Re: theoretically speaking

Thanks for the references...nope, I didn't know that, haven't read Glas.
 I picked it up and said, haha, no way, not now. :)

I'm beginning to think I may have been confusing the Death of the Author
essay with Foucault's. Again, it's been a couple years.

Jim

Omlor@aol.com wrote:

> Matt and Jim,
>
> Actually, I think the ideas in Barthes' "From Work to Text" might
> speak more directly to the discussion you are beginning concerning the
> author in a post-structuralist context. The "Death of the Author"
> essay still has specific structuralist assumptions that ground it and
> that make it, I believe, part of a previous philosophical moment. On
> the other hand, Foucault's "What is an Author?" would compliment your
> questions in interesting ways, though it should be read, I think,
> alongside Derrida's formulation of the notion of "signature" as the
> marked trace of the author that inevitably remains (in, say,
> "Signature, Event, Context" or "Spurs" to begin with, and any number
> of other specific places as well). Needless, to say, *Glas* speaks at
> some length about the uniqueness and importance of the author and his
> signature, especially those of Hegel on the one hand and Genet on the
> other. But you already knew that.
>
> In neither Foucault's case nor in Derrida's is the author anything
> like "dead."
>
> All the best,
>
> --John

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Wed Mar 5 17:03:18 2003