When years pass by, the author dies; but in writing, the author lives.

 

In the debate of the concept of work and role of an author, Barthes propounds a new way to read a text without the author – his/her intention holds no special weight in determining an interpretation of their texts; while Foucault believes that there could be more authors function to establish a unified meaning. Is author not holding any function in deciphering the text? Can authors be entirely removed? If author is not the center, is it valid to deem readers as the construct of the text?

 

Taking the ideas from both critics, I developed my own stance on dealing with the function of discourse within the author, that is, we are able to displace an author from the text as he/she does not have the authority over meaning - the text itself can be understood as the signifier. However, we must consider the characteristics of a discourse that support this use and determine the relationship between the author and reader. In such, Barthes’ idea may be limited to literature and literary criticism whereas Foucault’s extends problems from imaginative literature to the domain of non-fictional writings. Strictly speaking, autobiography, one of my favourite genres, is a recent example for the continuing survival of authorship. Autobiographies whets readers’ appetite to know that despite hardship and hurdles the author has managed to survive. My mother once read Angela’s Ashes: A Memoir, which records  McCourt’s impoverish childhood and his family’s alcoholism, she commended, ‘That’s my story.’ Conclusively, the authoritative voice of an author has been replaced not by the readers, but by the readers who his own understanding to the meaning of the text related to the author’s experience and imagined himself as the author. In the Pleasure of the Text, Barthes sees text as ‘a fetish object and this fetish desires me…but in the text, I desire the author: I need his figure.’