How should literature be judged?
Stanley Fish, a reader-response critic would say that it should be, and is, judged by “interpretive communities” That is, communities made up of “optimal readers” Optimal readers are those best suited to get the most out of a literary work (understand allusions, comprehend variations in meter, rhyme, grammar etc.) The idea is, that even though the individual reader can judge a work however they want, the interpretive communities made up of reader will definitively judge which reading of a work is the most relevant. So, although anyone can judge a literary work, it’s the people who are in the best position to fully understand that work (Academics, critics, etc.) who will have the endless debates which will hammer out all the details of whether a work is good, and why.
