Reader Response theory is a very interesting way to look at literature. It has a lot of notions that one already assumes about reading texts, but may not outwardly have realized. Reader Response essentially states that a text means nothing unless a reader reads it and gives it meaning. Otherwise, it is just a text. Similar to the idea of a tree falling in a forest and no one hears it, does it really make a sound, Reader Response would say no in terms of literature. There is no meaning without a reader. In fact, when we interpret the meaning of a text, we aren’t actually interpreting the meaning of a text. Reader Response is actually focused on the fact that we are interpreting our own symbolization. Each reader is going to read a piece a little differently. Just as every reader has had different life experiences, every reader is going to bring those experiences to their reading, and it will affect the way they view the piece. Reader Response also looks at how these exact experiences might cause us to have bias when reading a work. It seems almost impossible to not have any sort of innate bias when reading a work, especially if it is controversial. This theory completely removes the relevance of author. What the author has done up to this point is completely irrelevant for Reader Response. This theory is concerned only with the interaction between the reader and the text.

Louise Rosenblatt is a theorist that is focused on Transactional Reader Response theory, or the interaction between the reader and text. To Rosenblatt, both are equally important, but the focus is still what the reader makes from a text. She encourages reading of a text in an aesthetic way, or experiencing a personal relationship with the text. In doing this, it is going to be a reading with more emotions and will cause us to make more judgements, whether positive or negative.