Michel Foucault's
"What Is an Author?"
Provider:
Sophia Hsu
19 November 2002
An Outline
I. Why Foucault feels the need to ask such a question, "What
is an author?"
A. Preliminary thinking of "author"
- Roland Barthes' "death of the author"
- Samuel Beckett's "What matter who's speaking, someone said,
what matter who's speaking."
B. Originated from
The Order of Things
1. Two related objections arise from Foucault's failure to realize
the functions of author in his book.
a. Foucault fails to describe properly Buffon or his work; his
mentioning of Marx is also inadequate in terms of the totality of
his thought.
b. Foucault brings seemingly irrelevant names together and creates
"monstrous families" (1622).
2. Foucault's original purposes/defense:
a. He wants to locate the rules that formed a certain number
of concepts and theoretical relationships in Buffon's and Marx's works,
instead of merely describing them and their thoughts.
b. He tends to determine the functional conditions of specific
discursive practices.
II. The purpose of this paper: to set aside a socio-historical
analysis of the author as an individual and the numerous questions that
deserve attention in this context.
A. How the author was individualized in a culture such as ours.
B. The state we have given the author.
C. The systems of valorization in which the author was included.
D. The moment when the stories of heroes gave way to an author's
biography
E. The conditions that fostered the formulation of the fundamental
critical category of "the man and his work."
III. The ethical principle of contemporary writing: it dominates
writing as an ongoing practice and slights our customary attention to
the finished product.
A. The writing of our day has freed itself from the necessity
of "expression"; it only refers to itself, yet it is not restricted
to the confines of interiority. On the contrary, we recognize it in
its exterior deployment.
- Writing as an interplay of signs.
- Writing is concerned with creating an opening where the writing
subject endlessly disappears.
B. It is the kinship between writing and death.
- The concept of a spoken or written narrative as a protection
against death.
- Where a work had the duty of creating immortality, it now attains
the right to kill, to become the murderer of its author.
- The author is transformed into a victim of his own writing.
IV. Two theses that have detained us from taking full measure
of the author's disappearance:
A. How can an author's works be defined? What should be included
in his work?
B. The notion of ecriture
- It should allow us not only to circumvent references to an author,
but to situate his recent absence.
- It stands for a remarkably profound attempt to elaborate the
conditions of any text, both the conditions of its spatial dispersion
and its temporal deployment.
- The conception of écriture sustains the privileges of
the author through the safeguard of the a priori.
V. Difficulties and problems related to "what is the name of
an author?" and "how does it function?"
A. It is more than a gesture; it is, to a certain extent, the
equivalent of a description.
B. A proper name has other functions than that of signification:
they alter between the poles of description and designation.
C. The link between a proper name and the individual being named
and the link between an author's name and that which it names are not
isomorphous and so not function in the same way.
D. The presence of an author's name is functional in that it
serves as a means of classification.
E. The author's name characterizes a particular manner of existence
of discourse. Its status and its manner of reception are regulated by
the culture in which it circulates
F. The name of the author remains at the contours of texts, pointing
to the existence of certain groups of discourse and refers to the status
of this discourse within a society and culture.
G. The function of an author is to characterize the existence,
circulation, and operation of certain discourses within a society.
VI. Four different features of "author-function" in discourse:
A. Discourses are objects of appropriation; the form of property
they have become is of a particular type whose legal codification was
accomplished some years ago.
- Penal code
- Ownership, copyright
B. The "author-function" is not universal or constant in all
discourse.
- Authentification no longer required reference to the individual
who had produced them.
- The role of the author seems to be transformed into an index.
C. This "author-function" is not formed spontaneously through
the simple attribution of a discourse to an individual. It results from
a complex operation whose purpose is to construct the rational entity
we call an author.
1. Four criteria according to Saint Jerome about textual study
a. The texts that must be eliminated from the list of works attributed
to a single author are those inferior to the others.
b. Those whose ideas conflict with the doctrine expressed in
the others.
c. Those written in a different style and containing words and
phrases not ordinarily found in the other works.
d. Those referring to events or historical figures subsequent
to the death of the author.
2. Modern criticism on textual study:
a. The author explains the presence of certain events within
a text, as well as their transformations, distortions, and their various
modifications.
b. The author also constitutes a principle of unity in writing
where any unevenness of production is ascribed to changes caused by
evolution, maturation, or outside influence.
c. The author serves to neutralize the contradictions that are
found in a series of texts.
d. The author is a particular source of expression who is manifested
equally well, and with similar validity, in a text, in letters, fragments,
drafts, and so forth.
D. The "author-function" is tied to the legal and institutional
systems that circumscribe, determine, and articulate the realm of discourses;
it does not operate in a uniform manner in all discourses, at all times,
an in any given culture; it is not defined by the spontaneous attribution
of a text to its creator, but through a series of precise and complex
procedures; it does not refer, purely and simply, to an actual individual
insofar as it simultaneously gives rise to a variety of egos and to
a series of subjective positions that individuals of any class may come
to occupy.
VII. Initiators of discursive practices:
A. These authors produced not only their work, but the possibility
and the rules of formation of other texts.
- Freud vs. The Interpretation of Dreams
- Marx vs. Capital
- Ann Radcliffe vs. Gothic romance
B. The initiation of discursive practices appears similar to
the founding of any scientific endeavor.
C. The initiation of a discursive practice is heterogeneous to
its future transformations.
D. The initiation of a discursive practice, unlike the founding
of science, overshadows and is necessarily detached from its later developments
and transformations.
E. Discourses "returning to the origin"
1.Different from scientific "rediscoveries" and "reactivations"
a. Rediscoveries: the effects of analogy or isomorphism with
current forms of knowledge that allow the perception of forgotten
or obscured figures.
b. Reactivations: the insertion of discourse into totally new
domains of generalization, practice, and transformation.
2. Features of "return to"
a. Designates a movement with its proper specificity, which characterizes
the initiation of discursive practices.
b. They tend to reinforce the enigmatic link between an author
and his works.
c. Form a relationship between "fundamental" and mediate authors,
which is not identical to that which links an ordinary text to its
immediate author.
VIII. Conclusion:
Partially at the expense of themes and
concepts that an author places in his work, the "author-function" could also
reveal the manner in which discourse is articulated on the basis of social
relationships. The subject (and its substitutes) must be stripped of its
creative role and analyzed as a complex and variable function of discourse.
TOP
|