Booth and Foucault: Murdering the Author

In 'What Is an Author?", Faucault states that "an author's name is not simply an element in a discourse...; it performs a certain role with regard to narrative discourse, assuring a classificatory function" (107). Put more sucinctly, an author's name is not merely representative of the physical person, but of all of the connotations, ideas, and themes contained in and represented by that authtor's work. For example, the name Ayn Rand represents not just the person, but The Fountaindhead, Atlas Shrugged, and the objectivist philosophy. Faucault's statement that the name of the author defines the works and ideas associated with them more than a physical person is similar to Wayne Booth's idea of the implied author. In 'The Rhetoric of Fiction,' Booth states the implied author is the conceptualization of the values a literal author attempts to imply through his writings. In other words, the implied author is a concept of the literal author informed by the reader's understandings of the ideas represented in his writing. In both theories, the name of the author is assoicated with that author's ideas more than the person himself. Faucault takes this concept slightly further in implying that by using a name to define works and ideas rather than people we are essentially killing the author: "the work...now possesses the right to kill, to be its author's murderer" (102). By stating that the author's name now represents an amalgum of works, concepts, and ideas rather than a specific person, we are essentially removing the author from his work. Wayne Booth's implied author concept has a very similar function. The work of Booth and the Chicago Critics is, in part, a response to New Criticism, a theory which holds that it is the work itself rather than the author's intent that is of central importance. Booth does not quite take such a hard line, but his theory does contend that true meaning comes not from the actual author's intent but from the reader's understanding or conceptualization of the author's intent. By shifting the emphasis from author to reader, the theory of the implied author can be seen as an attempt to divorce the author from this work. In the end, the theories of Faucault and Booth, can be seen as removing the author from the work by using the author's name to imply a set of ideas rather than an actual person.

Lost in Czechoslovakia

The world in so much smaller than it seems. One hundred years ago, Jan Gebauer redefined how the Czech people related to their language. By categorizing the multinational components of his language, Gebauer created grammars and linguistic histories that were widely used by his countrymen. in the late 19th century, Gebauer was attempting to create a centralized language in a region that was heavily influenced by neighboring countries. His student Vilem Mathesius took up this idea and became one of the first scholars to work with how to create meaning between the Czech and English languages. He created a system which he believed could define linguistic meaning and composition across all languages. Mathesius' fascination with English literature led him to nurture the same interests in his student Rene Wellek, who would become the founder of comparative literature. These ideas have worked their way through linguists, theologians, and literary critics to become a part of our program. The research on Gebauer and his descendants has been fascinating but ultimately frustrating. The linguistic roadblocks that are keeping our group from advancing in this project (as far as I have found, Gebauer was not published in English)show that although ideas are linked realities are very different. There are plenty of references to Gebauer and his work in relation to other scholars, but information on the scholar himself belongs to the Czech people. We have made attempts of course, the ferret out some information, but I do not trust the efficacy of Microsoft's translation software (The Riegrova dictionary wrote baltistická password Jan Gebauer, all located in the sixth part of 1865). I am sure that other groups are experiencing the same problems as we explore older generations of scholars. This is, of course, probably no different from the frustrations experienced by the authors of all of the those historical essays we read at the beginning of our Norton book. It is up to us, I guess, to push forward to find information that we know exists. It is interesting, though, to be dealing with a language barrier when researching scholars who worked to connect and create meaning out of multiple languages. In addition, this research has shown how much politics has influenced and continues to influence education. Gebauer, Mathesius, and Wellek were working during the Russian revolution (Russian politics had a significant effect on their country) and during the rise of the Nazi party. Their ideas illustrate an attention to racial and cultural issues that scholars like bell hooks and Bizzell (my new favorite) are still grappling with today.