untitled

Foucault paraphrases the author-text relationship in a, for his time, very unprecedented way.  He describes modern writing as having left its own rules behind and evolved into a space where self-expression is not a priority, nor a necessity, but the author is somewhat “consumed” in the point they are making and the words/genre/medium in which they compose. Other important points that Foucault addresses are the relationship between a work and “death” (also taking note that he addresses death as a general rather than the death of the author), and the evolution of literary criticism and its contribution to writing.

From a historical stand point, the validity of Foucault’s argument is on-point, taking into consideration the purpose of writing 500 years ago versus today.  

The work is remembered rather than the author; the point is to create something immortal that people will connect with, draw upon, learn from, and digest for a while.  Obviously, all humans are mortal, meaning the author cannot BE his work, merely can he embody it. While he is the creator, he is not the effect.  In a way, this concept is inspiring, that something bigger can come from the fingertips of one human, yet in another way, it so belittles the empowerment that people get from writing that critics are outraged by this “theory.” However, criticism also fathered this notion of disconnection, because of the desire to eliminate personal offense in regards to someone’s writing.  The rise of literary criticism completely fed the obstruction of the author-text relationship, encouraging an absence of emotion in the situation of a less-desirable critique. 

Another thing to note is Foucault’s distinction between “formal” and “everyday” discourse, as one is more rhetorically valuable/discussion-worthy for his own purposes.  Although he does not quite specifically outline a definition for discourse in this text, the reader assumes that it refers to some type of knowledgeable dialogue, whether it be conversational, literary, philosophical, scientific, etc., that provides insight to some previously unknown theories on a certain subject which one party did not know before.  Even in this definition, the parties are somewhat irrelevant, meaning the who (the author) is less valuable, once again, than the actual content of discourse, which Foucault seems to categorize as discourse.  Foucault has formed an extremely modern take on literature that in return, places even more value on rhetoric.

One of the main questions that arise after understanding Foucault's theory of this relationship is:

In the somewhat hierarchical assembly of text over author (message over rhetor), where, then does the audience fall? Are the perceptions of the audience more valuable than the author's intent, or does the original contextual motivation prevail? While Barthes argues in the "Death of the Author" that after disconnecting author from text, the need for deciphering a text becomes irrelevant, but does Foucault agree with that sentiment completely, or does he, in some way, value the audience on a deeper level?

Roland Barthes, by composing in an intensely provocative manner, also raises questions between man (in general) and text/symbols.  In his third paragraph of "Death of the Author", Barthes details text as symbols, and therefore, more universal and more powerful than a man or author.  However, Burke conceptualizes the idea of humans as a species separating themselves from the rest of the animal kingdom with the invention of symbols and the use of symbols, which seems very relevant and accurate from a rhetorical standpoint. Man created symbols, but it seems that Barthes wants to create man from symbols. Therefore, my question would be, which came first? The importance of the symbol, or the importance of the author? Does one control the other? Is one more highly valued than another? 

Citation: 

Foucault, Michel. “What Is an Author?” The Critical Tradition: Classic Texts and Contemporary Trends,Third Edition. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2007. 904-914. 

Barthes, Roland. "The Death of the Author." The Critical Tradition: Classic Texts and Contempory Trends, Third Edition. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2007. 868, 874-877.