The Author / The Narrator / The Character:

Interrupting the narrative hierarchy:

Who is writing who?
Drifting positions; nodes
Multiple authors - dispersing authority
Analysis of Nabokov's "e!ruiting""
Reading Summary#
$tru!turalis% - outline
&arthes' oland - "(he Death of the Author"
)ou!ault' Mi!hel - "What is an Author?"
*eorge +andow' ,yperte-t - "e!onfiguring the Author"
Structuralism - outline:
." (he nature of things is deter%ined by their position within a larger stru!ture - whether so!ial'
psy!hologi!al' literary' linguisti! or politi!al"
/" (he individual should be !o%prehended through the stru!ture and not vi!e versa" (he parti!ular
is in!idental"
+anguage served as a pri%ary %odel for all other so!ial pheno%ena 0in parti!ular through
$aussure's analysis1' sin!e no a!t of spee!h has a %eaning outside a stru!ture or !ode 0se%anti!'
synta!ti!1"
Saussure:
,ow does language work? - syn!hroni! analysis vs" dia!hroni! 0i"e"evolution of signs within a
histori!al !onte-t1"
elative %eanings operating within a steady and !losed syste%"
2arole - real% of individual %o%ents of language use' parti!ular utteran!es or %essages' whether
spoken or written"
+angue - the 0independent1 syste% or !ode whi!h allows for the reali3ation of the individual
%essages"
+angage - the heterogeneous totality with whi!h the linguist is fa!ed and whi!h %ay be studied
fro% a variety of points of view"
(he !onne!tion between $ignifier 4 $ignified within $igns is arbitrary"
(he value of the sign is deter%ined in its relation to other signs; its differen!e"
+anguage does not refle!t or refer to a reality' but rather !reates it#
." &e!ause a natural link between sign and referent is absent' the !onne!tion is preserved through an
e-ternal !ode 4 syste% in order to allow !o%%uni!ation to be possible"
/" Meaning is !reated negatively - it is deter%ined through differen!e 0i"e"what the signifier is not1'
and not through a positive referential relation to the signified4 referent"
(he $tru!turalists !on!lusion - not to involve the signified in the pro!ess of produ!ing %eaning"
5nly representation 0the signified1 is a!!essible; therefore investigation fo!uses on representation
alone 0i"e"in e-ploring various syste%s of signifi!ation su!h as fashion or %yth1"
Meaning is produ!ed by a syste% of relations between signifiers" (he "natural" is a produ!t of a
syste% 4 %yth"
2roble%s with the $tru!turalists' approa!h#
Alienating language fro% its users"
6ho%sky's solution - there are stru!tures inherent in us - %ore i%%ediate and less arbitrary
a syste%"
7ven if language is arbitrary in its origin' it is not arbitrary in its usage"
$tru!turalis% under%ines agen!y' responsibility" Disregards histori!al 0dia!hroni!1
variables"
8t !annot e-plain change and growth' %erely a single situation"
+anguage is not stable" $tru!turalis% is based on the assu%ption that it is"
2ost stru!turalis% - the assu%ption of a stable stru!ture is itself shakey" (here is no single
"8" that !an testify for relativity and frag%entation" (he !ategories the%selves 0e"g"Author'
$ub9e!t' 2oint of :iew1 are not fi-ed"
Derrida - the falla!y of $tru!turalis%# the %etaphysi!s of "presen!e" is shifted fro% reality
to a stru!ture of des!ribable nature"
Barthes, Roland - The !eath o" the Author
&arthes' early work fo!uses on e-posing the ideologi!al %e!hanis% behind the produ!tion of what
is "natural" to us" (he only way out of an entrap%ent within a !losed sign syste% -- within its
!onventions -- is revealing the ideology at its base - the %eaning produ!ing %e!hanis%"
(he !urrent arti!le is written in the beginning of &arthes' transition fro% $tru!turalis% to 2ost-
$tru!turalis%"
8n !ertain !ultures te-t is !on!eived as sour!eless' perfor%ed or trans%itted" (hat is' the "Author" is
a produ!t of our !ulture' a !onvention; a refle!tion of a !apitalist so!iety !on!erned with ownership
and the prestige of the individual "
8t is not the author but language that speaks" Analysis of te-t needs to e-plore writing and writing
stru!tures rather than a speaking voi!e' a self"
Deta!hing writing fro% a sour!e releases the te-t fro% an an!hor' an author's intention" Weight shift
to a 0general1 reader' and an indefinite range of possible readings is opened"
Writing - the destru!tion of every voi!e' every point of origin"
(he Author dies in the %o%ent of writing"
As soon as a fa!t is narrated - no longer with a view to a!ting dire!tly on reality but intransitively'
outside fun!tion' the dis!onne!tion o!!urs - the voi!e loses its origin' the author enters his own
death and writing begins"
(he author is never %ore than the instan!e writing# the "8" in a te-t is a single instan!e of saying "8"'
it denotes a sub9e!t 0a" synta!ti! position1 rather than an individual' a person" 8ts referent is
irrelevant 0as well as ina!!essible1 to !o%prehending its fun!tion and %eaning in the writing"
Writing perfor%s rather than do!u%ents"
(he Author is always in the past of the te-t; whereas the Writer is si%ultaneous with it" Writing
always o!!urs now' in the a!t of reading it' enun!iating it' unpa!king its stru!ture"
(here is no single theologi!al %eaning but a %ultidi%ensional spa!e in whi!h a variety of writings
blend and !lash" A tissue of a%biguous %eanings' puns' parado-es' !ontradi!tory ;uotations to be
dete!ted rather than solved"
Assigning the te-t an an author is e;ual to i%posing a li%it4an an!hor4!losure on this %esh"
8n the %ultipli!ity of writing - everything is to be disentangled rather than de!iphered" (he stru!ture
is to be followed at every point' rather than redu!ed to a single angle"
(he unity of a te-t is in its destination - the reader; though the reader too is ins!ribed' not personal"
,en!e' the birth of reader begins with the death of the author"

#oucault, $ichel - %hat is an Author&
$trives to !an!el the i%%inent hierar!hy between author and reader altogether# roles are fun!tions
of use"
)ollowing the stru!turalists' )ou!ault too agrees that the dis!ussion of authorship need not relate to
the individual person or sour!e"
,owever' a!!ording to hi%' the histori!al so!ial reality should be given !onsideration before and
beyond the investigation of the !losed linguisti! stru!ture"
(he evolution of language is fun!tional" 8t is an out!o%e of a syste% of !ontrol produ!ing a variety
of sub9e!ts 0as well as %eans for knowing the%1 for defined purposes and fun!tions" ,istori!al
0Dia!hroni!1 analysis is restored' but in relation to the evolution of fun!tions within a 0!hanging1
syste%"
2resen!e is a sign of power" (he presen!e of the Author fun!tion in Western so!ial dis!ourse is a
sign of the power attributed to it and to its representation"
(he ;uestions to be asked are what allowed the Author to e-ist? what so!ial fun!tion 0and status1
does it serve as an institution? what are the !onditions in whi!h these fun!tions are reali3ed? ,ow
does it !ontribute to and fit within so!iety's distribution of roles and power?
(he Author's na%e is an a!t" 8t perfor%s within a !ertain so!ial dyna%i!' and serves as a %eans of
!lassifi!ation' grouping' e-!lusion and !anoni3ation of te-ts"
)ou!ault's goal - analysis of the author's fun!tion' the way in whi!h it is transferred' !ir!ulated'
attributed' appropriated and operates within a variety of types of dis!ourses"
(he sub9e!t should not be abandoned but re!onsidered# understood in its fun!tions' intervention'
syste% of dependen!ies"
(he !hara!teristi!s of the fun!tion4dis!ourse#
." 5b9e!t of appropriation" 5riginally - dis!ourse 0te-t1 was an a!tion' a gesture' not a thing"
$in!e the end of the .<th !entury it has been !aught within the e!ono%i! stru!tures of
property' ownership' !opy rights" 8t is tied to legal and institutional syste%s that regulate and
deter%ine the real% of dis!ourse"
/" (he author fun!tion is not universal or !onstant"
)or instan!e' in the Middle Ages it served to guaranty validity of s!ientifi! writings' whereas
today an agreed upon syste% of !onventions provides validation for a s!ientifi! te-t"
While in literary dis!ourse %eaning depends on the attribution of the te-t to an author' a
dependen!e whi!h only evolved and !rystalli3ed in re!ent ti%e"
=" (he fun!tion is not for%ed spontaneously' but is rather !onstru!ted through a !o%ple-
operation and a defined set of pro!edures' based on si%ilarity in ;uality' style' ideology and
range of ti%e"
8t evolves out of and !onfir%s the assu%ption of unity"
>" (he te-t bears signs referring to the author 0vs" speaker1' su!h as personal pronouns or
adverbs of ti%e and pla!e"
(hese produ!e a %ultipli!ity of positions 0in ti%e and pla!e1 and of points of view' a
plurality of egos4 sub9e!tive positions !hara!teristi! of the Author fun!tion"

'eorge (ando), *yperte+t - Recon"iguring the Author
."(he fun!tions of reader and writer be!o%e in hyperte-t as well as in !onte%porary theory %ore
deeply entwined with ea!h other than ever before"
5ne !lear sign of su!h transferen!e of authorial power appears in the reader's abilities to !hoose his
or her way through the %etate-t' to annotate te-t written by others' and to !reate links between
do!u%ents written by others" What literature soli!its of the reader is not si%ply re!eption but the
a!tive' independent' autono%ous !onstru!tion of %eaning" 0p"?.1
/" 8nterte-tuality# hyperte-t and !onte%porary theory both agree in !onfiguring the author of the
te-t as a te-t" ,yperte-t e%bodies %any of the ideas and attitudes proposed by &arthes' Derrida'
)ou!ault' and others" )or all these authors the self takes the for% of a de-!entered 0or !enterless1
network of !odes that' on another level' also serves as a node within another !enterless network"
0p"?/-?=1
adi!al !hanges in te-tuality produ!e radi!al !hanges in the author figure derived fro% that
te-tuality" +a!k of te-tual autono%y like la!k of te-tual !enteredness' i%%ediately reverberates
through !on!eptions of authorship as well" $i%ilarly' the unboundedness of the new te-tuality
disperses the author as well"
(he network paradig% !ontributes i%portantly to this sense of the attenuated' depleted' eroding' or
even vanishing sub9e!t" $o%e authors' su!h as $aid and ,ei%' derive the erosion of the thinking
sub9e!t dire!tly fro% ele!troni! infor%ation te!hnology" (he arbitrariness and availability of
database sear!hing de!reases the felt sense of an authorial !ontrol over what is written" 0,ei%'
7le!tri! +anguage' //@1" A data base sear!h' in other words' per%its the a!tive reader to enter the
author's te-t at any point and not at the point the author !hose as the beginning" 0p"?>-?A1
"Digital writing turns the private solitude of refle!tive reading and writing into a publi! network
where the personal sy%boli! fra%ework needed for original authorship is threatened by linkage
with the total te-tuality of hu%an e-pressions" 0,ei%' /.A1"
="(he third for% of re!onfiguration of self and author shared by theory and hyperte-t !on!erns the
de-!entered self' an obvious !orollary to the network paradig%"
Derrida' )ou!ault' and Deleu3e have spoken of !onte%porary knowledge 0savoir1 as de!entered;
Deleu3e's for%ulation is that knowledge' insofar as it is intelligible' is apprehensible in ter%s of
no%adi! !enters' provisional stru!tures that are never per%anent' always straying fro% one set of
infor%ation to another" 0&eginnings' =?B1" 0vs" the notions of the unitary self situated in a
privileged position1 0p"??1
(he ;uestion of authority of writing %akes sense only if the writing in ;uestion is !onsidered stable
and do!u%entary 0$aid1"
7ffe!tive argu%ent re;uires !losing off !onne!tions and abandoning lines of investigation that
hyperte-tuality would have %ade available"
(he linear habits of thought asso!iated with print te!hnology often for!e us to think in parti!ular
ways that re;uire narrowness' de!onte-tuali3ation' and intelle!tual attenuation' if not downright
i%poverish%ent" +inear argu%ent' in other words' for!es one to !ut off a ;uoted passage fro%
other' apparently irrelevant !onte-ts that in fa!t !ontribute to its %eaning" epetitions and detours
are eli%inated" (he linearity of print provides the passage with an illusory !enter whose for!e is
intensified by su!h sele!tion and eli%ination" 0p" <@-<.1
>" Within a hyperte-t environ%ent all writing be!o%es !ollaborative writing"
(he first ele%ent of !ollaboration appears when one !o%pares the roles of writer and reader' sin!e
the a!tive reader ne!essarily !ollaborates with the author in produ!ing a te-t by the !hoi!es he or
she %akes" (he se!ond aspe!t of !ollaboration appears when one !o%pares the writer with other
writersCthat is' the author who is writing now with the virtual presen!e of all writers "on the syste%"
who wrote then but whose writings are still present" 0p"<<1
5n!e ens!on!ed within a network of ele!troni! links' a do!u%ent no longer e-ists by itself" 8t
always e-ists in relation to other do!u%ents in a way that a book or printed do!u%ent never does
and never !an" )ro% this !ru!ial shift in the way te-ts e-ist in relation to others derive two
prin!iples#
)irst' any do!u%ent pla!ed on any networked syste% that supports ele!troni!ally linked %aterials
potentially e-ists in !ollaboration with any and all other do!u%ents on that syste%;
$e!ond' any do!u%ent ele!troni!ally linked to any other do!u%ent !ollaborates with it" 0p"<D1