In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Diderot and Reader-Response Criticism:mlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI The Case of Jacques le fatalisteRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA K A T H R Y N S I M P S O N V I D A L gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA In the "Eloge de Richardson," Diderot praises the English novelist for his dramatic impact upon the reader and describes how, while reading, he had the sensation of the acquisition of experience, of hav­ ing played a role in the work.1 Through an examination of his own reactions as a reader, Diderot attempts briefly to discern how Rich­ ardson's art provokes such a compelling feeling of involvement within the text. Modern critics have equally turned towards the phenome­ non of the reader's response as an essential dimension of the literary text, and Wolfgang Iser, one of the more prominent theoreticians in this domain, echoes Diderot's concept of "experience" in his analysis of reader activity. Diderot's novels themselves exhibit a good deal of experimentation with respect to the reader's role, but it is his final novel, J a c q u e s le f a t a l i s t e , which directly overturns convention in order to focus upon the presence of "the reader in the text."2 Iser's concept of the implied reader, whose role he analyzes at length in the English novel,3 provides some surprising parallels with the frustrated and frustrating le c t e u r in J a c q u e s le f a t a l i s t e .4 This fictive reader is quite an unusual and problematic presence because of his very flagrant role and the frequency of his interruptions. In effect, his questions supply the very first sentences of the novel, and from that point on he is everywhere, unannounced and often unidentified, constantly ac­ companied by his respondent, the narrator. Even the novel's conclu­ sion is left up to the faithful reader; for his own satisfaction, he is 33 34 / VIDALgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA asked to choose among the three possible endings salvaged by the "editor" after the narrator's disappearance. The playful, nonchalant tone which characterizes the intrusive dia­ logue between narrator and reader disguises a paradoxical interro­ gation into the premises of the novel itself. RQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA J a c q u e s le fa t a lis t e dis­ mantles its own powers of illusion while destroying the reader's faith in such powers, and thus effectively demonstrates one of Iser's ax­ ioms, that fiction "possesses none of the criteria of reality and yet it pretends that it does."5 Within this complex novel, Diderot's le c t e u r has often been dismissed as a parody of the typical eighteenth-century reader, avid for the mimetic illusion the novel purported to produce. Critical attention generally focuses upon the narrator, whose disdain for the reader's requests and outright refusal to respond seem to con­ firm the weaknesses of the le c t e u r . This narrator's apparent drive to dominate both reader and text, his unpredictability and his unrelia­ bility, all render him a more fascinating and inscrutable figure.6 The fictive reader's role is more complex than a simple parody, however. He is not totally submissive. Not only does he begin and end the novel, it is his response which triggers the narrator's com­ mentary. We must also take into account the fact that the entire novel is built upon a series of narrative situations which largely mirror the tendencies present in the initial narrator-reader relationship. Story­ telling is the essential activity of the novel, and all of the main char­ acters have stories to tell. They, too, comment upon the comportment of their audience just as those listening intervene to criticize the speakers' respective techniques. This commentary complements that of the explicitly inscribed le c t e u r . Jacques's master, the most avid lis­ tener, most often exhibits the same failings and is equally frustrated in his quest for a story. Such interaction is the foundation for my comparison of the novel and Iser's inquiry into the reader's re­ sponse...

pdf

Share