The Death of the author and it's Postmodern implications ( Continued 1)
Summary
TLDRThe NPTEL course session delves into Roland Barthes' seminal essay 'The Death of the Author,' exploring its significance in postmodern literary theory. Barthes argues for the independence of the literary text from the author's intentions, advocating a 'birth of the reader' approach that emphasizes reader interpretation over authorial intent. The essay is contextualized within the intellectual shift from Structuralism to Poststructuralism and the broader socio-political movements of the 1960s. Barthes' ideas challenge traditional literary criticism and celebrate the multiplicity of meanings in literature, ultimately positioning the reader at the center of the narrative.
Takeaways
- 📖 Roland Barthes' essay 'The Death of the Author' is pivotal in understanding Postmodern literary critical practices and the shift in understanding subjects and narratives.
- 🗣️ Peter Barry emphasizes the essay's assertion of the literary text's independence from the author's intentions, promoting the idea of radical textual independence.
- 🏙️ The context of 1960s Paris, with its intellectual movements, influenced Barthes' reaction against the overemphasis on the author's identity.
- 🔄 Barthes' essay signifies a transition from Structuralism to Poststructuralism, marking a shift in his critical approach.
- 🖋️ Barthes argues that writing creates the author, not the other way around, challenging the traditional notion of authorship.
- 📚 The essay advocates for the liberation of texts from the constraints imposed by authorial intent and emphasizes the role of the reader in interpreting texts.
- 🔍 Barthes criticizes the focus on biographical and historical criticism, arguing that the author's life and intentions are irrelevant to the text's meaning.
- 🌐 Barthes' ideas resonate with Marxist views on authorship as a construct of capitalist ideology, stressing control and authority.
- 📜 The essay reflects a historical trajectory of evolving notions of authorship, influenced by movements like Romanticism and Enlightenment.
- 🎨 Barthes' work, along with similar approaches in literature, promotes the idea of multiple interpretations, celebrating the plurality and liberation in reading texts.
Q & A
What is the significance of Roland Barthes' essay 'The Death of the Author'?
-The essay 'The Death of the Author' is significant as it marks a transition from Structuralism to Poststructuralism. It argues for the independence of the literary text from the author's intentions, emphasizing the reader's role in interpreting the text and allowing for multiple interpretations.
How does Peter Barry interpret the importance of 'The Death of the Author' in contemporary critical theory?
-Peter Barry interprets the importance of 'The Death of the Author' as a rhetorical assertion of the literary text's independence and immunity from being unified or limited by the author's intentions. It declares the birth of the reader, highlighting the text's freedom from the author's restraints.
What was the intellectual climate in Paris during the 1960s that influenced Barthes' essay?
-The intellectual climate in Paris during the 1960s was characterized by a move within the European tradition that overemphasized the identity of the author. Barthes' essay was a response to and reaction against these dominant tendencies, positioning it as a landmark text in the shift from Structuralism to Poststructuralism.
How does Barthes view the author in the context of language?
-Barthes views the author not as a person existing prior to or outside of language but as a product of history and societal compulsions. He argues that the author is a construct within the structures of language and that writing, rather than being a product of the author, actually constructs the author.
What does Barthes mean when he says that 'the death of the author' is also the 'birth of the reader'?
-By saying 'the death of the author is the birth of the reader,' Barthes means that the significance shifts from the author's intentions to the reader's interpretations. It suggests that the reader's engagement with the text is more important than the author's original intentions, allowing for a more liberated and diverse understanding of the text.
How does Barthes' essay challenge traditional literary critical approaches?
-Barthes' essay challenges traditional literary critical approaches by rejecting the idea that a text's meaning can be determined by the author's intentions or biography. Instead, it promotes the idea that texts have multiple meanings that are subjective to each reader's interpretation, thus decentralizing the author's authority and empowering the reader.
What is the role of the reader according to Barthes' essay?
-According to Barthes, the reader plays a crucial role as the one who brings meaning to the text. The reader's personal experiences and interpretations are what give the text its significance, allowing for a plurality of meanings and interpretations.
How does Barthes' view on authorship relate to the concept of the 'work'?
-Barthes argues against the idea of the 'work' as a fixed entity with a singular, ultimate meaning. Instead, he sees writing as a central factor that engages with the reader, where the communication is between the text and the reader, diminishing the author's significance.
What intellectual traditions influenced Barthes' ideas in 'The Death of the Author'?
-Barthes' ideas were influenced by various intellectual traditions, including Lacanian psychoanalysis, which questioned the unified subject, and Marxist perspectives that saw the author as a modern invention tied to capitalist ideologies. His work also resonates with the Enlightenment's emphasis on individuality and the Romantic notion of the writer as a creator.
How does Barthes' essay relate to the concept of multiplicity and plurality in contemporary culture?
-Barthes' essay celebrates the multiplicity and plurality of interpretations, which aligns with contemporary culture's emphasis on diverse perspectives and individual interpretations. It reflects the current social media landscape, where every individual can offer their own interpretations of texts and situations.
What is the significance of the epigraph in Barthes' essay, and how does it set the tone for the discussion?
-The epigraph, which discusses Balzac's story 'Sarrasine,' introduces the theme of indeterminacy in identifying the voice behind a text. It sets the tone for the essay by highlighting the impossibility of knowing the specific origin of a text's voice, which is central to the celebration of multiple interpretations and the liberation of the reader.
Outlines
📚 Introduction to 'The Death of the Author'
This paragraph introduces the essay 'The Death of the Author' by Roland Barthes, emphasizing its significance in postmodern literary criticism. It discusses the essay's role in the shift from modern to postmodern understandings of literature, narrative, and the subject. The paragraph also highlights the importance of understanding the historical and intellectual context of Paris in the 1960s, which influenced Barthes' work. It touches on the transition from structuralism to poststructuralism and the ongoing debate within French literature at the time.
🌟 The Emancipation of the Reader
The second paragraph delves into the concept of the author's death as an emancipatory event, marking the beginning of an era where the reader takes on a more significant role. Barthes' discomfort with being labeled a critic is noted, as he focused on the semiotic significance of works rather than providing verdicts. The paragraph also discusses how Barthes' poststructuralist analysis influenced cultural studies and how he challenged traditional literary criticism, celebrating the reader's emergence and the multiplicity of interpretations.
🛕 The Author as a Social and Historical Construct
In this paragraph, the authorship is explored as a social and historical construct rather than a personal identity. Barthes argues that the author is a product of societal compulsions and history, and that the concept of the author exists within the structures of language. He suggests that writing creates the author, not the other way around, and that the author's identity is constructed through their writings. This shift in perspective leads to a foregrounding of the text and the reader while the author's traditional elevated status is diminished.
📜 The Rejection of Authorial Intent and Biography
Barthes' rejection of the idea that a text reflects the author's distinct personality or that the author's biography is relevant to understanding a text is discussed in this paragraph. He challenges the notion that authors create original works, instead arguing that they combine existing elements. The paragraph also touches on the influence of Lacan and Marxist perspectives on Barthes' ideas, and how the concept of the author has been shaped by various intellectual traditions and socio-political movements.
🚀 The Elevation of the Reader and Plurality of Interpretations
This paragraph focuses on the elevation of the reader's role and the potential for multiple interpretations in literature. Barthes argues that meaning is brought to the text by the reader's personal experiences rather than the author's genius. He traces the intellectual trajectory leading to the death of the Author, highlighting the historical and critical changes that have occurred. The paragraph also mentions how contemporary social media platforms celebrate multiplicity and plurality, and how works like 'Tristam Shandy' and 'The French Lieutenant's Woman' invite reader participation.
🔍 Deconstruction and Theoretical Critique
The final paragraph discusses similarities between Barthes' ideas and the deconstructionist critics of the Yale school, who also emphasized the disjointed nature of texts. It mentions alternative readings of 'The Death of the Author', including the satirical interpretation, which is not widely accepted. The paragraph concludes by emphasizing the essay's importance in understanding literature, culture, and the contemporary world, which is characterized by multiple interpretations and the absence of a single authoritative voice.
📝 Conclusion and Preview of Further Discussion
The lecturer concludes the session by encouraging participants to read the original essay for a deeper understanding before the next session. They reflect on the essay's significance in understanding postmodern literature and critical practices, and how it has become a seminal text in the field. The lecturer thanks the audience and expresses anticipation for the following session's more detailed exploration of the essay.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Postmodernism
💡Roland Barthes
💡Author
💡Textual Independence
💡Reader
💡Structuralism
💡Poststructuralism
💡Intention Fallacy
💡Biographical Criticism
💡Interpretation
💡Cultural Studies
Highlights
The Death of the Author by Roland Barthes is a seminal essay in Postmodern literary criticism.
The essay argues for the independence of the literary text from the author's intentions or context.
Barthes' work is a response to the overemphasis on the Author's identity within the European tradition from the 1950s onwards.
The essay is a landmark text in the transition from Structuralism to Poststructuralism.
Barthes challenges the traditional literary critical approach and the idea of the Author as a unified intending subject.
The essay celebrates the emergence of the reader and their significance in the interpretation of texts.
Barthes views the Author not as a creator but as a product of history and societal compulsions.
Writing is seen as constructing the Author rather than the Author creating the writing.
The Author's elevated status is diminished, and the text and reader are foregrounded in Barthes' theory.
Barthes rejects the idea of the Author producing original works, emphasizing the combinatorial nature of writing.
The essay posits that the Author's biography and historical context are irrelevant to the interpretation of a text.
Barthes' approach is influenced by Lacanian psychoanalysis and Marxist ideology, which also critique the concept of the Author.
The essay is part of an intellectual tradition that reimagines the role and understanding of the Author in society.
Barthes' theory is aligned with the Romantic notion of the writer as a subjective identity, yet also seeks to transcend it.
The Death of the Author essay calls for an elevation of the reader's role and the multiplicity of interpretations.
Barthes' ideas have parallels with the Yale school of deconstructionist critics, focusing on the disjointed nature of texts.
The essay concludes by emphasizing the impossibility of knowing the voice behind the text and celebrating the plurality of interpretations.
Barthes' work remains influential in understanding Postmodern literature and the shift towards reader-centric interpretations.
Transcripts
Good morning and welcome to today's session of the NPTEL course Postmodernism in Literature.
In continuation with the previous session, we shall be discussing the essay The Death of the
Author by Roland Barthes. As we have indicateed earlier, this is a seminal essay which is located
in a transitional phase, this is also considered as an important piece in the understanding of
Postmodern literary critical practices and also in the understanding of a Postmodern shift in the
understanding of subject, in the understanding of narrative and even in the meaning-making process.
So, continuing our discussion, we begin looking at one of the statements made by Peter Barry in
his important work Beginning Theory. He talks about The Death of the Author in such a way
that he locates its importance within contemporary critical theory ; Peter Barry writes: “The Death
of the Author is a rhetorical way of asserting the independence of the literary text and its immunity
to the possibility of being unified or limited by any notion of what the Author might have intended,
or ‘crafted’ into the work. Instead, the essay makes a declaration of radical textual
independence: The work is not determined by intention or context. Rather the text is free
by its very nature of all such restraints. Hence as Barthes says in the essay the corollary of The
Death of the Author is the birth of the reader.” As some of the things Peter Barry talks about,
we shall come back to discuss in detail. And moving on, it is very important to
understand the context which produced this essay by Barthes, The Death of the Author. Barthes’
essay- and his pronouncement of The Death of the Author needs to be understood within the
intellectual life of a Paris, especially in the 1960's. So, there was a particular move
within the European tradition from the 1950's onwards which placed an overemphasis on the idea,
the identity of the Author. So, we need to understand that
Barthes was in certain ways, responding to and reacting against such dominant tendencies. And
this becomes very important to contextualize the essay The Death of the Author. So, in that sense,
we can understand this understand this essay as a landmark text in the move from Structuralism
to Poststructuralism. So, as we have indicated in one of the earlier sessions Roland Barthes;
when he began his carrier, he began with a very predominant Structuralist mode,
but it is with this essay, The Death of the Author that we began to see the Poststructuralist
tendencies emerging from Barthes’ works and also his attitude towards criticism,
theory and also most of the things in general. And this essay needs to be read in this
transitional context and also as a response to some of the things that were considered more
important during that period. And Barthes’ essay also needs to be seen as part of an
ongoing battle within the fortress of French literature. And French literature during that
time particularly in the late 50s and 1960s- it was a part of a network of ownership and control.
So, Barthes was in multiple ways responding to these dominant tendencies of that period,
particularly, in Paris. And even today when we look at this essay The Death of the Author,
we can see that there is a clear stance that Barthes displays against the enclosure of
Structuralism and the Authority of Formalism. So, in certain ways, we can see kind of a departure
away from the Structuralist modes and also away from the Formalist modes. If you know the history
of particular theory, we also know that in the 40s and 50s, the dominant modes of understanding
literary texts were also related to, were also in connection with the understanding of the Author.
So, in multiple ways, Barthes is challenging this traditional literary critical approach
and also foregrounding newer ways of looking at a text and the Author. And also celebrating the
emergence of the reader as a corollary and whether we agree or not with Barthes, the revolutionary
aspect of this text cannot be denied at all. Because this is located at such a transitional
phase that it becomes a seminal text even in our discussions related to Postmodernism to be able
to understand how the intellectual tradition was forged in such a way that the Postmodern
tendencies also celebrated a radical move away a radical shift from the traditional understandings
of literature and the reading of literature. So, though death is usually seen as something
not very positive; in this essay we can see that Barthes is using the idea of death the aspect of
death as an emancipatory event. So, here The Death of the Author does not mark the end of anything,
but it only marks a beginning of a new era, beginning of a new kind of mode,
new kind of freer and emancipatory reading in which reader assumes more relevance, reader
assumes more significance than that of the Author. So, having said that it is also important to
stress the fact that Barthes never saw himself as a critic; in fact, he was very uncomfortable with
this identification of him as a critic, because he did not access or provide verdicts on particular
literary works; if we look at the general corpus of his works we understand that he only
interpreted the semiotic significance of works. And more often than not, he did not focus on
particular works; he only refer to a general system of works and in analyzing their semiotic
significance he also opened up newer avenues to engage with literary texts. And here it is
also important to remember that it was this kind of Poststructuralist analysis
of literary texts that played a major role in the emergence of various methodologies
and techniques; within Cultural Studies. And in various ways when we look back at
Barthes works, we find that he was not in adherent of traditional literary critical practices,
but by challenging those practices he in fact, was opening up newer avenues for us to engage
with literature and culture in general. In continuation with the previous session,
where we started looking at some of the particular aspects of the essay we continue to look at how
Barthes locates the significance of the Author. And here we also realize that for Barthes,
Author ceases to be a commonplace a commonsensical figure. He tries to
understand the Author as the socially-constructed and historically-constituted subject and here the
Author ceases to be simply a person. But he becomes a product of history,
a product of the societal compulsions as well and also continuing with his Structuralist tendencies,
Barthes also places on record that the Author does not exist prior to or outside
of language the existence of Author, the identification and the idea of the Author,
it exists only within the structures of language; it is impossible to make sense of an Author just
as a person outside the systems of language. In that sense, Barthes goes on to suggest that
it is not the Author who makes the writing, but on the contrary writing makes an Author.
So, the writing instead of seeing it as a product of the Author; Barthes sees the Author, being
constructed through his writing. Barthes sees the Author assuming an identity of his own assuming
a character and stature of his own through the kind of writings that he produces. In that sense,
from this point of, from this point of time, from the moment The Death of the Author the essay gets
published we find a foregrounding of the text, we find a foregrounding of the reader, and alongside,
we also find that the Author loses the elevated status that he held until that point of time.
And in Barthes’ own words, “the writer can only imitate a gesture that is always anterior,
never original. His only power is to combine different kinds of writing to oppose some by
others, so as to never sustain himself by just one of them, if he wants to express himself at
least he should know that the internal thing; he claims to translate is itself only a readymade
dictionary whose words can be explained (defined) only by other words and so, on ad infinitum.”
So, here Barthes is challenging the very idea of the writer, producing original works. And he says
that all that the writer does perhaps is combined various kinds of things which were always already
available. So, it is this combination which makes the writing different or distinct from one another
and it is never dependant on the originality or the genius, as we would say of the Author. So,
here, Barthes is throwing the emphasis away from an all-knowing and unified intending subject as
the site of production on to language. And he hopes that through this process, through this
critical unpacking of the idea of the Author, the idea of the text, he hopes to liberate writing
from the despotism of what he calls ‘the work’. So, here, ‘writing’ becomes the central factor
rather than the work or the book or the text as we would call it; writing becomes a central aspect
with which the reader engages. So, the ultimate communication is between the writing, between
the text and the reader and the Author loses his significance entirely in this sort of an analysis.
And when Barthes talks about death; his death is not directed to the idea of writing. He does not
mean that the writing will come to an end; or that he does not try to dismiss the process of writing
altogether, but on the contrary he uses the term death to address specifically the French image
of ‘auteur’ and it is the French word for Author as a creative genius expressing of inner vision.
So, by attributing certain particular and specific traits to the Author of having originality,
of having genius there is also a sense of power being bestowed upon the Author. So,
Barthes is in fact, reacting against those sorts of attributions to the Author and he is also
opposing a view of texts as expressing a distinct personality of the Author.
Because in Barthes’ analysis the text need not, and perhaps may not at all
reflect the personality of the Author. So, it is completely futile attempt according
to Barthes to try look for the personality of the Author, within a text and equally futile
to hope to be able to understand the text in accordance with the biography of the Author.
So, here, contrary to the popular assumption that Authors consciously create masterpieces;
we find Barthes totally challenging and even rejecting this idea. In the similar way, he also
completely rejects the idea that Author should be interpreted in terms of what they think they
are doing- the intention of the Author becomes completely irrelevant. It is only the intention
and only the meaning that the reader attributes to the text- becomes important at the end of the day.
And in Barthes’ approach and when he pronounces The Death of the Author, the biography of the
Author ceases to have any relevance. So, any kind of biographical or historical criticism completely
falls apart when we look at it through the lens of Barthes’ essay, and here he is also trying
to tell us that the Author is perhaps no more important than perhaps a scientist who is doing
an experiment, the biography of the Author, the personality of the Author ceases to be important;
just like the details about the personality of the scientist ceases to be important when
he is performing a scientific experiment. While we totally admit the revolutionary
ideas that this essay was foregrounding was upholding. We cannot entirely say that
the revolution of the essay happened all of a sudden, there is an intellectual tradition
attached to it; there is a historical precedence as well. In fact, Barthes’ approach, Barthes
pronouncing The Death of the Author could be seen as an extension of the end of the unified subject
as Lacan had done in his re-reading of Freud. Barthes was heavily influenced by Lacan’s
re-reading, Lacan’s approaches and we too found that there is an extension of some of Lacan’s
views that they find in Barthes’ articulation of The Death of the Author as well. And also as a
corollary, we can even take a look at the Marxist perspective which understood the Author as a very
Modern invention just like Barthes does. And it is also there is a Marxist belief that the idea
of the Author was derived from the Capitalist ideology and it is also a reflection of the
Capitalist stress on control through Authority. So, when Barthes is talking about the Author;
when Barthes is trying to liberate the Author from the certain commonsensical understanding
from certain traditional clutches; he is also participating in this intellectual
tradition which had an exploring the idea of the Author; which had been talking about the
various ways in which the Author could be constructed, the Author could be accessed.
And here, it is also important to remember that the Marxist ideology,
just like Barthes would also. Barthes and Foucault would later lead us towards-they
also believe that the idea of the Author was also akin to attaching more importance to an Author’s
person. And in that sense, the Author also becomes a part of the wider system of ownership
property and privileges like we see even today. And there is also an Authoritative interpretation
and the presence of a privileged interpreter that we would see when we foreground the presence of
the Author; when we foreground the dominance of the Author. So, we find Barthes in certain,
in multiple ways responding to all of these things and also drawing from some of those ongoing
intellectual traditions and intellectual conversations of the twentieth century.
And we can also say that a certain kind of precedence could be found in the stress that
the enlightenment placed on the individual, on individuality. So, there is a way in which the
Author figure underwent particular transitions through these different ideological moves, through
these different socio-political movements. And we find that Barthes’ essay needs to be accessed
needs to be read and understood in the context of this various historical precedences as well.
And there is also this Romantic notion of the writer as a creator; writer as a subjective
identity. And if you remember, there is a way in which the idea of the Author underwent a radical
change during the Romantic period especially with the publication of The Preface to Lyrical Ballads
by Wordsworth and Coleridge where together, they looked at the idea of the poet and spoke about the
poet merely as a man who is talking to other men. So, there were particular attributes, they gave
to the poet, but nevertheless, we find that there was a radical shift in the idea of understanding
the poet. So, in this sense, always throughout history; we do see that the idea of the Author,
the sort of attributes that we give to the Author, had always been changing historically,
ideologically. But; however, Barthes was the only one who pronounced the death of the Author so that
we can look back and trace the intellectual trajectory which led eventually to the death
of the Author through a series of historical socio-political and literary and critical changes.
So, eventually, when Barthes talks about the death of the Author; what he attempts is to
elevate the status of the reader until that point of time the reader was not a significant
identity to deal with. And we also find Barthes arguing that if a text renders an insightful
interpretation if a text lends itself to a particular kind of an interpretation,
it is not because of the genius of the Author, but because of the personal experiences of the reader.
We also find certain attributes of the Romantic strain also coming in in this approach,
but nevertheless, we can find that rather categorically privileges the reader over the
Author. And here, he even goes on to argue that it is the reader who brings meaning to the text
and in that sense, if it is a reader who brings meaning to the text, there could be multiple
readers. And there also exists the possibility of multiple interpretations available, there are no
limits to the number of interpretations available, the kind of interpretations available because
we can not set any limit to the kind of personal experiences that various readers had gone through.
Here the death of the Author is not just about the Author, but it is also about various other
things happening at the same time, the emergence of the Author and also the possibility of multiple
interpretations. Even today if we are able to look at to watch a movie and give our own
comments and regardless of what the director of the movie thought about, regardless of what
originally a scene intended this is also because we had been given this freedom to
interpret the text in whichever way we want. And here we also we remember that the various
platforms which have been opened up today, the various social media platforms today,
also celebrate this idea of multiplicity and plurality to such an extent that; every reader,
every single subject is capable of providing their own interpretation to not just a text,
but also to various situations in the contemporary all around us.
Perhaps the most significant example that would come to our mind would be Tristam Shandy,
the novel by Lawrence Sterne. And here, there is a character Widow Wadman and to talk about
the character, Lawrence Sterne feels that he is incapable of describing the character and so,
he leaves a blank page for the reader to fill in their own ideal description of the
most concupiscible woman in the world. So, here is how the text looks like he
leaves an entire page with an invitation to the reader to fill it in; “To conceive this
right-- call for pen and ink—here’s a paper ready to your hand-- sit down, Sir, paint her
to your own mind.” So here is a text from the seventeenth century which invites the reader to
participate in the production of the writing. Here is an Author who is willing to go to the
background and give the freedom to the reader to co-participate in the creation of a text.
And there is also John Fowles’ novel The French lieutenants Woman, where the Author when he talks
about this particular character Sarah Woodruff, he says that the character is an ‘enigma’ that
he cannot know and he also moves away from the stance of an omniscient, omnipotent narrator and
confesses to the reader that he does not know anything more than the reader knows by now.
So, there are these instances that we can find in literary texts challenging the idea of the Author
and foregrounding and giving a sort of a freer hand to the interpretation and to the imagination
of the reader. And Barthes’ essay, in multiple ways, it consolidates all of these events,
it consolidates many of these approaches and gives it within a theoretical critical framework.
And when we talk about Barthes’ approach; we may also note certain similarities with the
Yale school of the deconstructionist critics who were popular in the 1970’s. There were
four of them who made this particular school extremely popular during the 1970's Paul de Man,
Hillis Miller, Harold Bloom and Geoffrey Hartman. And they also insisted upon the disjointed nature
of texts, their fissures of meaning and their incongruities interruptions and
breaks. We find Barthes’ essay having a lot of similarity with these critics who emerged
in the 1970s and just like Barthes, these- the Yale school of deconstructionist critics
also believe that it is not the origin, but the destination that mattered more.
They have also been alternative readings about Barthes’ essay The Death of the Author. Some have
even tried to read this essay as a satire upon the very notions that Barthes advocates in the
text. Actually some have argued that Barthes is perhaps defending the traditional notions
of Authorship in a very satirical way, but this sort of an approach has only been accepted by a
critical minority. And most of the leading critics, most of the leading theorists did
not really subscribe to this view that Barthes actually was presenting this essay as a satire.
Now, trying to highlight the intentions of the essay The Death of the Author;
we have also pointed out that there is a transition that happens in the understanding
of the text and also in the sort of privileges that are being attributed to the Author.
In Barthes’ own words, “to give a text an Author is to impose a limit on that text, to furnish it
with a final signified, to close the writing… However, by refusing to assign a ‘secret’ an
ultimate meaning to the text and the world as text liberates what may be called an anti-theological
activity. That is truly revolutionary since to refuse to fix meaning is, in the end, to refuse
God and his hypostases, reason, science, the law.” So, here when Barthes is trying to liberate the
text from the Author; he is also trying to liberate the text from the limits
which had been imposed upon it by various external aspects-- it could be dominant critical practices,
it could be the ideas of reason and science, it could be the methods of reading, it could
be the methods of criticism. So, here Barthes is embarking upon a task to liberate the text from
the Author the figure whom Barthes understands as being extremely Authoritative and also not
allowing any other possible interpretations. And this refusal to assign one particular
meaning to a text, Barthes argues, would eventually lead to the emergence
of freer and multiple meanings and the emergence, of a celebration of a plurality.
And if you look at the way in which Barthes has structured this essay; he begins by addressing
a problem in traditional critical approach to literature. And he also asks this question: how
can one detect precisely what the writer entitled? And most of his arguments in this essay, we can
see that they are all directed against particular schools of literary criticisms that seeks to
uncover the Authors meaning as a hidden reference. And also there is an attempt to entirely reject
the journey seeking the final meaning of the text because Barthes argues that there is absolutely
no final meaning for a text; it is only the various meanings that particular readers would
assign to it. Barthes begins this essay with an epigraph that is about Balzac's story Sarrasine.
If we try to read the essay The Death of the Author which is also a very short piece,
just about 5 or 6 pages; I strongly encourage you to take a look at the original before we
continue with the discussions as well. So, Barthes begins with an epigraph where he
talks about a story by Balzac which is Sarrasine. And here, Barthes begins this discussion about
a castrato disguised as a woman who writes one particular sentence; I will read it out for you:
“It was woman, with her sudden fears, her irrational whims, her instinctive fears,
her unprovoked bravado, her daring and her delicious delicacy of feeling. And looking
at this sentence written by Balzac in this story Sarrasine; Barthes now asks a series of questions
who is speaking in this way? Is it the story’s hero concerned to ignore the castrato concealed
beneath the woman? Is it the man Balzac endowed by his personal experience with a philosophy of
woman? Is it the Author Balzac professing certain literary ideas of femininity? Is it a universal
wisdom or romantic psychology?” And then he says, “it would it will always be impossible to know”.
So, here, Barthes talks about multiple possibilities when he tries to discern the
voice which is uttering that sentence; it could be the character, it could be a particular philosophy
which influenced the Author and one will not even know whether it is a philosophy that influenced a
character or the Author. And Barthes also tells us right on our face, right at the outset of the
essay that it will always be impossible to know. And in certain ways we can say that Barthes essay
The Death of the Author is also an engagement with this impossibility to know. And what makes it more
Postmodern, in certain ways is that Barthes does not make an attempt to know; rather he
celebrates this impossibility to know. And here is where we find also a radical difference that
we noticed earlier in our discussions as well from Modernism to Postmodernism; rather than
lamenting the fact that it is impossible to know whose voice it is, whose literary voice it is.
Barthes is here inviting us to be a part of this exercise of celebrating
the impossibility of knowing because within the impossibility of knowing;
lies the many possibilities of plural and multiple interpretations. Within this impossibility also
lies the liberating effect of giving voice to the voices that were either to unheard of. And
also within this impossibility of knowing lies a certain kind of liberation for the reader who
is not constrained within particular aspects of reading or within particular methods of reading.
And he goes on to talk about this “impossibility to know”, and he says, “…for the good reason
that all writing is itself this special voice consisting of several indiscernible voices. And
that literature is precisely the invention of this voice to which we cannot assign a specific
origin. Literature is that neuter that composite that oblique into which every subject escapes;
the trap where all identity is lost beginning with the very identity of the body that writes.”
So, in the beginning of the essay, in this epigraph itself Barthes pronounces that the
very identity of the body that writers is lost in this entire process. So, he begins by talking
about the Death of the Author which happens, which takes place even as the process of writing
is completed. And here it is also interesting to note that Barthes does not romanticise the
idea of the Author; instead he only looks at the Author as a body that writes. And
this epigraph is important to set the tone, to set the stage for the discussions that are to follow.
To sum up, in the opening of the essay, Barthes begins by asking this question about Balzac’s
story who is speaking in this way; he talks about the many possibilities that are inherent in any
traditional literary critical approaches. And then he highlights and rather asserts the fact
that it is impossible to know which also remains as a key for understanding any Postmodern text.
And he also asserts that we cannot assign a specific origin because it is impossible
for us to know. And also asserting and also identifying a specific origin would also mean
that one would not be able to pursue the various other kinds of meaning which are
being made possible by the text. And then he also talks about how ‘every subject escapes,
all identity is lost including the very identity of the body that writes’.
So, Barthes begins this essay with this note that there is no point looking at;
there is no point trying to identify the voice. There is no point in trying to locate the identity
of the Author because in this practice of writing; in this practice of literature every subject,
all identity including the identity of the body that writes is immaterial and it ceases
to exist because it does not really help like we thought it would in the meaning-making process.
So, with this we come to an end of today's lecture in the next session; we shall be taking a further
detailed and closer look at the entire essay. I would also strongly encourage you to take a look
at the original essay and also be familiar with it. So, that it would make more sense to you as
we discuss it step by step in the next session. Before we wind up, it is also important to
remember that though this text was written during a transitional phase from the Structuralist mode
towards Poststructuralist practices; now it has become an important text in understanding
literature, culture and even the contemporary which is entirely devoid of this Author figure,
which is entirely about multiple interpretations and pluralities.
So, this text in multiple ways, continues to be seminal in our understanding of Postmodern
literature, in our understanding of Postmodern critical practices and in our understanding of
how the idea of the text, how the idea of the Author and also how the emergence of
the reader becomes extremely significant in understanding Postmodernism in literature.
Thank you for listening, I will look forward to seeing you in the next session.
Browse More Related Video
The Death of the author and it's Postmodern implications
Roland Barthes' Mythologies | Literary Theory | Part 1
10 Types of Literary Criticism
Poststructuralism: WTF? Derrida, Deconstruction and Poststructuralist Theory Explained
INTRODUCTION TO LITERARY CRITICISM || QUARTER 3 WEEK 6 || GRADE 10 || MELC-Based || Aizie Dumuk
Beyond the Reader's Viewpoint | a breakdown of the Omniscient Reader's Viewpoint
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)