Rebecca's Thoughts

“Death of the Author” is based on the principle of authorship and the authors role in media and art. In Roland Barthes’ essay he discusses how people should interpret the “ultimate meaning[1]” of a text. He sees the author as hindering said meaning and interfering in the analysis and discussions surrounding media. His proposed method of criticism sees the experiences, history, and bias of the author’s work contrary to finding an “explanation[2]” or meaning within a text. Barthes says, “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.[3]” This can also be seen in his explanation of the removal of the author. “[The] book and the author stand automatically on a single line divided into before and an after .[4]” He goes on to say that the Author is seemingly also the Critic and that the blurring between the two roles diminishes the credibility of the Critic. 

Thus, for readers to be a true critic, they must separate the work from the author, and “liberate[5]” the text . “[By] succeeding the Author, the scriptor no longer bears within him passions, humour, feelings, impressions, but rather his immense dictionary from which he draws a writhing that can know no halt.[6]” Barthes sees the words as speaking for themselves, and that the “origin[7]” of meaning lies only in the “language[8]” and words that compose it. The “scriptor[9]” or author is only seen as producing the work and any explanation they have for it is negligible to the true meaning of a work. In the essay, he claims that the reader is the only person who can “understand each word[10]” presented in a work and “holds together[11]” the meaning through the words on the page. This is done using linguistics and the presence of subjects in a work of art rather than a person. The writing sees the characters within the pages, not the person writing it. The same can be said for the reader: they do not see the author writing the book, but rather the words presented as they were written.

The idea of “Death of the Author” is something I find incredibly interesting. I think there are a lot of great discussions and criticism that surround the topic, and both sides of the discourse can be seen as being both valid and ostensibly right. I also have mixed feelings about the idea and feel conflicted about my position on the theory. I agree that the idea of authorship is limiting and can undermine discussion and criticism about media and art, but at the same time, I think the author can provide context and nuance that can often get lost when consuming media. 

As someone who is an avid reader and someone who probably spends too much time on social media, I am very much aware of the conversation surrounding authorship and the role of representation. When it comes to books, there seems to be an audience-imposed rule on who is allowed to write what kind of representation. I think a lot of this stems from a lack of representation in books written by marginalized people and would be resolved if publishers gave marginalized people the same opportunities they give cis straight white men. I think people want to see more representation in the media they consume, but I also think that disregarding representation based on the authenticity of an author can be more counterproductive.

I think that “Death of the Author” is often used to defend literature from the people who created it. More recently, this has been used in the context of the Harry Potter franchise, and the fall of the author JK Rowling. This usage perpetuates a somewhat selective usage of the principle and waters down the true intent of Barthes’ original idea. On social media, “Death of the Author” is interpreted as justification for enjoying things despite the views of the creator.

 I do not think there is a right answer on how to understand or implement “Death of the Author” and I find there are more questions than answers surrounding the topic. If representation is good, does it matter who made it? Should marginalized people be allowed to create things that do not align with the marginalization they face? Can people consume media if the author is not a good person? I am confident in the idea that all these questions can be answered and argued to the end of the world and still have people disagree. This also means that I find these questions almost answerless and hard for me to give a definitive answer. 

Barthes’ “Death of the Author” gives an interesting insight into the role of the author in art and media. He lays the ground for an authorless view where art is viewed on its own merits and that authorial intent should not play into the role of discussion, criticism, and general appreciation of media. At the end of the day, the author only has as much power as the people give them. What the author does with that power is outside the realm of what is already written.

---

[1] Pg. 147

[2] Pg. 143

[3] Pg. 147

[4] Pg. 145

[5] Pg. 147

[6] Pg. 147

[7] Pg. 146

[8] Pg. 147

[9] Pg. 147

[10] Pg. 148

[11] Pg. 148