I believe that what Barthes is saying as far as the authors of written works do not matter, only they written work is what matter is false. If this were true than famous writers and poets wouldn’t be who they are. I don’t think that anyone could discredit them because this is what they were knowing for in the first place. In one of my classes this semester we are relying heavily on poetry and famous poets. In the poems they are writing down their thoughts and feelings, as well as the times in which they are living. If we find truth in what Barthes is saying in the article The Death of an Author than we are basically taking away the reasoning behind who and what the person is writing about. Anyone could have wrote Emily Dickenson’s poems and it wouldn’t have mattered. People who admire these authors for the works they have written for one reason or another, that would disappear. You wouldn’t be able to put the face to the name. I feel as though credit should be given when credit I due. We even know that Barthes has written this article. If what he is saying is true he should have signed the article with anonymous. In the article “The Death of the Author” he states “Probably this has always been the case: once an action is recounted, for intransitive ends, and no longer in order to act directly upon reality — that is, finally external to any function but the very exercise of the symbol — this disjunction occurs, the voice loses its origin, the author enters his own death, writing begins.” He is basically saying that it doesn’t matter who has written something. When the author is dead it still won’t matter. This writing has become something bigger than what the author may have intended. I do believe that sometimes when people write things they do not believe that it will be popular, or a success. For instance the Harry Potter series. I am sure that J.K Rowling never thought that her book series would be so popular, let alone be a bestselling series. Just like people have jobs whether it be a lawyer, or an actress etc. they are always acknowledged for the things they have done. So the question still remains why an author shouldn’t be acknowledged for the same thing. On a broader scale is it really fair to them if they couldn’t say that they wrote something. In this case I truly believe that this is like any other job. In the Article Why I don’t read much books anymore the author says “I’m not alone in this shift. There must be millions by now who have all but abandoned books to keep up with breaking and broken news, speculation about news to come, and with their professions, hobbies, and daily living.” Since people do not read very many books we should know where and who they are coming from. Some people who have a favorite author may only read books when it’s by them. Or even if they are reading off of a tablet, or something else. If what Barthes is saying is true we lose this completely. In the other article Big Tent Digital Humanities,’ a view from the Edge part1 the author states here that “Titled “Big Tent Digital Humanities,” the alliance’s annual conference brought together members of the Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing, the Association for Computers and the Humanities, and the Society for Digital Humanities, along with more than a few people who might be described as DH-curious.” Again how could we have things like the Association of literary and Linguistic computing if we didn’t have authors to go by? What Barthes is saying is unreal. I do not feel as though what he is saying is justified. If we did not have authors before his time, people still wouldn’t be reading things that have gone back for centuries.
Why I don’t read much books anymore \
Big Tent Digital Humanities,’ a view from the edge part 1
The death of an author