Muhammad Mussawar, M.

A ENGLISH
Muhammad Mussawar, M. A ENGLISH

Q. Where does the meaning lie in the text, reader, writer, or the structure?
Explain in the light of Catherine Belseys Critical Practice.
In her book Critical Practice, Catherine Belsey has evaluated the theories of major critical
schools of thought. Most of these theories evolved as a reaction against Common Sense view
of literature. New Criticism, Northrop Frye and Reader-Power attempted to refute the claims of
common sense but did not succeed. In one way or the other, they got trapped in the problems
of common sense. Belsey says that it was Post-Saussurean linguistics that revolutionized the
theory and practice of literary criticism by presenting a whole new concept of meaning and
interpretation. Post-Saussurean linguistics proved that meaning does not lie in the text, in the
writer or in the reader but it lies in structure.
Common sense claims that literature reflects reality. It is based upon those concepts which are
eternal and universal. When we read a novel, we can see that its characters and situations are
familiar to us. The reason is that these characters and situations are taken from real life and we
ourselves pass through similar situations. Authors are special persons who possess
extraordinary insight and sensitivity. They observe and experience these real situations and
then transform them into works of literature. In this way, the works of literature are the
products of the minds of these genius writers. The meaning expressed in these works comes
from the knowledge and sensibilities of these writers. The life of the author and the age in
which he lived play a very important role in the interpretation of a literary work. As these works
of literature are based upon the situations we ourselves experience and observer, therefore,
we do not need any theory to understand and interpret them just using common sense. But
the study has revealed that common sense itself is based upon theories of imitation, humanism
and romanticism. These theories consider man who thinks by himself as source of action and
meaning. The critical practice based upon common sense is called Expressive Realis m.
New Critics like T. S. Eliot, I. A. Richards, R. P. Warren, J. C. Ransom and Cleanth Brooks rejected
the claims of common sense and expressive realism. They claimed that the meaning of a literary
work lies in the text and not in the author. New Critics said that it was neither possible nor
desirable to search for the intentions of the author while interpreting a text. They stressed that
a critic should focus his attention on the text itself. A close-reading of the formal elements of
the text i.e. the images, symbols, metaphors, rhyme, meter, setting, characterization and plot
reveals its real meaning. The analysis of these formal elements can lead to a single accurate
meaning of the text. Belsey says that New Criticism failed to define the proper origin of
meaning. Their claim the text on the page is the source of meaning is not valid because a text
is written in a language. Every language has its own system of meaning. This semantic system is
always in a process of evolution and with the passage of time it goes through transformation. It
means that a text can never have a permanent and unchangeable interpretation. If we accept
that the meaning of a text is permanent and universal, then we must also accept that meaning
is outside language and the change in language does not affect it. But if meaning is outside
language then it means that it exists in the mind of the author. Hence the New Criticism also
became another version of expressive realism and failed in its attempt to free the text from its
author.
Northrop Frye challenged both expressive realism and New Criticism. He rejected the theory of
New Criticism that literature should be interpreted in isolation. He said that all literary works
Muhammad Mussawar, M. A ENGLISH
Muhammad Mussawar, M. A ENGLISH

form a system and whole, and the individual work should be interpreted as part of that system
and whole. That system or whole is termed by him as Archetypes. The word archetype refers
to any recurring image, character, plot or action. An archetype is a model, different versions of
which recur throughout human history, in the myths, literature, religion, and social behavior.
Four major mythical patterns or archetypes defined by Frye are comedy, romance, tragedy and
irony/satire. The origin of archetypes is eternal and unchanging human; therefore, an author
cannot be a source of meaning. Belsey says that Fryes concept of eternal human desire
indirectly connects to human consciousness and then to the author. Also Frye fails to explain
the role of language in the construction of meaning.
Another theory which posed a very serious threat to expressive realism is Reader-Response or
Reader-Power theory. This theory focuses on readers responses to literary texts. Reader-
Response Criticism began in the 1960s and 70s, particularly in America and Germany, in works
by Norman Holland, Stanely Fish, Wolfgang Iser and others. Reader-Response theory recognizes
the reader as an active agent who imparts real existence to the work and completes its
meaning through interpretation. Reader-Response criticism emphasizes the role of the reader
rather than the author in the construction of meaning. Readers interact with the text and their
knowledge, emotions and feelings play an important role in the process of interpretation. The
reader is affected by the stylistic devices used in the text and interprets it accordingly. The
psychological experience of the readers also plays a very important role in the construction of
meaning. The Reader-Response criticism failed to challenge expressive realism because it
supposes another authority figure i.e. highly informed reader.
Belsey says that the meaning of a text does not lie in the writer or reader or the text but it
lies in the structure of social formation. Structuralism is based upon the linguistic theory of
Ferdinand de Saussure. Saussure divided linguistic sign into signifier and signified. For example,
the word dog is a sign. A sign consists of a signifier and a signified. A signifier is the spoken or
written image while the signified is the concept associated with it. When we write or speak the
word dog, it would bw called signifier but the concept associated with this word i.e. a four
legged domestic animal is its signified. The relationship between a signifier and a signified is not
based upon some logic but it is arbitrary. Langue is the total system of a language. It comprises
of all the rules and principles that an individual must follow. When an individual speaks or
writes something, following the rules of langue, it would be called his parole. Langue is social
while parole is individual. Similarly a society also has its own system of beliefs and ideas. This
can be called the langue of the society. The beliefs of individual are parole and parole is always
dependent upon langue. When an individual says something, unconsciously he expresses those
views which are part of langue, the overall belief system of society. Belsey calls this ideology.
This is the reason that we cannot take an individual as source of meaning. Meaning is generated
by social formation and not by one individual. Literary criticism should interpret a text in
relation to the social formation in which it was written. It should concentrate on the social,
political and economic system of that society.