Reading Response: The Death of the Author

I did not enjoy this reading, it was a little hard for me to understand. Or rather I understood it but disagree with it. I believe the author can do whatever they want and the work will not loose it's "spark." The article states things like "the Author is supposed to feed the book." To me the author can distance himself from the story because they are creating something that may not be real and they may not put there all into it but they may have certain "writing skills" and can create this creative work without trying. The same goes for if you put your all into a work it could be undesirable. The article also states, "once the Author is gone, the claim to “decipher” a text becomes quite useless."  Why? there is still a story being told, there is still something there to be understood. The biggest disagreement is to this statement of the reading, "once the Author is discovered, the text is explained." We as people change, our creativity changes, and our work changes. It may be one work but you could be going through so much that it can have several different "vibes" from it. My question is who is the author, there are so many thoughts that it may feel like there are multiple people. Does this lessen the work? Or if there is a painful experience that you have lost that desire to put your all into the work and you distance yourself is it still worthless. I just believe that anyone can create art with a spark because no one can define art. No one can define that "spark" in the work. I believe that as long as you create it and put it out there for the world to see that "spark" is always there it's just up to the audience to decide when they will except it. Society loves the work of many artist who are dead because we can create in our own mind that connection between the artist and there work. When in reality no one even knows the true person who created it work their thoughts behind it. We give the work an author for our own satisfaction.

Death of the Author

I found the article very inspiring. Barthes's work definitely honed in on a topic that is more prevalent than people are aware of. This idea of having an assumption or preconceived notion of an article or topic, or any given information based solely on the author or source, rather than the information given to you. It is a similar topic I tried to engage in one of my projects, about creating a dissonance between a creator or a source and its creation. Barthes's believes we as viewers should move away from such thought processes, and eliminate his/her need to categorize an element based on all surrounding aspects and elements. We are meant to not fully comprehend the thoughts of a writer for "...assign[ing] a single, corresponding interpretation [...] 'is to impose a limit [...].'"

The Death of the Author

I think the reading is interesting--it claims that the main part or writing, the "locus," is "reading." It suggests that writing is best when the author is ambiguous. When the author tries to force himself or herself to be separate from the narrative (tries to maybe identify themself or make it clear that they are not involved in the story, that they are simply an "Author-God" and not, in fact, a character), the story loses some of its "passion" that the original content lacks. The author, interestingly enough, also references the Greek tragedy, and the utilization of ambiguous language. I think the passage is interesting, as it brings to mind something I feel like I've always thought but never really put into words or consciously put much thought into. I agree that oftentimes stories written with a certain perspective lack that emotion, and that I tend to prefer stories that are more immersed in the content rather than the storytelling.

The death of the author

This article said a lot but the overall concept I got was that after a piece of work is created the interpretation is left solely to the viewer. The artist or "author" does not have the ability to correct or help the viewer to explain the work. This applies to many things, not just art.