Rebecca's Thoughts

Something that I have read a fair amount of because of university is French science fiction from the resonance period. Although a very niche topic, I think many of the themes presented are universal within the genre and play into many of the sociopolitical themes of the time. Because of this, I think it’s difficult to classify many of these works as not being philosophy and therefore it’s hard to detach the author from the works. Many of these works are direct products of the author’s ideology and life story, and thus it’s hard to remove intent and context from the literature. This makes the application of ideas like ‘Death of the Author’ difficult, as often the literature and the author are one and the same.

Often hailed as the first work of science fiction, The Other World: The Comical History of the States and Empires of the World of the Moon by Cyrano de Bergerac is a wild ride of a novella. Following an unnamed character, who the reader later understands to be Bergerac himself, the novella is about a man’s adventure to the moon. Upon arrival, Bergerac discovers that there is life on the moon and that the moon is home to the Garden of Eden and ‘alien’ life who see the earth as a moon. These ‘aliens’ walk on all fours, tell time with their teeth, and see Bergerac as an animal and not a human.

The novella is satirical and sets to highlight themes like orientalism, Eurocentrism, religion. It looks at how their place in society is kind of weird and maybe not something that should be perpetuated. Bergerac used the story to emphasize the oddity of how we view people and science in relationship to society and its numerous hierarchies. Bergerac was a known libertine and many of these writings (if not all) are blasphemous and often question the Catholic Church’s teachings directly. I think he manages to do this with tact, but it’s obvious what he was trying to do. This makes it hard to distinguish between Bergerac’s writings from Bergerac as a person. Bergerac is the arbiter of knowledge within the context of this novella. He wants to tell a story, but he also wants to explain himself and his ideology.

Something I find interesting about ‘Death of the Author’ is the idea of the author. Like, obviously, the author has to exist for something to be created. You can’t have a book without someone to write it. Yet people’s interpretation of that book can exist without the author and their intent, contexts, and inspirations. I read something last year for a different class that said something like “Punishment can only be given when the author has authority.” I unfortunately can’t find this source anymore, but I think this idea is interesting and plays into things like unfaithful criticism, censorship, and how people view art. The invention of the printing press institutionalizes the role of the author and this gave people a face that they could directly critique, celebrate, and punish. The Catholic Church then uses this newly created role to punish naysayers and reinforce their power.

With this in mind, The Other World: The Comical History of the States and Empires of the World of the Moon was relatively well received when it was published in the 17th century. I often wonder if this was because the book was published posthumously and there wasn’t a person to directly punish. The Church couldn’t punish Bergerac because he was already dead and thus his impact was diminished and static.

I don’t think the intent of ‘Death of the Author’ is to completely devoid the work of its authorship, nor do I think the intent is the only way to interpret art. But I think something interesting arises when the book is the author and represents or depicts the explicit views and opinions of said author. This novella only exists within a world where Bergerac exists and where his ideologies are contrarian. I think it’s hard to separate the two. I don’t think this separation is inherent in the idea of authorship, nor do I think Barthes or Foucault would agree that this is the only valid lens to view and critique media. At the end of the day, the author only has as much power as the critic allows. The problem only arises when speculation sidelines the media itself.