Some of the Problems with Barthes

So, I think I get what the Barthes essay is saying: that criticism has removed the author from any immediate presence in the text, especially in conjunction with the realization on the part of both reader and author that the narrative voice is entirely distinct from the authorial voice. This is certainly an interesting aspect of the modern literature and criticism, but I think Barthes must be contradicting himself when he says that this is the death of the author. (I suppose I could give him the benefit of the doubt, and imagine that he is taking a good deal of poetic license, but even if the death of the author isn't exactly what he means, I still take issue with his assessment that the author is no longer present within the text.)

What I mean is this: Barthes asserts that "at all its levels the author is absent" within the modern text, and further that the modern text is no longer a piece of polished craftsmanship, but that the work "has no other origin than language itself" (1468). What I can't seem to get my head around is his simultaneous and contradictory assertion that the modern text has become something "performative" (1468). He equates the text with "the I declare of royalty, or the I sing of the very ancient poets" (1468). The effect of such a performative statement is precisely a reminder that the performer is present in the first place!

I agree with Barthes that the nature of the author's position has been radically transformed, but I simply don't understand how he can argue that it is excluded from the text altogether; even his essay, which is invested in removing the presence of the author from the text, references the author as if he is still present. The transformation of the author from a dedicated craftsman to an almost improvisational channeler of language itself is notable, but it does not remove the author from the text. Rather, the author's position is transferred from one position of authority to another, equally as potent. The ancient poet, reciting epic poetry in a continuous, almost unconscious stream is nevertheless the listener's center of attention and direct mediator to the story he is channeling. Even the "performative" language preceding a recitation serves to draw attention to the performer. An audience focuses on the performances in a stage play; although an actor is simply reciting the words laid out by the playwright, it is through the actor that the audience experiences the story, and each actor has the job of interpreting that story.

In summation, I think the transition from author as creator to author as performer is a fascinating and useful observation, but I also think that the author's presence in a text is not removed by that transition.