SOURCE: “Fish's Consequences,” in British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 29, No. 1, Winter, 1989, pp. 57-64.

In the following essay, Kivy examines various contradictions and logical flaws of Fish's theoretical perspective, particularly those involving distinctions between demonstration and persuasion models of criticism and their respective implications for literary interpretation.

I want to examine, in this essay, the consequences for the practice of criticism there would necessarily be if what Stanley Fish says about that practice were indeed the truth. I am not interested, here, in truth, but in consequences. Fish believes that the implications of his view for the practice of criticism would be business as usual. I will argue that this cannot be correct, and that Fish’s position, in this regard, is deeply confused.

To put the matter baldly, there are, in Fish’s view, two opposing models of the literary critic’s activity: what Fish calls the demonstration...