On 28/04/12 16:49, Lawrence Upton wrote:
> I wasn't asked to, but I couldn't follow them, too many conflicting ideas
> about civil war;
The other concern that comes to me is, again Roland Barthes. Thanks
again for the comments, most welcome.
Is the conflicting lines on civil war readerly or writerly? The
difference is is important, to me at least.
A writerly writing is a type of writing in which the reader is free to
write again that which is written. A readerly writing is a didactic
authority imposed on the reader by the writer. (Hence, Barthes idea of
the death of the author...)
What authority does a writer have? An ethical question, perhaps, as much
a political question.
I suspect and might even fear that Barthes death of the author is poorly
understood.
The line on civil war .... confusing, perhaps? Is the writer attempting
a claim of authority which is imposed on the reader? If so, it is
readerly and as such It allows no freedom for the reader to make a
writerly reading, or to re-write in a free fashion what the writer has
already written. (This is a question I make of my own writing. It seems
somewhat unfair to impose this on other writers in the way I may impose
it on my writing.)
Free indirect discourse, as Barthes understands, seems to me a way to
write in a writerly way. That is in a way in which the reader writes
what is written, without making a claim by the writer to the authority
of being an author.
|