Reception Theory and Les Liaisons DangereusesOf all the literary critical theories discussed so far, I find reception theory by far the most intelligent and most enriching. After all, where does literature become literature, where does it “produce” so to speak, if not in the mind of the reader? Without the reader, literature is just ink blots on paper. This fits Berkeley's solipsistic analogy of a tree falling in the woods. Without a listener, does it make a sound? Well, technically it emits vibrations, but only one ear will interpret those vibrations as sound. So with literature. The reader's mind, operating on the text with its various literary and extra-textual codes, makes it literature. In the case of Les Liaisons Dangereuses, reception theory is not only useful, it is positively essential to any sort of literary discussion on the subject. the novel. Considerations of authorial intention are clearly unnecessary, as, due to the epistolary format, such intention cannot be inferred from the text. Even if we try to construct some sort of original meaning in the author's mind, we ultimately discover that the meanings we have come up with have been provided by ourselves. Laclos is like the puppeteer's hand: we never see it, even if we know that it controls the entire show. All we see are the ornate 18th century puppets as they dance through every vile deception, every “dangerous liaison.” Even more exasperating than trying to find authorial intent in the pages of Les Liaisons Dangereuses is the (one would think) relatively simple task. to check the moods and motivations of the characters themselves. Since we know that the majority of characters are moderate to outright liars, writing one thing to one person and another to another, who do we believe? When the appearance of soul bearing is just another weapon in the arsenal, how are we supposed to determine when true soul bearing is taking place? Here again, reception theory comes to our aid. By examining our own literary and non-literary conventions, we begin to feel more confident about the proposition that Valmont is truly in love with the President and that the Marquise is truly in love with Valmont. After all, that’s what makes it good, right? Without having love rear its ugly head at some point, the book would be a monotonous, thankless, depressing look at people both glamorous and depraved..