Although the text is a little difficult to get your head around, my understanding of it is that too much emphasis is placed upon the author, rather than the work and the reader. For, in fact, it is the reader that gives the work its meaning, as the meaning of the work is dependent on the reader's perspective of it, therefore, if they believe the work to be meaningless then it is meaningless, despite the author's ideas. However, Barthes believes that the "culmination of capitalist ideology" (Barthes. R, 1968, pg. 143) has given "the greatest importance to the 'person' of the author" (Barthes. R, 1968, pg. 143), teaching the reader to channel the author of the work, and their essence, rather than see the work for what they believe it to be. The author is seen as a person of importance, as 'God' because social structures demand that we take the work of an author and attach their meaning to it, because their 'message' and meaning is the only one that counts and is the only correct one. When this is believed, it also gives belief to the thought that the author nourishes the work, that they live for their work, that they work to create something perfectly, which is arrogant.
Barthes believed that this was incorrect and that things only 'mean' when they are read, they 'mean' because of the way they are perceived by the culture rendering the author unimportant. It is, in fact, "language which speaks, not the author" (Barthes. R, 1968, pg. 143), as the author is simply drawing upon already existing forms, re-cycling ideas rather than creating them. It could even be said that it is the language that writes the author rather than the author writing the language. This can relate to animation too, in the sense that it is technology that creates for the animator, it isn't their own style but rather the style of the technology they choose to create with. Barthes believed that "the birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author" (Barthes. R, 1968, pg. 148), which is to say that you must follow your own perception of society, rather than following the one you are told you should believe. In today's society online forums allow for individuals to comment on work with their own perception and this allows for the 'reader' to invent their own truth of the world, as they get to see multiple perceptions of the world all in one place, completely eliminating the meaning the author gave to the work. Similarly, Landow suggested that "hypertext... infringes upon the power of the writer, removing some of it and granting that portion to the reader" (Landow, G. P, 1992, pg 90). Both suggest that the reader is just as important as the writer, which is particularly the case within animation, as it is, more often than not, the reader who determines the meaning of any animation and not the author.
Overall, Barthes and Landow are encouraging the 'reader' to take a revolutionary stand against the 'author' and not accept other people's view of society, but rather create their own, as they, some could say, have more validity than the author, as the meaning of work is created through the perception of the reader, not the author.
Barthes, R. (1968) "Death of the Author" in Image Music Text, (1977), London, Fontana Press
Landow, G.P. (1992) "Re-configuring the Author" in Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Barthes believed that this was incorrect and that things only 'mean' when they are read, they 'mean' because of the way they are perceived by the culture rendering the author unimportant. It is, in fact, "language which speaks, not the author" (Barthes. R, 1968, pg. 143), as the author is simply drawing upon already existing forms, re-cycling ideas rather than creating them. It could even be said that it is the language that writes the author rather than the author writing the language. This can relate to animation too, in the sense that it is technology that creates for the animator, it isn't their own style but rather the style of the technology they choose to create with. Barthes believed that "the birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author" (Barthes. R, 1968, pg. 148), which is to say that you must follow your own perception of society, rather than following the one you are told you should believe. In today's society online forums allow for individuals to comment on work with their own perception and this allows for the 'reader' to invent their own truth of the world, as they get to see multiple perceptions of the world all in one place, completely eliminating the meaning the author gave to the work. Similarly, Landow suggested that "hypertext... infringes upon the power of the writer, removing some of it and granting that portion to the reader" (Landow, G. P, 1992, pg 90). Both suggest that the reader is just as important as the writer, which is particularly the case within animation, as it is, more often than not, the reader who determines the meaning of any animation and not the author.
Overall, Barthes and Landow are encouraging the 'reader' to take a revolutionary stand against the 'author' and not accept other people's view of society, but rather create their own, as they, some could say, have more validity than the author, as the meaning of work is created through the perception of the reader, not the author.
Barthes, R. (1968) "Death of the Author" in Image Music Text, (1977), London, Fontana Press
Landow, G.P. (1992) "Re-configuring the Author" in Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment