Precious: Identity, Adaptation, and the African-American Youth Film by Katherine Whitehurst (review)

Abstract

03/07/23 4:25 PM Reception_15_15_Book_Reviews.indd Page 139 03/07/23 4:25 PM reception 138 with obvious stakes for the literary standing of the works in the minds of readers. The chapter on Ellison’s Invisible Man reveals how some readers believed the novel illustrated the plight of Black men in general, and others found it only pertained to a certain subset of African Americans, whereas still others thought that certain aspects of the characters’ experience were universal. Goldstein discusses commentary on Beloved in a later chapter that interprets the novel as a literal ghost story, as opposed to the views of readers that emphasize that the reappearance of the dead was a device Morrison used to represent traumatic memories. Whether Invisible Man is merely a novel with relevance to a niche population or if Beloved should be discredited for being too fantastic are questions that stir readers’ passions—and correlate with their responses to depictions of race and gender in the fiction. I also commend Goldstein for recognizing and discussing the place of literary status in the reception process, notably the public perception of Morrison and Ellison as great writers on weighty subjects, which often compelled nonacademic readers to embrace these works despite their difficulty. I discovered through this book that Goldstein and I do not picture the same ends to reception study although we agree completely on its principles and value. But because I was always attracted to the cross-disciplinary, big tent mentality of the Reception Study Society and Reception, I am not deterred in the least. In fact, The Theory and Practice of Reception Study inspires me for keeping open meaningful debates about how reception should play a role in literary criticism. Goldstein’s book is proof that we in this society thoughtfully reexamine and regularly expand the capabilities of our field.