Plutarch's 'Lives' and the critical reader

This paper analyses the kind of reader constructed in the Lives and the response expected of that reader. It begins by attempting a typology of moralising in the Lives. Plutarch does sometimes make general 'gnomic' statements about right and wrong, and occasionally passes explicit judgement on a subject's behaviour. In addition, the language with which Plutarch describes character is inherently moralistic; and even when he does not pass explicit judgment, Plutarch can rely on a common set of notions about what makes behaviour virtuous or vicious. However, the application of any moral lessons is left to the reader's own judgement. Furthermore, Plutarch's use of multiple focalisations means that the reader is sometimes presented with varying ways of looking at the same individual or the same historical situation. In addition, many incidents or anecdotes are marked by 'multivalence': that is, they resist reduction to a single moral message or lesson. In such cases, the reader is encouraged to exercise his or her own critical faculties. Indeed, the prologues which precede many pairs of Lives and the synkriseis which follow them sometimes explicitly invite the reader's participation in the work of judging. The syncritic structure of the Parallel Lives also invites the reader's participation, as do the varying perspectives provided by a corpus of overlapping Lives. In fact, the presence of a critical, engaged reader is presupposed by the agonistic nature of much of Greek literature, and of several texts in the Moralia which stage opposing viewpoints or arguments. Plutarch himself argues for such a reader in his How the young man should listen to poems.

'Response and Responsibility: Theories of the Implied Reader in Children's Literature Criticism'

Reader Response Theory remains popular within Children's Literature Criticism. It seems to offer a sensible resolution to the question of whether meaning derives from text or reader. Through a close reading of one example of this criticism, I suggest that its dualisms are constantly collapsing into appeals to singular authority. at various stages the text or the reader is wholly responsible for meaning. I further suggest that the criticism bypasses the question of interpretation through claiming knowledge of a child reader whose opinions and reactions can be unproblematically accessed. We do not have to worry about reading texts, because we can, apparently, know the child's response to them with certainty. Anything other than this claim to certainty is taken to be a failure of responsibility, a wallowing in the subjective, obscure and perverse. My intention is to reinstate reading as the responsibility of criticism.

Is it still King Lear? English teachers and the e-reader phenomenon

E-reading devices such as the Kindle have rapidly secured a significant place in a number of societies as at least one major platform for reading.To some extent they are part of the overarching move towards a fully digitised world, but they have a distinctiveness in being deliberately‘book-like’. Teachers generally have some suspicion towards ‘New Media’, especially when it challenges their established practice. This chapter reports on a survey of English teachers in England to gauge their reactions to e-readers, both personally and professionally, and describes their speculations about the place of e-readers in schools in the future. There is a mixed reaction with some teachers concerned about the demise of the book and the potential negative impact on reading. However, the majority welcome e-readers as a dynamic element within the reading environment with particular potential to enthuse reluctant readers and those with special or linguistic needs. They also, some grudgingly, view the fact that reading using this form of technology appeals to the ‘egeneration’ and may succeed in making reading ‘cool’. This form of technology is, ironically [given that it appears to threaten traditional books], likely to be rapidly adopted in classrooms.

Typographic layout and first impressions: testing how changes in text layout influence reader's judgments of documents

This study explores how the typographic layout of information influences readers' impressions of magazine contents pages. Thirteen descriptors were used in a paired comparison procedure that assessed whether participants' rhetorical impressions of a set of six controlled documents change in relation to variations in layout. The combinations of layout attributes tested were derived from the structural attributes associated with three patterns of typographic differentiation (high, moderate, and low) described in a previous study (see Moys, 2014). The content and the range of stylistic attributes applied to the test material were controlled in order to focus on layout attributes. Triangulation of the quantitative and qualitative data indicates that, even within the experimental confines of limited stylistic differentiation, the layout attributes associated with patterns of high, moderate, and low typographic differentiation do influence readers' rhetorical judgments. In addition, the findings emphasize the importance of considering inter-relationships between clusters of typographic attributes rather than testing isolated variables.