The Role of Readers

Though it was tough for me to flesh out the point that Ong was trying to make in "The Writer's Audience is Always a Fiction," the content was very interesting especially in regards to the role that a reader takes whenever he or she is reading something. Ong writes, "A reader has to play the role in which the author has cast him...They have to know how to play the game of being a member of an audience that 'really' does not exist (p.12)." As I was reading the this whole interpretation of the reader having to play a role, I kept thinking, "Hasn't this always been the point of reading?" To get lost in a book I would think has been the main reason for reading and writing since it was pencil first hit paper, at least in fiction. Good writing has to entertain or enlighten, maybe even both. That is the reason that any novelist has a job. He is an entertainer. Ong was explaining something that I previously felt needed no explanation. Why do people read? This is one reason why I felt Ong's piece lacked a definite point. Yes, what he wrote was interesting in content, but he seemed to be writing it just because it was interesting, not because he had a problem with it or even any opinion at all, but I was honestly OK with that.
The section in which Ong discusses how writers can manipulate the role of readers was quite interesting as well. By simply using the word "the" instead of "a," a writer can setup a sense of companionship with the reader in order to persuade them to accept their role the writer has created for them(p.13). It's strange to think that something so minuscule as this might turn an average book to a great book in the eyes of the masses. One thinks that the caliber of the story alone is what mainly gives a book its fame, but being able to use a category of words in order suck the reader into his role also holds a lot of power as well. One rarely think of manipulation being a major part of writing, but the reader plays the most important part in deciding whether a work is any good or not. A story or idea may not be very interesting at face value, but if a writer is able to tell it in a more interesting way, then the reader may find it much more enjoyable to read. This hearkens back to the idea of a writer being an entertainer more than anything. If you cannot get your "imaginary audience" sucked in to the message you are trying to send, then what you have to say does not matter. Ong's view of the writer needing to get his reader to accept the role the reader is trying to create for him makes the role of writing seem slightly sleazier in a way. It seems almost as if a writer is a con man trying to dupe the reader into buying what he has to sell, which is exactly what writing is in many cases.