# Lit Crit term
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [January 17, 2006, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318 "2006-01-17T04:21:27Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@bagkitty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bagkitty)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/1 "2006-01-17T04:21:27Z")
There is a specific term in literary criticism (and art criticism and film criticism) that is used to describe the meaning projected into a text or work by the reader/critic, that is in addition (and in fact be more important) than what was the artist’s intention. I have been wracking my brain for hours trying to remember what the term is, or come up with a way of finding it on google, and I can’t. :smack: Perhaps the teeming millions can help.
---
### Author:  [@Mindfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mindfield)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/2 "2006-01-17T05:04:49Z")
Deconstruction?
---
### Author:  [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/3 "2006-01-17T05:12:06Z")
Subtext?
---
### Author:  [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/4 "2006-01-17T05:47:56Z")
Reading?
---
### Author:  [@bagkitty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bagkitty)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/5 "2006-01-17T06:17:59Z")
Those are all fine answers, but not the specific term I was looking for. It came to mind when watching a program on Showcase, one of the characters was lamenting that her work had been taken over by its readers, and that their interpretation was being accepted as definitive… well, I can hope for more replies… or maybe watch a lot of reruns… Thanks for taking a stab at it to this point folks.
---
### Author:  [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/6 "2006-01-17T06:49:43Z")
Argh. I know this one. I think it’s part of reader-response theory, but I can’t think of the term itself.
---
### Author:  [@HazelNutCoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HazelNutCoffee)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/7 "2006-01-17T07:06:47Z")
You mean where the reader bases their criticism of the text on their personal reaction? Affective fallacy?
---
### Author:  [@FlyingRamenMonster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlyingRamenMonster)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/8 "2006-01-17T07:18:09Z")
Reader Response?
---
### Author:  [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/9 "2006-01-17T07:45:43Z")
Yeah, it sounds like [Reader response criticism](http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Reader-response_criticism.html)
“According to reader-response criticism, the reader is a producer rather than a consumer of meanings.”
---
### Author:  [@bagkitty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bagkitty)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/10 "2006-01-17T07:52:51Z")
> [@Hunter Hawk](#):
>
> Argh. I know this one. I think it’s part of reader-response theory, but I can’t think of the term itself.
Frustrating isn’t it…, I like HazelNutCoffee’s suggestion, but I am pretty sure I am trying to remember a single word.
Sleep beckons, I hope some tortured soul has an inspirational flash and offers up the term I am looking for. Thanks to everyone so far who has made suggestions.
---
### Author:  [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/11 "2006-01-17T08:07:44Z")
Subjectivity?
Historicism?
---
### Author:  [@HazelNutCoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HazelNutCoffee)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 8:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/12 "2006-01-17T08:34:39Z")
Hm. Are you looking for a term that specifically refers to the readers’ interpretation of the text, and not the concept of it? The closest terms I can think of are reconstruction or formulation. Maybe [this site](http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng215/reader_response_terms.htm) will help you think of the term you’re looking for.
I re-read the OP and realized that the affective fallacy belongs to New Criticism, which believes that criticism of the text should not be tainted with the intentions of either the author or the reader. Since you’re looking for a term that supports reader-response criticism, this is definitely not what you’re looking for. :smack:
---
### Author:  [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/13 "2006-01-17T09:51:14Z")
intentional fallacy?
---
### Author:  [@mamboman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mamboman)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/14 "2006-01-17T10:03:44Z")
Co-Option?
---
### Author:  [@HazelNutCoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HazelNutCoffee)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 10:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/15 "2006-01-17T10:09:54Z")
> [@uglybeech](#):
>
> intentional fallacy?
Intentional fallacy is when the criticism is based on the _author’s_ intent, not the reader’s. In any case, like “affective fallacy” the term comes from New Criticism (which argues that interpretation of the text should be free of subjective opinions, be they the author’s or the reader’s) and not reader-response criticism.
---
### Author:  [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/16 "2006-01-17T10:26:14Z")
> [@HazelNutCoffee](#):
>
> Intentional fallacy is when the criticism is based on the _author’s_ intent, not the reader’s. In any case, like “affective fallacy” the term comes from New Criticism (which argues that interpretation of the text should be free of subjective opinions, be they the author’s or the reader’s) and not reader-response criticism.
Yes, but I suspect the OP may be groping for the term that indicates the author’s intentions are irrelevent, and merely inferring that that must elevate the reader’s interpretation. And in practice this is how the term is often used.
---
### Author:  [@HazelNutCoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HazelNutCoffee)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/17 "2006-01-17T11:42:23Z")
> [@uglybeech](#):
>
> Yes, but I suspect the OP may be groping for the term that indicates the author’s intentions are irrelevent, and merely inferring that that must elevate the reader’s interpretation. And in practice this is how the term is often used.
Well, FWIW, the OP does say
> [@Bagkitty\_the\_return](#):
>
> There is a specific term in literary criticism (and art criticism and film criticism) that is used to describe **the meaning projected into a text or work by the reader/critic** , that is in addition (and in fact **be more important) than what was the artist’s intention**.
and
> [@](#):
>
> Frustrating isn’t it…, I like HazelNutCoffee’s suggestion [affective fallacy], but I am pretty sure I am trying to remember **a single word**.
I agree with the general opinion that we’re probably looking for a term from reader-response criticism. And a positive term at that; both affective fallacy and intentional fallacy are terms used to criticize what they refer to.
---
### Author:  [@WotNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WotNot)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/18 "2006-01-17T12:45:03Z")
Are you thinking of [semiotics?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics)
---
### Author:  [@bagkitty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bagkitty)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/19 "2006-01-17T18:25:08Z")
Again, thanks to everyone who has offered suggestions. Nothing so far suggested has resulted in that “Eureka” moment… But I am still hoping.
---
### Author:  [@groman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/groman)
#### Post date: [January 17, 2006, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318/20 "2006-01-17T18:30:43Z")
I am almost certain you are thinking of **eisegesis**.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lit-crit-term/340318.md?page=2)