Reader Response focuses on how the reader receives the text and how they give meaning by how they interpret it. All readers being their own prior knowledge of a piece, which can influence the way that they read, thus giving their own meaning to a piece depending on how the author wrote it. Through this, we are completely disregarding the idea from the previous theories that the text is the main source of meaning for a piece of text.
In Reader Response, we look at the theories of Stanley Fish and Wolfgang Iser. Fish explains how the structure of the words themselves, such as the sentence or paragraph structure, affects how a reader responds to a text. An author can manipulate the way they write a piece to coax a very specific, emotional response. He also describes the Social Reader Response Theory, where people read texts different ways depending on what communities they belong to. Meanwhile, Iser’s contribution to Reader Response defines the reader itself. While the reader deduces the “implied author,” who is the one who is writing the piece, either the narrator or not, there is also an “implied reader” (179) who is the implied author is addressing. The actual reader assume who the author is addressing using clues from the text.
I believe Reader Response is a smart way to look at any text, especially since it gives the reader more facets to analyze without any restrictions like New Criticism and Structuralism do. The reader can use prior knowledge and context from the text to help read it with more clarity. However, if someone is so used to using Reader Response, it may be hard for them to switch to an objective standpoint if ever asked to.