Roles of interpretation in Wolfgang Iser’s theory of reading and in systematic poetics

En hymema XVIII 2017 Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y o Reading and Sys ema ic Poe ics Samuli Bjo ninen Uni e si y o Tampe e Abs ac Among he many a eas o li e a y heo y on which Ise has le his oo p in one a ely hea s any men ion o one ha none heless coincides wi h his ise o p ominence – s udy o poe ics. Al hough poe ics s. he meneu ics was one o he majo heo e ical hemes o he la e 1970s, Ise is be e unde s ood in he con ex o c i ical hough a oiding he s ic opposi ion be- ween he wo. This a icle b idges he gap be ween Ise ’s heo y o eading and s udy o poe ics by del ing in o he w i ings o schola s like James M. Ha ding, and he heo is s o poe ics such as S ein Haugom Olsen and Roge Seamon, who emphasize ha he endea o o sys ema ic po- e ics ba ely go o he g ound be o e i had o eckon wi h he cyclical p ocess o in e p e a- ion. Howe e , Ise ’s desc ip ion o he meneu ics sugges s ha he e y dis inc ion migh be misconcei ed. Ise discusses he adi ion spanning om he 18 h Cen u y hough o F ied ich Schleie mache o he he meneu ic phenomenology o Paul Ricoeu in his inal book, The Range o In e p e a ion (2000). Acco ding o Ise , his adi ion has by de aul concei ed o he meneu ics as a sel - e lexi e p ac ice o coming o unde s and he condi ions o unde s anding. In e p e a- ion is seen as “ he igo ous p ac ice o disco e ing and elucida ing he ami ied condi ionali y o how unde s anding comes abou ” (The Range o In e p e a ion 41–42). Thus de ined, he meneu- ics emphasizes sel - e lexi i y and in e es owa ds i s own condi ions. As my a icle will show, a simila sel - e lec i e u n also cha ac e izes Culle ’s e sion o s uc u alis poe ics (1975), and p e igu es wha Seamon (1989) calls he « hi d phase o scien i ic poe ics». Keywo ds Poe ics, he meneu ics, Ise , in e p e a ion, li e a y heo y. Con ac s ps.bjo [email protected] 1. In oduc ion In his cap i a ing s o y o how he eade o Hen y James’s “The Figu e in he Ca pe ” becomes conscious o he aci assump ions and his o ical no ms shaping in e p e a ion, Wol gang Ise ou lines a p ocess ha also desc ibes ce ain mo emen s wi hin he s udy o li e a y poe ics. By del ing in u n in o Ise ’s heo y, his analy ical p ac ice, and heo y o poe ics, his essay a emp s o gi e e idence o ce ain poin s o con e gence be- ween Ise ’s wo k and he la es ogue o Anglophone s udy o poe ics, which unde - wen i s ajec o y o dominance and decline in he 1970s and 1980s in he Ame ican ac- ademia. Mo e pa icula ly, i a gues wo hings: i s ly, ha con ex ualizing Ise wi hin he mo emen s o phases o poe ics can en ich ou unde s anding o he aims and scope o his wo k. Secondly, he essay a gues ha ou iew o poe ics will be enhanced when jux- aposed wi h Ise ’s changing posi ions. Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 137 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema In addi ion, i should be assumed ha Ise ’s eading o “The Figu e in he Ca pe ” can se e as a p ac ical example o how Ise ’s heo y o eading is used in analysis. Usual- ly Ise is seen al e na i ely in he con ex o phenomenological s udy o li e a u e o eade - esponse c i icism.1 He e a mo e encompassing e m « heo y o eading» is p e- e ed. This choice is p agma ic: he aim o his essay is no only o discuss Ise ’s heo y bu also o analyze his c i ical p ac ice. Ise ’s heo e ical unde pinnings and hei p ob- lems ha e been s udied mo e ex ensi ely han any o he aspec o his hinking. The p agma ic app oach a emp ed he e hopes o con ibu e o ou iew o Ise ’s wo k by jux aposing his heo y wi h his analyses o li e a y wo ks. As Cli o d Gee z amously a gues, unde s anding «a science» may no be p ima ily a heo e ical challenge – we mus i s and o emos «look a wha he p ac i ione s o i do» (Gee z 5). 2. Figu ing he Ca pe wi h Ise : A S o y o Reading Acco ding o Ise , he eade o Hen y James’s “The Figu e in he Ca pe ” is om he ou se in i ed o pa icipa e in he na a o ’s (whom Ise calls « he c i ic») schola ly ques o he meaning o he mys e ious au ho Hugh Ve eke ’s inal no el. Howe e , as Ise poin s ou , ul ima ely he eade and he c i ic mus pa ways. The c i ic emains caugh up in he sea ch o he ul ima e meaning and conclusi e in e p e a ion. He is an alized by ano he c i ic’s appa en disco e y o Ve eke ’s «gene al in en ion» – he ue meaning o he wo k – and is inally le embi e ed as he i al c i ic akes he sec e o his g a e. Acco ding o Ise , howe e , his is no he eade ’s a e. The change in o unes comes abou , Ise a gues, when he o he c i ic’s disco e y is also wi hheld om he eade . The eade has been «o ien ed» by he pe spec i e o he na a o -c i ic, bu his o ien a ion is now challenged and o eg ounded as a con en ion o eading. Ise w i es: This de achmen is ema kable, in ha no mally he eade o ic ion accep s he lines laid down o him by he na a o in he cou se o his «willing suspension o disbelie .» He e [ he eade ] mus ejec such a con en ion, o his is he only way he can begin o con- s ue he meaning o he no el. (The Ac o Reading 8) The eade has o esis he impulse o accep he na a o ’s iewpoin , bu his can only do his by becoming conscious o he con en ionali y o his impulse. To ejec he pe spec i e o he c i ic is, acco ding o Ise , o ead agains one’s own p ejudices. This is any hing bu simple, bu he eade is helped by he ealiza ion ha i is p ecisely he c i - ic’s «pe spec i e» ha is esponsible o wi hholding he o he c i ic’s disco e y.2 1 Ise ose o p ominence in Anglo-Ame ican li e a y heo y as a pa o he i s wa e o eade - esponse heo ies in he mid-1970s. Ye i soon became clea ha he a ious s ands o eade - esponse would and should no con e ge o ma k a uni ied c i ical o heo e ical posi ion (Tompkins ix). The in luen ial olumes compiling con ibu ions o eade - esponse o ‘audience-o ien ed’ c i i- cism highligh ed ha he u n owa ds he eade was, abo e all, a shi in pe spec i e ha a ec ed many a eas o li e a y s udy (Suleiman, The Reade in he Tex 3–4, 6). 2 A guably, his is ue in wo di e en senses o «pe spec i e». One o hem is he na a ological one: he es ic ion o he na a i e o he epis emological iewpoin o he na a o is esponsible o wi hholding in o ma ion abou wha o he cha ac e s in he s o y hink and expe ience. The e o e, no only does no he na a o unde s and how he o he c i ic disco e s he meaning o Ve eke ’s no el, he also qui e simply does no know wha wen h ough his head a he ime o he disco e y. The na - Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 138 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema Ise hen shows whe e his p ocess mus lead he eade : The p ocess hen consis s o he eade g adually ealizing he inadequacy o he pe spec- i e o e ed him, and u ning his a en ion mo e and mo e o ha which he had up o now been aking o g an ed, and inally becoming awa e o his own p ejudices. The «willing suspension o disbelie » will hen apply, no o he na a i e amewo k se up by he au- ho , bu o hose ideas ha had hi he o o ien ed he eade himsel . (8) As soon as he eade makes he choice o ea he na a o as un eliable, ano he eading con en ion becomes no iceable: i he eade has hus a been o ien ed by he c i ic’s iewpoin , (s)he is now o ques ion he e y p ocedu es o meaning-seeking po - ayed in he s o y. Acco ding o Ise , he s o y hema izes, in he c i ic’s pe spec i e, ce - ain nine een h-cen u y no ms o eading ha a e in e nalized o such a deg ee ha , e en oday, hey seem ‘na u al’ o eade s. The c i ic is seeking he u h abou he ex – a se- c e message, a philosophy, a iew o li e, o «a he e y leas some s ylis ic igu e im- p egna ed wi h meaning» (5). This is he eading con en ion ha Ise ’s s o y o eading James mos o ce ully con ends: ha he meaning o he wo k is a message o a philoso- phy o li e in e p e able om he ex . Bu his is jus one hal o he s o y. The e is ano he se o in e p e i e p ocedu es hema ized in he s o y. This side o he a ai is ep esen ed by he o he c i ic in he s o y, Geo ge Co ick, as well as he au ho Ve eke himsel , who a emp s o enligh en he na a o -c i ic, al hough only in agues o e ms. Unlike he na a o , he c i ic Co ick e en ually seems o ge he gis o Ve eke ’s no el, bu he is unable o a icula e his disco e y be o e being silenced by dea h. Ye o cou se his ina icula ion is, in pa , he poin . The eason why he na a o -c i ic is unable o unde s and Ve eke , no only in w i ing bu also in pe son, is ha he is seeking he access o meaning in he «gi ens» o he ex . Ve eke , on he o he hand, insis s: «My whole lucid e o gi es him he clue – e e y page and line and le e . The hing’s as conc e e he e as a bi d in a cage, a bai on a hook, a piece o cheese in a mouse ap» (James, “The Figu e in he Ca pe ” 368). Ve e- ke ’s iew o he li e a y ex , Ise seems o say, is basically Ise ian: he «whole» which Ve eke e e s o is only pe cep ible o a eade who unde s ands ha a ex is p oduced by he eade , in in e ac ion wi h he gi ens and he «blanks» o he ex (The Ac o Read- ing 9). Indeed, Ise a gues, du ing he eading p ocess he eade mus abandon he sea ch o a de ini e meaning, and ins ead become a kind o me a- eade – a eade conscious o bu also implica ed in he in e p e i e p ocedu es esponsible o c ea ion o meaning. While his p ocess unde gone in eading does no lead Ise o explici ly a gue ha « he a o is he locus o wha is in Gé a d Gene e’s na a ology called «in e nal ocaliza ion» (Na a i e dis- cou se 189). The second sense o «pe spec i e», and p obably he only one in ended by Ise s ems om his own phenomenology o eading. Acco ding o Ise , he ex is ne e app ehended in o al bu wi hin a «wande ing iewpoin » – he eade ’s an age on he ex ual pe spec i es (P ospec ing 35; c . The Ac o Reading 109). Pe spec i es a e connec ed by he spo s o inde e minacy which Ise names «blanks», and hey a e o be illed by he eade in such a way ha makes he change o pe spec i e unde s andable o he wande ing iewpoin which is hus ans o med (P ospec ing 34–35). In “The Tu n o he Sc ew” one such pe spec i e is cons i u ed by he na a ing p o agonis . New pe spec i es a ise when he ex allows us a glimpse in o some hing he na a o does no comp ehend. The pe - spec i es ( he na a o ’s, Ve eke ’s, he c i ic Co ick’s) in e link and in e ac , a e in oduced and su- pe seded, and om hem eme ges he eade ’s « ealiza ion» o he ex (The Ac o Reading 33, 68). Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 139 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema hing» o a li e a y wo k is some hing o he han he meaning, his way o using he wo d meaning eme ges om his analysis as some hing highly uno hodox:3 Such a meaning mus clea ly be he p oduc o an in e ac ion be ween ex ual signals and he eade ’s ac s o comp ehension. And, equally clea ly, he eade canno de ach himsel om such an in e ac ion; on he con a y, he ac i i y simula ed in him will link him o he ex and induce him o c ea e he condi ions necessa y o he e ec i eness o ha ex . As ex and eade hus me ge in o a single si ua ion, he di ision be ween subjec and ob- jec no longe applies, and i he e o e ollows ha meaning is no longe an objec o be de ined, bu is an e ec o be expe ienced. (The Ac o Reading 9–10) The eading pe o med by Ise immedia ely s ikes one as a b illian in e p e a ion. A guably i also succeeds as a p ac ical demons a ion o Ise ’s heo y o eading. Due o i s emphasis on wha he eade does and ealizes in he p ocess o eading, Ise ’s pe - o mance ul ills o a ee Jona han Culle ’s (On Decons uc ion) a gumen ha in e p e a- ions a e ac ually concep ualizable as «s o ies o eading.» Acco ding o Culle , an in e - p e a ion o a wo k can be seen as an accoun o wha happens o he eade : «how a i- ous con en ions and expec a ions a e b ough in o play, whe e pa icula connec ions and hypo heses a e posi ed, how expec a ions a e de ea ed o con i med» (35). This is an ap desc ip ion o Ise ’s eading as well. I is also clea ha Ise himsel is he e si ua ed in a pa icula his o ical con ex o c i icism, wi hin a mo emen o eading, as i we e. The book in oducing i sel wi h he s o y o wha he eade o “The Figu e in he Ca pe ” does and comes o ealize is The Ac o Reading, pe haps Ise ’s bes known wo k. As will be shown below, he ideas i p e- sen s align wi h ce ain c i ical no ions a oo in he ield o poe ics a he same ime. In he cou se o his essay we will mo e be ween heo y o poe ics, Ise ’s heo y o eading, and Ise ’s analy ical p ac ice. In he ollowing sec ion, a b ie look in o he s udy o sys ema ic poe ics is aken, wi h ocus on how poe ics nego ia ed – o ailed o nego- ia e – i s ela ion o in e p e a ion. In he subsequen sec ions, i will be a gued ha ce - ain aspec s o Ise ’s wo k can be con ex ualized ui ully by looking in o he p oblems su acing in he s udy o poe ics in he la e 1970s and ea ly 1980s. Howe e , i will also be a gued ha some o Ise ’s ideas s and in in e es ing con as o p oblems encoun e ed in sys ema ic poe ics, and ha ou unde s anding o poe ics could be en iched by a jux- aposi ion wi h Ise ’s heo y o eading. 3. Sys ema ic Poe ics and he P oblem o In e p e a ion Poe ics, concei ed as a sys ema ic s udy o li e a y canons, gen es, o co po a – and, mo e con en iously, indi idual wo ks – has been p og amma ically pu sued a many junc u es o li e a y his o y. Wha connec s hese a emp s o «occiden al poe ics,» om one cen u y o he nex , is he p onounced engagemen wi h s uc u e, sys ema ici y, and scien i ic hough o he ime (Doležel 1–8). Acco ding o Roge Seamon, li e a y heo y a la ge has been s uc u ed by a ension be ween « he e o o make c i icism scien i ic and he esis ance o ha e o posed by he he meneu ic impulse» (“Poe ics agains I - 3 As James Ha ding poin s ou , his is some hing ha he Ame ican c i iques o Ise some imes ailed o ake in o accoun . Acco ding o Ha ding, Ise equa es meaning wi h he e y p ocess o he eade ha his app oach desc ibes (42). Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 140 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema sel ” 294). Also in he wen ie h cen u y, his ension mani es s in changing emphases and oci o s udy. In he con ex o ou discussion o Ise and poe ics, i is especially impo an o ask how he p oblema ic ela ionship o poe ics and he meneu ics is seen in he s uc u alis e a o poe ics ma ked by he in luence o linguis ics-based models. This is he ogue o poe ics empo ally p oximal o Ise ’s wo k, bu one o which he a ely is linked. The e a e, o cou se, se e al good easons o cau ion when discussing Ise in his con ex . One o hese is he heo e ical he i age o he Cons ance school app oach o ecep ion and he meneu ics. Hans Robe Jauss, o example, e y delibe a ely dis ances his e sion o Rezep ionäs he ic om linguis ics (Kloep e , “Escape in o Recep ion” 51). While Ise does no sha e his compa io ’s dis as e o all hings linguis ic, i is ob ious ha ex uali y, in he s uc u alis sense, is nei he he objec o s udy o he domain o heo y o Ise .4 Howe e , as we ace he u ns o poe ics in he la e wen ie h cen u y, he jux aposi- ion be ween Ise ’s app oach(es) o li e a y s udy and sys ema ic poe ics wi h a s uc u al- is backg ound begins o seem less and less o ced. We could a gue ha his is because he in e nal dynamics in poe ics, as desc ibed by Seamon and o he s, g adually mo e po- e ics close and close o Ise ’s posi ion. This a gumen equi es us o ake a close look a he sys ema ic poe ics o he 1970s and 1980s. As Seamon shows, in i s la es heyday sys ema ic poe ics was no a uni ied endea o wi h common goals and ag eed-on me hods. As widesp ead as he in e es in poe ics was, he e was disag eemen abou many key issues, including he e y pu pose and scope o s udy. Addi ionally, he ield was iddled wi h in e es ing ambigui ies esul ing om he linguis ic models unde lying he p ac ice o s udying ex s. Acco ding o Sea- mon, howe e , wha may be called he i s phase o sys ema ic poe ics is la gely uni ied in how he a ea o inqui y was de ined by i s di e ence o c i icism and in e p e a ion. Po- e ics does no compe e wi h he meneu ics; i s ands clea ly apa om i because o i s di e en aims and oci (Seamon 295). The clea es indica ion o his di e ence migh be he insis ence ha s udy o poe ics conce ned no pa icula wo ks bu he sys em o li e a u e (e.g. H usho ski; Ba hes “In oduc ion o he S uc u al Analysis o Na a i e” 237–39; Todo o , The Poe ics o P ose.). This en ailed inding he p ope objec o s udy and de ining he «sys em» o be s udied. I he objec o s udy was no o be he wo k, adi ionally he objec o c i icism and in e p e a ion, i could no be he whole o language ei he . Roman Jakobson a- mously de ined he mid-le el objec o s udy si ua ed be ween language and a pa icula wo k as he «li e a iness» o li e a u e (“On ealism in a ”). Al hough heo e ical o mu- la ions we e no uni o m, in one o m o ano he , his idea in o ms mos app oaches o poe ics. Acco ding o Benjamin H usho ski, an ope a ional delimi a ion o he s udy o poe - ics could be made h ough a dis inc ion be ween heo e ical and desc ip i e poe ics. In his scheme o hings, desc ip i e poe ics is o he s udy o poe ics wha ieldwo k is o o he human and social sciences. In H usho ski’s poe ics, heo e ical hypo heses a e o be alsi iable by he p ac ical wo k applying heo e ical concep s o desc ip ion o ex ual co po a. Tho ough sc u iny o li e a y wo ks p o ides ma e ial, da a and expe imen al e idence o heo y o build on (H usho ski x i). The wo old ask assigned o poe ics 4 Ise is ehemen ly opposed o he idea ha linguis ics is a su icien ame o li e a y heo y, bu he also engages wi h linguis ics-based heo ies – o example in his discussion o he a ie ies o «im- plied» eade s in heo ies o Michael Ri a e e and S anley Fish (see e.g. The Ac o Reading 30–32). Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 141 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema echoes he syn hesis o a ionalism and empi icism in Kan ’s me aphysics: ieldwo k ac- cumula es he pe cep ual da a wi hou which concep s emain emp y, ye ieldwo k p o- duces no hing, emains blind, unless i elies on concep ual s uc u es. The bipa i e sci- en i ic p ac ice also aligns wi h he Poppe ian ideal o scien i ic p og ess h ough he in- e play o alsi iable heo y and epea able expe imen s. In e p e a ion was conside ed an ou lie o his duopoly. H usho ski sees in e p e a- ion as a sub ield ha is s ill in i s p e-scien i ic s a e and may only be legi imized as a pa o sys ema ic poe ics a e a igo ous de elopmen (xxi ). The hing o do wi h indi- idual wo ks, he e o e, is no o in e p e hem bu o desc ibe hem in su icien de ail a a ele an le el. This diminished ole o indi idual wo ks is echoed in he ea ly w i - ings in F ench s uc u alis poe ics (e. g. Todo o 31). The unde s anding o indi idual wo ks achie ed h ough desc ip ion is ins umen al a he han an end in i sel . The ask o poe ics is s ill de ined a he le el o he sys em o li e a u e. Howe e , he idea o he wo k as a sys em o i s own is accep ed in sys ema ic poe ics by ans e ence. Wo k is a sys em o a di e en o de , and can now be legi ima ely he objec o sys ema ic s udy in poe ics. Seamon conside s his as an augu o adical change in he endea o o poe ics – al hough one ha is epea ed in e e y i e a ion o scien i ic poe ics. The second phase o sys ema ic poe ics is dis inguished by his e u n o he wo k o he ocus o s udy (Seamon 298–99). Wha makes his shi signi ican is no only he o e u ning o a o me ly held s ic u e; his signals a change o o unes o in e p e a- ion as well. 4. The Role o He meneu ics in Ise ’s Theo y o Reading This p oblem o in e p e a ion is he i s con ex in which Ise ’s hinking p oduc i ely compa es o he en e p ise o sys ema ic poe ics. In he i s phase o poe ics, consensus was agains in e p e a ion, some imes on he g ounds o i s un-scien i ici y (c . Todo o ; H usho ski), a o he imes o easons mo e o do wi h he ins i u ion o c i icism (e.g. Culle , The Pu sui o Signs and “In e p e a ions”). Ye a guably in e p e i e eadings ha e no been ea ed as he be-all and end-all o c i icism, bu equally, as a pa o he p ac i- cal applica ion o li e a y heo y. As Ka in Li au w i es, li e a y heo is s equen ly use eadings – bo h hei own and hose o o he s – as an occasion om which o ex apo- la e a heo y o eading (107). Indeed, as shown abo e, in his eading o James’s “The Figu e in he Ca pe ,” Ise in e p e s he s o y in such a way ha seems o ecommend his own no ion o eading as an in e ac ion be ween he eade and he ex . I is, o cou se, u e ly unsu p ising ha we should ind Ise using his own in e p e a- ions o li e a y wo ks o bols e his heo e ical claims. This is e y much business as usual in li e a y s udies. Pe haps mo e in e es ingly, Ise ’s heo y o eading seems o embody on a mo e undamen al le el he dual d i es o li e a y s udy iden i ied by Sea- mon: on he one hand, he sea ch o ‘scien i ici y’, and on he o he , he esis ance moun ed by he he meneu ic impulse. As i has been well and duly documen ed, Ise ’s heo y o eading builds on Roman Inga den’s heo y o he phenomenology o a li e a y wo k, bu is equally indeb ed o Gadame ’s e sion o he he meneu ic ci cle (e.g. Holub; Alanko; Li au 108–11). These elemen s, howe e , a e no as easily econciled as Ise seems o hink. This is also wha many o Ise ’s commen a o s ha e poin ed ou . Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 142 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema Ise adop s elemen s om he Gadame ian he meneu ics because he wishes o a oid objec i ying he ex , as Inga den’s phenomenological app oach seemed o do.5 Ise con- inually emphasizes ha he ocus o his app oach is on he mo emen be ween he ex and he eading mind. Tex and eade a e no longe he opposi e sides o a subjec - objec di ide bu a e de ined oge he in a «si ua ion» o in e ac ion (The Ac o Reading 9– 10). The emphasis on in-be weenness and dialogici y poin s owa ds he in luence o he meneu ics o Ise ’s hinking. As Ou i Alanko poin s ou , hese ideas bo owed om he meneu ics a e in equal measu es supposed o sa egua d he eade agains he objec i- ica ion. Ye i is undeniable ha a kind o objec i ica ion akes place. In Ise ’s heo y he eade is no he empi ical eade bu a «phenomenological» one whose wande ing iew- poin shi s om one an age o he nex in acco dance wi h he p ocession o «pe spec- i es» o e ed by he ex . Ise u ns o phenomenology in o de o main ain a ce ain sci- en i ic igo : he phenomenological me hod supposedly allows o a b acke ing o he id- iosync a ic and empi ical aspec s o eading and e eals i s in e subjec i e aspec s (Alanko 57). As Ka in Li au shows, concep ualizing he eade as a « anshis o ical, anssubjec i e, and anscenden al ecep o » uni es he a ious o mula ions o he ead- e : «in o med (Fish), ideal (Culle ), implied (Ise ) o ex ualized (Ba hes)» (Li au 107). The ailu e o econcilia ion be ween he scien i ic igo o phenomenology and he dialogici y o he meneu ics has se ed as he punchline o se e al c i icisms o Ise ’s heo y. E en he mos amous o hem, he one o e ed by S anley Fish, is unde s anda- ble in he con ex o he inal incompabili y o he scien i ic and he meneu ic impulses.6 In his e iew o The Ac o Reading en i led “Why No One’s A aid o Wol gang Ise ,” Fish os ensibly akes issue wi h Ise ’s idea ha i is possible o dis inguish be ween he «gi en» ea u es o ex s and spo s o inde e minacy spu ing he eade in o ac i i y (Fish 5–7; see also Holub 101–06). Acco ding o Fish, his posi ion is un enable: Ise mus assume ha he e is a le el o obse a ion, «a place o a eade o s and,» whe e he gi en ea u es o he ex can be seen p io o any in e p e a ion aking place. Fish coun e s ha obse a ion is always al eady an in e p e a ion wi hin a sys em o in elligi- bili y, which makes ce ain ea u es obse able: [T]he assigning o ha in e p e a ion is no some hing one does a e seeing; i is he shape o seeing, and i seeing does no ha e his (in e p e i e) shape, i will ha e some o he . Pe cep ion is ne e innocen o assump ions, and he assump ions wi hin which i occu s will be esponsible o he con ou s o wha is pe cei ed. The conclusion is he one I ha e eached be o e: he e can be no ca ego y o he «gi en» i by gi en one means wha is he e be o e in e p e a ion begins. (Fish 8) The idea o no pe cep ion being p esupposi ionless is p esen ed in a way ha is high- ly eminiscen o Gadame ian he meneu ics (c . Holub 41). This idea can also be ound in many con ex s. In philosophy o science, o ins ance, Thomas Kuhn akes a s ep o- wa ds he meneu ics by a guing ha expec a ions inhe en in heo e ical «wo ld iews» 5 Robe Holub poin s ou ha Inga den’s insis ence on ocusing on he wo k as an objec endea ed his wo k o Ame ican New C i ics like Réne Wellek, whose no ion o «in insic» modes o c i icism is indeb ed o Inga den’s iews (Holub 23). 6 Howe e , many schola s ha e main ained ha Ise ’s c i ics ha e ailed o add ess he heo y «in i s own e ms.» This c i ique is equen ly applied o he No h Ame ican ecep ion o Ise ’s w i ings, in- cluding Fish’s e iew (Ha ding 40). Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 143 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema p e-s uc u e obse a ions: obse a ion is « heo y-laden» (Kaise 78). A simila posi ion has been aken in assessmen s o poe ics as well. In his discussion o sys ema ic poe ics, S ein Haugom Olsen a gues ha he scien i ic me hod o hypo hesis and expe imen builds on he assump ion ha s uc u es and pa - e ns desc ibed in poe ics a e inhe en ea u es o he ex . This would mean ha he da a o li e a u e can be obse ed empi ically and objec i ely: «[s]cien i ic poe ics accep s s uc u al pa e ns as gi en; he seman ic heo y akes he gi en ac s o be seconda y meanings o ph ases and wo ds» (Olsen 339–40). The ob ious coun e poise o his a - gumen is one ha ques ions he gi enness o pa e ns and seconda y meanings by a guing ha hese ea u es a e, in ac , acqui ed ia in e p e a ion. This is Fish’s coun e a gumen o Ise , as well as he line o ques ioning Olsen akes. Olsen add esses he ques ion o obse able gi ens ia he concep o ele ance. Ac- co ding o Olsen, obse a ion o li e a y da a will always equi e p ede e mining he ele- ance o ce ain ea u es o p ope ies o li e a y ex s; seeing li e a y wo k as s uc u ed equi es a p esc ibed se o ele an s uc u al ca ego ies. Olsen claims ha no desc ip- ion o he wo k can es on gi en s uc u al ea u es bu equi es an explica ion o «a me hod (in e p e a ion) [sic] o assigning a is ic ele ance o pa s o a wo k iden i ied h ough his me hod» (349). Olsen, he e o e, conside s he desc ip ions o li e a y wo ks in poe ics as necessa ily in e p e i e. This is due o he cyclical he meneu ic p ocess al- ways al eady p e igu ing obse a ions o «s uc u al ea u es». This c i icism agains he aux-objec i i y o poe ics comes in many o ms. Seamon p o okes ha in e p e a ion is no hing less han he sub e si e sec e a he hea o po- e ics (304). I seems clea ha his necessa y and subs an ial c i ique o sys ema ic poe ics is, mu a is mu andis, equi alen o he c i icism le eled a Ise . Though pe haps making o he wise dissimila a gumen s, Ise ’s c i ics ha e consis en ly poin ed ou ha his phe- nomenological and he meneu ic impulses a e inally a odds wi h each o he . 5. Towa ds a Me ahe meneu ic Poe ics – Wi h Ise o Wi hou ? Acco ding o Seamon, in he hi d phase o poe ics he objec o s udy changes ye again: « om he s uc u al uni y ha unde lies li e a u e o li e a y wo ks o he deep s uc u e o in e p e a ion i sel » (Seamon 301). This shi can be seen in he p oli e a ion o a i- ous u ns owa ds he eade , some explici ly linked wi h s udy o poe ics, o he s delibe - a ely dis ancing hemsel es om i . Jona han Culle ’s e sion o s uc u alis poe ics is since i s incep ion a eading-o ien ed en e p ise, u ning away om i emiza ion o ex ual elemen s owa ds desc ip ion o con en ions and condi ions o meaning-making (see e.g. Li au 111–12). S e en Mailloux pu s he label «social c i ics» o hose heo is s who u n owa ds a s udy o condi ions o meaning and con en ions o eading (21–22). Va ious b ands o eade - esponse c i icism su acing in he la e pa o he 1970s can also be seen in he con ex . Wi hin Ise ’s oeu e, oo, we can see a c i ic becoming inc easingly «social.» We can ace a mo emen om he indi idual ex ual analyses o Implied Reade (1974) o he phenomenology o eade esponse explo ed in The Ac o Reading (1978) and e isi ed in P ospec ing (1989). The ea e Ise mo es on o «li e a y an h opology.» P ospec ing (1989) concludes by poin ing o he di ec ion o a b oadly «an h opological» li e a y heo y (P o- spec ing 263–65). Ise ’s subsequen wo ks o li e a y an h opology oge he comp ise an ex ended su ey o he place o ic ion, imagina ion, and in e p e a ion in human cogni- ion and cul u e. This su ey is unde aken in The Fic i e and he Imagina y (1993) and The Roles o In e p e a ion in Wol gang Ise ’s Theo y Samuli Bjo ninen En hymema, XVIII 2017, p. 144 h p:// i is e.unimi.i /index.php/en hymema Range o In e p e a ion (published in 2000 bu based on a se ies o lec u es gi en in 1994). In his inal book-leng h s udy, he ex book How o Do Theo y (2006), Ise desc ibes he gene al change in li e a y heo y « om a seman ics o a p agma ics o a , and om he- ma ics o ope a ions o a » (8). The de elopmen o Ise ’s own hinking o e laps wi h his ajec o y a se e al poin s. Howe e , al hough pa allels be ween he phases o poe ics and Ise ’s heo e ical eo - ien a ions can be made, he e a e ce ain a icula ed conce ns in Ise ’s wo k ha pu i sub ly ou o sync wi h he mo emen s o poe ics.7 One o hese is he con inuing em- phasis on in e p e a ion as a sel - e lec i e p ocess, while ano he one is he con inuing emphasis on he his o ical no ms and con en ions ha a e unde s ood as a esul o his sel - e lec i i y. These hemes a e salien h oughou he eo ien a ions in Ise ’s w i ing. We can al- eady see i in The Implied Reade (1974), when Ise is s ill conspicuously quie abou he - meneu ics and in e p e a ion. He does, indeed, explici ly claim ha his eadings a e no con ibu ing o a speci ic heo y o eade ly «disco e y» (xiii). Ye he aim o unde s and- ing is al eady he e: [T]he disco e y conce ns he unc ioning o ou own acul ies o pe cep ion. The eade is mean o become awa e o he na u e o hese acul ies, o his own endency o link hings oge he in consis en pa e ns, and indeed he whole hough p ocess ha cons i u es his ela ions wi h he wo ld ou side himsel . (xi ) This iew o in e p e a ion ecu s in Ise ’s w i ings. As we see in his eading o James’s “The Figu e in he Ca pe ,” he pi o al momen o eading is ha in which he eade has o doub and become conscious o ha which up o ha poin has been aken o g an ed – he his o ical no ms o in e p e a ion. Ise ’s heo y o eading does no equa e in e p e a ion wi h eco e y o meaning: he des iny o eading is no comple ion by in e p e a ion, bu , a he , con inua ion in a mo e encompassing sphe e o unde - s anding. This sphe e en elops he possible meanings o he ex , bu also he con en- ions o eading in ol ed. Fu he , his con inuing p ocess allows one o e lec on he p ocedu es by which bo h he meaning and he con en ions a wo k in i s p oduc ion a e a icula ed and e alua ed. Ul ima ely, in wha may be conside ed Ise ’s las con ibu ion o his heo y o he p ocesses and unc ions o eading, his iew is explici ly linked wi h he meneu ics. In The Range o In e p e a ion (2000), Ise pu s o h ha he con inen al adi ion o mode n he meneu ics has since Schleie mache de ined i sel as a sel - e lec i e p ac ice o aim- ing o unde s and he condi ions o unde s anding. In e p e a ion is seen as « he igo ous p ac ice o disco e ing and elucida ing he ami ied condi ionali y o how unde s anding comes abou .» In his iew, he meneu ics is seen as a speci ic his o ical and gene ic a ie- y o in e p e a ion whose a i al ma ks « he s age a which in e p e a ion becomes sel - e lec i e» (41–42). This pe sis en ea u e in Ise ’s hinking gi es he p ocess o becoming conscious o he his o ical no ms and con en ions o in e p e a ion a key ole in eading. Ye al hough his s and o hinking s ems om he meneu ics, in p ac ice, he p ocedu es o analysis 7 Shlomi h Rimmon-Kenan discusses he main hemes o Ise ’s wo k and hei de elopmen (91). She shows how hese hemes unde go a p ocess o «in ensi ica ion, sel - e lexi i y, and expansion» as his wo k p oceeds om he ea ly phenomenological app oach o li e a y an h opology (92).