MS 190: Authorship is the course website for the Fall 2006 Media Studies senior seminar at Pomona College in Claremont, California.
What the F*%#
Submitted by bloggityblog07 on 12 September 2006 - 1:12am.
I'm not sure if its me being distracted, me being incompetent, or the fact that it is approaching 1 am, but am I the only one out there who doesn't have a freaking clue what Marchessault is talking about? I just read and reread pretty much every sentence in that essay and I haven't the faintest clue what ol' Janine's argument is. Example number one: "If, in the post-structuralist scheme, an author is man in his purest expression, then the dead author is indeed a woman - a 'fluid' phantom, 'unfixed' and 'multiply' existing always in the elsewhere." I mean honsetly? Is there anyone that could explain this sentence to me in plain English? Another little gem of a quote from an earlier passage suggests that perhaps "the ideological stench of the author might indeed be greater in death than life." Is there some meaning for stench in the dictionary that I am not seeing, or am I just completely missing the point of this article?
While I must admit I was able to comprehend some of the social and political commentary in the article on feminism, the "dead author" concept is just way over my head right now. If there is anyone out there who is feeling benevolent and would like to offer a simple explination as to what exactly a "dead author" is if it is not a decaying sack of skin and bones in some cemetary, I would greatly appreciate it:)
»
- bloggityblog07's blog
- Login to post comments
Your shoes rule You know I
Your shoes rule
You know I feel your pain, the articles are hard. This is not the helpful insight providing comment, just blog world support.
An attempt...
At risk of sounding very self-involved, you might consider reading my latest post, it might help you understand, or the comment "I gotta say your title's a killer!" but if those don't help, or you don't feel like it, here's an attempt at explanation. (I hope you'll forgive me if I'm repetative)
"If, in the post-structuralist scheme, an author is man in his purest expression, then the dead author is indeed a woman - a 'fluid' phantom, 'unfixed' and 'multiply' existing always in the elsewhere."
Live Author has AUTHORity, Ego, personal identity -> power -> masculine/male in the patriarchal establishment
Dead Author has no Ego, no specific self, the identity is not important, fluidity and multiplicity are aspects attatched to women in the patriarchal dichtomies (man/woman, culture/nature, etc.). Thus the dead author can be seen as feminine/female in her lack of Authority.
I may be wrong, but I feel like that's sort of what Marchessault is getting at.
(I would like to interject that there is great danger in assuming an inherent alignment of male and masculine, and female and feminine, but that's another debate).
"the ideological stench of the author might indeed be greater in death than in life"
That is to say that when the author lived he could easily be defined, you asked "who is the author?" and you could point to a real person and the question was closed. But with the death of the author, the question of authorship/authority is not so easily answered if we are to assume that you can longer point to a person and say "him" and have that be the end of it. Thus authorship is a much more ideologically important question when authorship is severed from the body of the author.
As for stench I think she's just taking a little liberty with the whole "corpse of the author" thing. She just means the discursive emanations. Although that may not seem to be any plainer English, but it was an attempt (as promised).
I thought I said English!!
No I'm only kidding. Your explination cleared a lot of things up for me. Though I can't say I understand everything...all this hypothetical, theoretical, conjectural argumentation is really throwing me for a loop, but I think I see light at the end of the tunnel. Maybe by the end of the semester I just might be able to wrap my head around the dead author... or should I say hands? HA. Thanks for the help.