32 pages • 1 hour read
Roland BarthesThe Death of the Author
Nonfiction | Essay / Speech | Adult | Published in 1967A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Essay Topics
What do you think of Barthes’s overall claim that the author and his or her intentions are of no relevance when interpreting the meaning of a text? In evaluating his argument, cite and compare some examples from your own reading experience that seem to support his thesis and some that seem to refute it.
Barthes’s argument seems quite extreme. If he is taken seriously, all communication should be held as being uncertain in meaning, and the possibility of reaching definitive understanding is placed out of reach. Should we believe him? Why or why not?
Think of a short piece of writing (a poem, a passage from a story, an advertisement, etc.) and write an essay in which you interpret it as a “text”—that is, as a “tissue” or fabric of multiple voices. How does this support Barthes’s claim that the author is “dead”?
Barthes says that “writing” as he understands it “liberates” the reader and reading from any need to arrive at a final meaning. What does this liberation feel like to you, and why? Is it refreshing? Frightening? Burdensome?
The author has died, says Barthes. Should we mourn this passing? How would we do so? In short, is this a good development, or one we should try to undo?
Many of Barthes’s sentences are long, complex, and difficult to understand. Take a sentence from the essay that you find challenging and write a short essay in which you take it apart, explaining in your own words what it means and discussing how it relates to the essay as a whole.
Barthes says that literature, as writing, demands a refusal of all sources of original meaning, including of god in any form, whether biblical, supernatural, or secular and cultural (such as science or law). But is writing then just another secular “god” for Barthes, one that has overthrown all the other gods and now demands to be loved and even worshiped?
Today, the identities of writers are held to be very important, especially as specific identities stand behind their experiences as persons of particular races, nationalities, ethnicities, gender orientations, and/or economic classes. Barthes argues that the identity of the writer is irrelevant to how we understand writing, and furthermore that this is truly “revolutionary.” But is it? What are the implications of his argument for understanding “identity”-oriented writing? Is it revolutionary, or a step backward?
