In this article I report on findings from an ongoing research project into the activities of a transnational range of book groups reading the same series of ‘diasporic’ novels. Rather than relying upon speculations as to how readers respond to text-immanent cues, this project conceives reading as a socially situated, localized activity, contingent upon the context in which it is produced. Empirical approaches to literary reception (whether historical, experimental, or ethnographic) have rarely taken full account of the conditions in which reception data is produced. An ethnomethodological analysis of transcribed book group sessions illuminates the ‘social order’ of particular book groups, their implicit values and systems of accountability, and their careful management and negotiation of subjective experience. This contributes to a complex understanding of the processes of literary interpretation, allowing linguistic studies of reading to complement sociological reception studies.
Alasuutari, P. (ed.) (1999) Rethinking the Media Audience. London: SAGE.
2.
Allington, D. ( 2008a) ‘Discourse and the Reception of Literature: Problematising "Reader Response" ’, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Stirling.
3.
Allington, D. ( 2008b) ‘How to Do Things with Literature: Blasphemous Speech Acts, Satanic Intentions, and the Uncommunicativeness of Verses’ , Poetics Today29(3): 473-523.
4.
Allington, D. and Benwell, B. (forthcoming) ‘Reading the Reading experience: An Ethnomethodological Approach to "Booktalk"’, in A. Lang (ed.) Reading the Readers: Communities, Practices, Transformations.
5.
Andringa, E and Schreier, M. (eds) (2004) How Literature Enters Life . Special Issue of Poetics Today25(2).
6.
Ang, I. ( 1985) Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination . London: Methuen.
7.
Ang, I. ( 1991) ‘Wanted: Audiences. On the Politics of Empirical Audience Studies’, in E. Seiter et al. (eds) Remote Control: Television, Audiences and Cultural Power , pp. 96-115. London: Routledge.
8.
Bennett, T. ( 1987) ‘Texts in History: The Determinations of Readings and their Texts’, in D. Attridge, G. Bennington and R. Young (eds) Poststructuralism and the Question of History , pp. 63-81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Benwell, B. ( 2005) ‘"Lucky This Is Anonymous": Ethnographies of Reception in Men’s Magazines: A Textual Culture Approach’, Discourse and Society16(2): 147-72.
10.
Bray, J. ( 2007a) ‘The "Dual Voice" of Free Indirect Discourse: A Reading Experiment’, Language and Literature16: 37-52.
11.
Bray, J. ( 2007b) ‘The Effects of Free Indirect Discourse: Empathy Revisited’, in M. Lambrou and P. Stockwell (eds) Contemporary Stylistics , pp. 56-68. London: Continuum.
12.
Cook, G. ( 1994) Discourse and Literature: The Interplay of Form and Mind . Oxford: Oxford University Press .
13.
Corner, J., Richardson, K. and Fenton, N. ( 1990) Nuclear Reactions: Form and Response in ‘Public Issue’ Television. London: John Libbey.
14.
Dahlgren, P. ( 1988) ‘What’s the Meaning of This?: Viewers’ Plural Sense-Making of TV News’, Media, Culture and Society10(3): 285-301.
15.
Darnton, R. ( 1990) ‘What is the History of Books?’, in The Kiss of Lamourette: Reflections in Cultural History, pp. 107-35. London and Boston: Faber and Faber .
16.
Edwards, D. and Stokoe, E. ( 2004) ‘Discursive Psychology, Focus Group Interviews, and Participants’ Categories’, British Journal of Developmental Psychology22: 499-507.
17.
Emmott, C., Sanford, A.J. and Morrow, L.I. ( 2006) ‘Capturing the Attention of Readers? Stylistic and Psychological Perspectives on the Use and Effect of Text Fragmentation in Narratives’, Journal of Literary Semantics35(1): 1-30.
18.
Eriksson, K. ( 2002) ‘Booktalk Dilemmas: Teachers’ Organisation of Pupils’ Reading’, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research46(4): 391-408.
19.
Eriksson Barajas, K. and Aronsson, K. ( 2009) ‘Avid Versus Struggling Readers: Co-construed Pupil Identities in School Booktalk’, Language and Literature18(3): 281-300.
20.
Frow, J. ( 1995) Cultural Studies and Cultural Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
Fuller, D. ( 2008) ‘Reading as Social Practice: The Beyond the Book Research Project’, Journal of Popular Narrative Media1(2): 211-17.
22.
Garfinkel, H. ( 1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
23.
Gavins, R. and Steen, G. (eds) (2003) Cognitive Poetics in Practice . London: Routledge.
24.
Hall, G. ( 2008) ‘Empirical Research into the Processing of Free Indirect Discourse’, in S. Zyngier, M. Bortolussi, A. Chesnokova and J. Auracher, J. (eds) Directions in Empirical Literary Studies: In honor of Willie van Peer, pp. 21-34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
25.
Halsey, K. ( 2009) ‘ "Folk Stylistics" and the History of Reading: A Discussion of Method’, Language and Literature18(3): 231-46.
Iser, W. ( 1978) The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Reception. London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
28.
Jauss, H.R. ( 1982) Toward an Aesthetic of Reception, trans. Timothy Bahti . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
29.
Kreuz, R. J., and MacNealy, M. S. (eds) (1996) Empirical Approaches to Literature and Aesthetics. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.
30.
Lang, A. ( 2009) ‘Reading Race in Small Island: Discourse Deviation, Schemata, and the Textual Encounter’, Language and Literature18(3): 316-31.
31.
Lentin, A. ( 2004) Racism and Anti-Racism in Europe. Pluto Press.
32.
Long, E. ( 2003) Book Clubs: Women and the Uses of Reading in Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33.
Machor, J.L. and Goldstein, P. ( 2001) Reception Study: From Literary Theory to Cultural Studies . London/New York: Routledge.
34.
Miall, D. ( 2000) ‘On the Necessity of Empirical Studies of Literary Reading’, Frame14: 43-59.
35.
Miall, D. ( 2006) ‘Experimental Approaches to Reader Responses to Literature’, in P. Locher, C. Martindale and L. Dorfman (eds) New Directions in Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, pp. 175-188. Amityville, NY: Baywood Press.
36.
Moores, S. ( 1993) Interpreting Audiences: The Ethnography of Media Consumption . London: SAGE.
37.
Morley, D. ( 1980) The Nationwide Audience. London: British Film Institute.
38.
Morley, D. ( 1992) Television, Audiences and Cultural Studies. London: Routledge.
39.
Pomerantz, A. ( 1986) ‘Extreme Case Formulations: A Way of Legitimizing Claims’, Human Studies9(2-3): 219-29.
40.
Radway, J. ( 1984) Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy and Popular Literature . London: Verso.
41.
Radway, J. ( 1988) ‘Reception Study: Ethnography and the Problem of Dispersed Audiences and Nomadic Subjects’, Cultural Studies2(3): 359-76.
42.
Semino, E. and Culpeper, J. ( 2002) Cognitive Stylistics: Language and Cognition in Text Analysis . Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
43.
Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, M. ( 1975) Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
Sotirova, V. ( 2006) ‘Reader Responses to Narrative Point of View’ , Poetics34(2): 108-33.
45.
Stockwell, P. ( 2002) Cognitive Poetics: An Introduction. London: Routledge.
46.
Stockwell, P. ( 2003) ‘Schema Poetics and Speculative Cosmology’ , Language and Literature12(3): 252-71.
47.
Swann, J. and Allington, D.(2009) ‘Reading Groups and the Language of Literary Texts: A Case Study in Social Reading’, Language and Literature18(3): 247-64.
48.
Van Dijk, T. ( 1993) Elite Discourse and Racism. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
49.
Van Peer, W. (ed.) (2007) Foregrounding. Special Issue of Language and Literature16(2).
50.
Van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F. and Zyngier, S. ( 2007) Muses and Measures: Empirical Research Methods for the Humanities. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
51.
Werth, P. ( 1999) Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse . New York: Longman.
52.
Zyngier, S.,Bortolussi, M.,Chesnokova, A. and Auracher, J. (eds) (2008) Directions in Empirical Literary Studies: In Honor of Willie van Peer. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
