18.11.

2015

TheDeathoftheAuthor[1967]RolandBarthes|

ESSAY

TheDeathoftheAuthor[1967]Roland
Barthes
InhisstorySarrasine,Balzac,speakingofacastratodisguisedasawoman,writes
thissentence:ItwasWoman,withhersuddenfears,herirrationalwhims,her
instinctivefears,herunprovokedbravado,herdaringandherdeliciousdelicacyof
feelingWhoisspeakinginthisway?Isitthestoryshero,concernedtoignorethe
castratoconcealedbeneaththewoman?IsitthemanBalzac,endowedbyhispersonal
experiencewithaphilosophyofWoman?IsittheauthorBalzac,professingcertain
literaryideasoffemininity?Isituniversalwisdom?orromanticpsychology?Itwill
alwaysbeimpossibletoknow,forthegoodreasonthatallwritingisitselfthisspecial
voice,consistingofseveralindiscerniblevoices,andthatliteratureispreciselythe
inventionofthisvoice,towhichwecannotassignaspecificorigin:literatureisthat
neuter,that
composite,thatobliqueintowhicheverysubjectescapes,thetrapwhereallidentity
islost,beginningwiththeveryidentityofthebodythatwrites.

Probablythishasalwaysbeenthecase:onceanactionisrecounted,for
intransitiveends,andnolongerinordertoactdirectlyuponrealitythatis,finally
externaltoanyfunctionbuttheveryexerciseofthesymbolthisdisjunctionoccurs,
thevoicelosesitsorigin,theauthorentershisowndeath,writingbegins.Nevertheless,
thefeelingaboutthisphenomenonhasbeenvariable;inprimitivesocieties,narrative
isneverundertakenbyaperson,butbyamediator,shamanorspeaker,whose
performancemaybeadmired(thatis,hismasteryofthenarrativecode),butnothis
geniusTheauthorisamodernfigure,producednodoubtbyoursocietyinsofaras,
attheendofthemiddleages,withEnglishempiricism,Frenchrationalismandthe
personalfaithoftheReformation,itdiscoveredtheprestigeoftheindividual,or,toput
itmorenobly,ofthehumanpersonHenceitislogicalthatwithregardtoliterature
itshouldbepositivism,resumeandtheresultofcapitalistideology,whichhas
accordedthegreatestimportancetotheauthorspersonTheauthorstillrulesin
manualsofliteraryhistory,inbiographiesofwriters,inmagazineinterviews,andeven
intheawarenessofliterarymen,anxioustounite,bytheirprivatejournals,theirperson
andtheirwork;theimageofliteraturetobefoundincontemporarycultureis
tyrannicallycenteredontheauthor,hisperson,hishistory,histastes,hispassions;
criticismstillconsists,mostofthetime,insayingthatBaudelairesworkisthefailureof
https://designopendata.wordpress.com/portfolio/thedeathoftheauthor1967rolandbarthes/
themanBaudelaire,VanGoghsworkhismadness,Tchaikovskyshisvice:the

1/5

18.11.2015

TheDeathoftheAuthor[1967]RolandBarthes|

themanBaudelaire,VanGoghsworkhismadness,Tchaikovskyshisvice:the
explanationoftheworkisalwayssoughtinthemanwhohasproducedit,asif,through
themoreorlesstransparentallegoryoffiction,itwasalwaysfinallythevoiceofoneand
thesameperson,theauthor,whichdeliveredhisconfidence.

ThoughtheAuthorsempireisstillverypowerful(recentcriticismhasoften
merelyconsolidatedit),itisevidentthatforalongtimenowcertainwritershave
attemptedtotoppleit.InFrance,Mallarmewasdoubtlessthefirsttoseeandforeseein
itsfullextentthenecessityofsubstitutinglanguageitselfforthemanwhohithertowas
supposedtoownit;forMallarme,asforus,itislanguagewhichspeaks,nottheauthor:
towriteistoreach,throughapreexistingimpersonalitynevertobeconfusedwith
thecastratingobjectivityoftherealisticnovelistthatpointwherelanguagealoneacts,
performs,andnotoneself:Mallarmesentirepoeticsconsistsinsuppressingthe
authorforthesakeofthewriting(whichis,asweshallsee,torestorethestatusofthe
reader.)Valery,encumberedwithapsychologyoftheSelf,greatlyedulcorated
Mallarmestheory,but,turninginapreferenceforclassicismtothelessonsofrhetoric,
heunceasinglyquestionedandmockedtheAuthor,emphasizedthelinguisticand
almostchancenatureofhisactivity,andthroughouthisproseworkschampionedthe
essentiallyverbalconditionofliterature,inthefaceofwhichanyrecoursetothewriters
inferiorityseemedtohimpuresuperstition.ItisclearthatProusthimself,despitethe
apparentpsychologicalcharacterofwhatiscalledhisanalyses,undertookthe
responsibilityofinexorablyblurring,byanextremesubtilization,therelationofthe
writerandhischaracters:bymakingthenarratornotthepersonwhohasseenorfelt,
noreventhepersonwhowrites,butthepersonwhowillwrite(theyoungmanofthe
novelbut,infact,howoldishe,andwhoishe?wantstowritebutcannot,andthe
novelendswhenatlastthewritingbecomespossible),Prousthasgivenmodernwriting
itsepic:byaradicalreversal,insteadofputtinghislifeintohisnovel,aswesaysooften,
hemakeshisverylifeintoaworkforwhichhisownbookwasinasensethemodel,so
thatitisquiteobvioustousthatitisnotCharluswhoimitatesMontesquiou,butthat
Montesquiouinhisanecdotal,historicalrealityismerelyasecondaryfragment,derived
fromCharlus.Surrealismlastlytoremainonthelevelofthisprehistoryofmodernity
surrealismdoubtlesscouldnotaccordlanguageasovereignplace,sincelanguageisa
systemandsincewhatthemovementsoughtwas,romantically,adirectsubversionof
allcodesanillusorysubversion,moreover,foracodecannotbedestroyed,itcanonly
beplayedwith;butbyabruptlyviolatingexpectedmeanings(thiswasthefamous
surrealistjolt),byentrustingtothehandtheresponsibilityofwritingasfastas
possiblewhattheheaditselfignores(thiswasautomaticwriting),byacceptingthe
principleandtheexperienceofacollectivewriting,surrealismhelpedsecularizethe
imageoftheAuthor.Finally,outsideofliteratureitself(actually,thesedistinctionsare
beingsuperseded),linguisticshasjustfurnishedthedestructionoftheAuthorwitha
preciousanalyticinstrumentbyshowingthatutteranceinitsentiretyisavoidprocess,
whichfunctionsperfectlywithoutrequiringtobefilledbythepersonofthe
interlocutors:linguistically,theauthorisneveranythingmorethanthemanwhowrites,
justasIisnomorethanthemanwhosaysI:languageknowsasubject,nota
person,endthissubject,voidoutsideoftheveryutterancewhichdefinesit,sufficesto
makelanguagework,thatis,toexhaustit.

https://designopendata.wordpress.com/portfolio/thedeathoftheauthor1967rolandbarthes/

2/5

18.11.2015

TheDeathoftheAuthor[1967]RolandBarthes|

TheabsenceoftheAuthor(withBrecht,wemightspeakhereofarealalienation:the
Authordiminishinglikeatinyfigureatthefarendoftheliterarystage)isnotonlya
historicalfactoranactofwriting:itutterlytransformsthemoderntext(orwhatis
thesamethingthetextishenceforthwrittenandreadsothatinit,oneverylevel,the
Authorabsentshimself).Time,firstofall,isnolongerthesame.TheAuthor,whenwe
believeinhim,isalwaysconceivedasthepastofhisownbook:thebookandtheauthor
taketheirplacesoftheirownaccordonthesameline,castasabeforeandanafter:the
Authorissupposedtofeedthebookthatis,hepreexistsit,thinks,suffers,livesforit;
hemaintainswithhisworkthesamerelationofantecedenceafathermaintainswithhis
child.Quitethecontrary,themodernwriter(scriptor)isbornsimultaneouslywithhis
text;heisinnowaysuppliedwithabeingwhichprecedesortranscendshiswriting,he
isinnowaythesubjectofwhichhisbookisthepredicate;thereisnoothertimethan
thatoftheutterance,andeverytextiseternallywrittenhereandnow.Thisisbecause
(or:itfollowsthat)towritecannolongerdesignateanoperationofrecording,of
observing,ofrepresenting,ofpainting(astheClassicwritersputit),butratherwhat
thelinguisticians,followingthevocabularyoftheOxfordschool,callaperformative,a
rareverbalform(exclusivelygiventothefirstpersonandtothepresent),inwhich
utterancehasnoothercontentthantheactbywhichitisuttered:somethinglikethe/
CommandofkingsortheISingoftheearlybards;themodernwriter,havingburiedthe
Author,canthereforenolongerbelieve,accordingtothepathosofhispredecessors,
thathishandistooslowforhisthoughtorhispassion,andthatinconsequence,making
alawoutofnecessity,hemustaccentuatethisgapandendlesslyelaboratehisform;
forhim,onthecontrary,hishand,detachedfromanyvoice,bornebyapuregestureof
inscription(andnotofexpression),tracesafieldwithoutoriginorwhich,atleast,has
nootheroriginthanlanguageitself,thatis,theverythingwhichceaselesslyquestions
anyorigin.

Weknowthatatextdoesnotconsistofalineofwords,releasingasingle
theologicalmeaning(themessageoftheAuthorGod),butisaspaceofmany
dimensions,inwhichareweddedandcontestedvariouskindsofwriting,nooneof
whichisoriginal:thetextisatissueofcitations,resultingfromthethousandsourcesof
culture.LikeBouvardandPecuchet,thoseeternalcopyists,bothsublimeandcomical
andwhoseprofoundabsurditypreciselydesignatesthetruthofwriting,thewriter
canonlyimitateagestureforeveranterior,neveroriginal;hisonlypoweristo
combinethedifferentkindsofwriting,toopposesomebyothers,soasnevertosustain
himselfbyjustoneofthem;ifhewantstoexpresshimself,atleastheshouldknowthat
theinternalthingheclaimstotranslateisitselfonlyareadymadedictionary
whosewordscanbeexplained(defined)onlybyotherwords,andsoonadinfinitum:
anexperiencewhichoccurredinanexemplaryfashiontotheyoungDeQuincey,so
giftedinGreekthatinordertotranslateintothatdeadlanguagecertainabsolutely
modernideasandimages,Baudelairetellsus,hecreatedforitastandingdictionary
muchmorecomplexandextensivethantheonewhichresultsfromthevulgarpatience
ofpurelyliterarythemes(ParadisArtificiels).succeedingtheAuthor,thewriterno
longercontainswithinhimselfpassions,humors,sentiments,impressions,butthat
enormousdictionary,fromwhichhederivesawritingwhichcanknownoendorhalt:

https://designopendata.wordpress.com/portfolio/thedeathoftheauthor1967rolandbarthes/

3/5

18.11.2015

TheDeathoftheAuthor[1967]RolandBarthes|

enormousdictionary,fromwhichhederivesawritingwhichcanknownoendorhalt:
lifecanonlyimitatethebook,andthebookitselfisonlyatissueofsigns,alost,
infinitelyremoteimitation.

OncetheAuthorisgone,theclaimtodecipheratextbecomesquiteuseless.To
giveanAuthortoatextistoimposeuponthattextastopclause,tofurnishitwitha
finalsignification,toclosethewriting.Thisconceptionperfectlysuitscriticism,
whichcanthentakeasitsmajortaskthediscoveryoftheAuthor(orhishypostases:
society,history,thepsyche,freedom)beneaththework:oncetheAuthorisdiscovered,
thetextisexplained:thecritichasconquered;henceitisscarcelysurprisingnot
onlythat,historically,thereignoftheAuthorshouldalsohavebeenthatoftheCritic,
butthatcriticism(evennewcriticism)shouldbeoverthrownalongwiththeAuthor.
Inamultiplewriting,indeed,everythingistobedistinguished,butnothing
deciphered;structurecanbefollowed,threaded(likeastockingthathasrun)inallits
recurrencesandallitsstages,butthereisnounderlyingground;thespaceofthewriting
istobetraversed,notpenetrated:writingceaselesslypositsmeaningbutalwaysin
ordertoevaporateit:itproceedstoasystematicexemptionofmeaning.Thusliterature
(itwouldbebetter,henceforth,tosaywriting),byrefusingtoassigntothetext(and
totheworldastext)asecret:thatis,anultimatemeaning,liberatesanactivity
whichwemightcallcountertheological,properlyrevolutionary,fortorefusetoarrest
meaningisfinallytorefuseGodandhishypostases,reason,science,thelaw.

LetusreturntoBalzacssentence:noone(thatis,noperson)uttersit:itssource,its
voiceisnottobelocated;andyetitisperfectlyread;thisisbecausethetruelocusof
writingisreading.Anotherveryspecificexamplecanmakethisunderstood:
recentinvestigations(J.P.Vernant)haveshedlightupontheconstitutivelyambiguous
natureofGreektragedy,thetextofwhichiswovenwithwordsthathavedouble
meanings,eachcharacterunderstandingthemunilaterally(thisperpetual
misunderstandingispreciselywhatismeantbythetragic);yetthereissomeonewho
understandseachwordinitsduplicity,andunderstandsfurther,onemightsay,the
verydeafnessofthecharactersspeakinginfrontofhim:thissomeoneispreciselythe
reader(orherethespectator).Inthiswayisrevealedthewholebeingofwriting:atext
consistsof
multiplewritings,issuingfromseveralculturesandenteringintodialoguewith
eachother,intoparody,intocontestation;butthereisoneplacewherethismultiplicity
iscollected,united,andthisplaceisnottheauthor,aswehavehithertosaiditwas,
butthereader:thereaderistheveryspaceinwhichareinscribed,withoutanybeing
lost,allthecitationsawritingconsistsof;theunityofatextisnotinitsorigin,itisin
itsdestination;butthisdestinationcannolongerbepersonal:thereaderisaman
withouthistory,withoutbiography,withoutpsychology;heisonlythatsomeonewho
holdsgatheredintoasinglefieldallthepathsofwhichthetextisconstituted.Thisis
whyitisabsurdtohearthenewwritingcondemnedinthenameofahumanismwhich
hypocriticallyappointsitselfthechampionofthereadersrights.Thereaderhasnever
beentheconcernofclassicalcriticism;forit,thereisnoothermaninliteraturebutthe
onewhowrites.Wearenowbeginningtobethedupesnolongerofsuchantiphrases,
bywhichoursocietyproudlychampionspreciselywhatitdismisses,ignores,

https://designopendata.wordpress.com/portfolio/thedeathoftheauthor1967rolandbarthes/

4/5

18.11.2015

TheDeathoftheAuthor[1967]RolandBarthes|

bywhichoursocietyproudlychampionspreciselywhatitdismisses,ignores,
smothersordestroys;weknowthattorestoretowritingitsfuture,wemustreverseits
myth:thebirthofthereadermustberansomedbythedeathoftheAuthor.
translatedbyRichardHoward

BlogatWordPress.com.|TheEspiedTheme.

https://designopendata.wordpress.com/portfolio/thedeathoftheauthor1967rolandbarthes/

5/5