The Theories of Roland Barthes?

I thought, that I would be best off describing which of Barthes' theories I am referring to, which is quite predictably those of 'Death of the Author'. For those of you who dont know, these theories lay the foundation for almost all of modern literary criticism (I would referrence it but I cant really be bothered with it at the moment.)

The theory in a nutshell refers to the loss of the author's intention once the very first words are put to paper because the context in which the text was written can never be regained, he also theorises that all literature is un-original and exists in a literary space ruled by plagiarism where ideas are simply re-organised rather than created

Do any of you think these ideas hold any weight, and if you do not what is your theory on the possibility of originality?

Originally Posted by Aodh Mor

I thought, that I would be best off describing which of Barthes' theories I am referring to, which is quite predictably those of 'Death of the Author'. For those of you who dont know, these theories lay the foundation for almost all of modern literary criticism (I would referrence it but I cant really be bothered with it at the moment.)

The theory in a nutshell refers to the loss of the author's intention once the very first words are put to paper because the context in which the text was written can never be regained, he also theorises that all literature is un-original and exists in a literary space ruled by plagiarism where ideas are simply re-organised rather than created

Do any of you think these ideas hold any weight, and if you do not what is your theory on the possibility of originality?

As soon as a fact is narrated no longer with a view to acting directly on reality but intransitively, that is to say, finally outside of any function other than that of the very practice of the symbol itself, this disconnection occurs, the voice loses its origin, the author enters into his own death, writing begins. The sense of this phenomenon, however, has varied; in ethnographic societies the responsibility for a narrative is never assumed by a person but by a mediator, shaman or relator whose ‘performance’ — the mastery of the narrative code —may possibly be admired but never his ‘genius’. The author is a modern figure, a product of our society insofar as, emerging from the Middle Ages with English empiricism,

Roland Barthes
(from Image, Music, Text, 1977)

Barthes considers that a writer is a medium between the text and the reader; he has been elevated to Author in the west. All literary criticism attempts to explain a text based on personal characteristics of the autor.


The above is quite understandable given the experience that Barthes had with the personality cult in French Academic circles. I believe that Barth's polemic intended to do for literature what the Annales did for history. To wit, restore an equilibrium in a Author driven environment rather than totaly discplace the author from the creative process.

i always found barthes' belief that all literature existed in a share space his most interesting, especially when considering it linked to cases like Dorothy and William Wordsworth, where a clear plagiarism had occurred, I felt as Barthes clear the plagiarist of any blame by saying that all the texts exist in a multi-lingual space where nothing is original - plagiarism is the norm and inevitability of all literary endeavour