In much of the theoretical analyses of text processing, it is assumed that text should be thought of as a form of communication between the author and the reader. This conception is analogous to the communicative model used for analyzing conversation. We argue that this text-as-communication model is inappropriate for many forms of written discourse and for fictional narrative in particular. Unlike oral communication, the author is not physically present, the author is usually not the implied speaker of the text, and recovering the author's intended message can be problematic. Consequently, we feel it is more productive simply to view the text simply as a stimulus. In trying to understand how readers process that textual stimulus, it is important to specify the features and characteristics that can be objectively found in the text, but it is not important to know what the author may or may not have intended.