Another idea...
The 'experience of the reader' theory also makes me question how this impacts upon the idea of teaching. Traditional teaching (in both educational and religious institutions) centres on the teacher
instructing the learner. So when we study a play by Shakespeare, the teacher will tell the class what the meaning of that work is. There may be differing ways of getting to that point, and there may be more than one meaning proferred, but the end result is the same; the teacher is the one who validates the opinion of the learner. Opinions which differ are not necessarily considered valid, even if they
are the 'experience of the reader'.
An unusual opinion may prompt the teacher to demand that it is backed up with facts, or it may be dismissed as 'wrong', possibly as the teacher knows that only x, y or z opinion expressed on an exam paper will get the learner to the required standard; or the unusual opinion may challenge the status quo of a religious community. Presumably this is wrong if the 'experience of the reader' is the acceptable way of looking at things.
In reality, 'experience of the reader' is not as free as we think it is. If I was to post a highly controversial view (think of some of the more odious and offensive opinions held in society
) on the 'Downs backed up with selective quotes, then I would expect a barrage of angry replies. I might say "well it was my personal experience which made me interpret the meaning in that way", but this would not hold up as an acceptable defence; many posts would be made telling me why I was wrong. This community we are in has its own rules on interpretation (e.g. LotR is not an allegory, it is not racist, it is not sexist) and if we break one of those rules then 'personal experience' holds no water.
The point I'm trying to make is that just as in society as a whole there are 'rules' (both written and unwritten) which restrict us from acting in a certain way or speaking of certain things, there are also rules (mainly unwritten, imposed by the group) in this very community which likewise prevent us from totally free interpretation. So finding meaning in the experience of the reader is not always applicable, nor is it always even acceptable.
I still like the idea of it, and indeed, I feel strongly that the Thought Police ought to be banished, but in reality, the defence of 'personal experience' is not as watertight as we might think.