Reference no: EM131708847

Respond to Peers: Respond to at least two of your classmates' initial posts. Each response should be at least 75 words in length and should address two or more of the following points:

• Do you agree with your classmates' perspectives? Why, or why not? Be specific.

• Ask a specific question to encourage further discussion on the topic.

• Challenge your classmates' interpretation of literature and/or point of view.

• Do a small amount of research and share what you learn with your peers about the topic discussed in this post.

• Natashia Johnson

75 Word Count Rseponse

Describe each critical approach in detail.

Reader response criticism analyzes the interaction between the text and the reader. In this theory, analysis is determined by the readers take on the text. The background, religion, culture, among other things contribute to the interpretation of the text for every individual reader. This method is used typically in a classroom setting where there will be discussion on student's take on textual concepts and theories.

New historicism criticism analyses texts from a historical stand point. It analyses the time period it was written in, for and what the cultural background the era represents. This theory uses history to help readers change their viewpoints on the issues defined in the text.

Compare and or contrast the two critical approaches. How are they different or similar?

I think both approaches give the reader command over what they get from the text. Reader respond is more in tune with the reader and only requires an individual interpretation. The historical approached requires the reader to get in tune with a specific time period and analyze from there. Both approaches draw from the perspective the reader has found in the work.

Determine which critical approach you find most useful for examining the conflicts and meaning in literature.

I would use the reader response approach.

Explain why you chose this particular approach as the most useful. Why does it appeal to you?

I would use this approach because it draws me into the text and I am better able to analyze the conflict and meaning. When I am able to make a personal connection with the text, I am better able to understand the characters and the meaning of the story to me.

• Rhiannon Tabios

75 Word Count Response

First critical approach I chose is the Reader Response criticism. This approach deals with the interaction between what is written and the reader. Every type of literature weather it's a book, poem or short story can be interpreted differently. It is the method that we use to find a way to relate to the piece of literature. It is an informal approach, one that is used in more discussions and casual conversations, but I feel can still be a useful approach with any literature.

Second critical approach I chose is the Psychoanalytical Criticism. The approach focuses on the psychology of the characters. It looks deeper into what motivates a character and looks at their behavior and actions. It is said that if you can figure out the protagonist's psychology you can understand and have a better understand of the rest of the text.

I believe these two approaches are similar because one deals with how we can relate to the story and usually the first thing we look to relate to is the main character, and the psychoanalytical approach focuses on the main character. When we focus on this first than we can move on to further understand the rest. They are different because one is more personal and the other is more logical and looking at the piece of literature from a very unbias point of view.

I don't know if I could say that I would choose one over the other because they are both so useful. I don't think I could use one without the other. I suppose if I were to just use one for conflicts than I might say the Psychoanalytical approach just because I love to learn more about peoples real or fake behavior and motivations.