Entry 6

The focus of discussion this week was Roland Barthes’ ‘Death of the Artist’, in which Barthes posits the idea that the author must remove himself or herself from his writing in order for the reader to find their own interpretation of the stories the author relays. What I interpreted from the reading was that the reader is the mind that connects, interprets, and sees the final design of all the characters and views in the story; yet, classic criticism ignores the reader in favor of concentrating on what the author must be interpreting/thinking, when he is actually just the ‘dictionary’ which relays information to the reader. We must let go of the concept of the author being the force of meaning behind the writing, in order to let ourselves as viewers act as what we really are, the interpreters that find their own meaning and interpretations.

I can understand Barthes’ point of view as the author being the final destination that decides the meaning of the writing, and understand that Barthes presented a revolutionary concept for his time: giving power to the viewer rather than creator. Yet, I cannot help but disagree with several of his points. The first one being, that I believe the author is also an interpreter of the story, thus the story told by the author cannot be fully trusted to be an accurate ‘relay of stories’ due to bias. Take for example, a giant meteor shower that is seen by two people; one writes an article in the newspaper on it, the other reads that article. The author of the article is a scientologist who states, in what he considers scientific and realistic terms, that he saw a bunch of spaceships with alien DNA flying to the earth sent by the evil lord Xenu in attempts to conquer the human race. The second person who is not a scientologist who also saw the meteor shower reads this article. Is it wrong for the reader to believe the author has his own ulterior motives and/or biases that turns the author into just as much an interpreter of information?

My opinion sides more so with that of Kiki Smith, who believed that art is just a way to think; “Art is something that moves from your insides into the physical world and at the same time, it’s just a representation of your insides in a different form.” While it was noble of Barthes to honor the reader as the sole interpreter that find the meanings of the author’s story, considering the author as a simple ‘teller of stories and facts’ gives the author way too much power; it puts them in a position whose authority is hard to be questioned even though the presentation of information is greatly affected by the author’s personal opinions. In my view, considering the author as simply an interpreter above all brings the author down a notch of undeserved power, and onto the same level as the reader by recognizing the humanity of both author and reader.