers. Although, they have no control once it is exposed to the public. A copper statue begins to oxidize when the metal interacts with the atmosphere, the same may be applied to words interacting with the public consciousness.
Moving beyond the aforementioned word and onto art in general. The piece of art itself goes through different phases. The creator of the piece installs their own meaning to it, but as it enters the public sphere, their meaning is not totally discarded, but set aside. The art enters the public sphere as an empty shell. The public, individually or collectively, then fills that shell with their own meanings and ideas, possibly taking into consideration the meaning placed by the creator, possibly not. Each receiver will apply to the object their own set of catalysts, creating different responses to the exact same object. There technically is no wrong when it comes to analysis of interpretation of a text, and it is purely subjective, making a single word a very powerful thing indeed.
For safety sake I must again apologizes to anyone who may have taken offense to the content posted, I chose this subject merely for the controversy surrounding the aforementioned word and the multiple meanings it that have been applied to it in an effort to analyze a Reader Response theory.
Works Cited:
Barthes, Roland. "The Death of the Author." The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism. Second ed. New York, NY: W.W. Norton &, 2010. 1322-326. Print.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. "What Is Literature." The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism. Second ed. New York, NY: W.W. Norton &, 2010. 1199-213. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment