Unsurprisingly, as we already saw,

Unsurprisingly, as we already saw, scholars disagree on the importance of an overlap or similarities between readers and characters: Phelan (1994), for example, argues that the more specificity is added to the description of a character in a given storyworld the more distanced readers will feel from the you referent position; by contrast, Kacandes argues the opposite by effectively saying that specificity does not diminish the address pronoun’s rhetorical sway over readers. Bonheim (1983: 73) additionally addresses the question of fictionality when he argues: ‘If the fictive “you” is not present physically in the story in an obvious way, the reader may not recognize his fictive status and mistak- enly think himself to be addressed.’If we factor in immersion through experientiality we arrive at an impasse because greater experientiality (e.g. by means of the reflectoral mode or internal focalization) seems to demand specificity as a prerequisite. As mentioned above, the problem arises because discussions ofyou-narration at this point conflate two distinct aspects, namely, whether we feel addressed by the you in the text on the one hand, and whether we become emotionally involved in the presented actions on the other. It is obvious that we can immerse ourselves to a certain degree in stories which do not make use of second-person narration. The more difficult question is whether we can feel addressed by the second- person pronoun and still remain detached or uninvolved.