#DEATHOFTHEAUTHOR

[antoniab93-blog]

The 'death of the author' concept

Occasionally with this blog, I just cover topics that have been on mind & this is something we discuss on my podcast a lot, about how much you can separate an author from their books. So what does Death of the Author mean by the original definition?

For those who don’t run in the booktok, bookstagram, book tube online sphere, these days we are very quick to cancel an author based on their actions (and rightly so in most cases!). And for some, once an author has done something to end up on the shit list, it means they no longer want to engage with any of that authors work, even if there is a lot of sentimentality attached to it (I.e She Who…

[tellmeallaboutit]

I think that's an extremely important thing to say, and there's never been such a thing as a true reading of any work of fiction, even if there is only one canonical source, and the never would be. Death of the author, you know the drill. You may have a knee-jerk reaction to having other interpretations of the characters, ESPECIALLY when they come from the 'canon' source, but it's really important to internalise that there is no right or wrong reading in art. Whatever resonates with you, do it, and make it valid in your own little world.

For example, if the Raphael romance were to be implemented (I don't think so, but theoretically), a lot of fanon readings of the Raphael/Tav romance would come crashing down and feel invalidated (or reinforced and made somehow more 'true'). But no, that's just not the case. It made sense in the eyes of the beholder -> was made true in this particular instance. I really love that our little corner of fandom doesn't even get into the whole bottom/bottom/bad in bed discussion except in jest - because ultimately it doesn't matter to our interpretations at all. Canon is a source of inspiration, a guideline, if you want, from there on, it's free game.

given everything, i think we as a fandom need to really internalize that – even for those of us who prefer characterization derived from canon as much as possible – there is, at this point, increasingly no such thing as one true characterization. this is true even outside of discussions of personal read of a character. in this case, i am referring solely to the effect of the changes and edits larian has made, and continues to make, that affect characterization.

given the frankly somewhat unprecedented effect of these continuing changes and tweaks of characterization, it also raises the question of what counts as “canon”. and, at least in my personal determination, the answer is nothing so simple as it is in the case of many other mediums and source materials.

canon for each individual is going to mean something different — not just in the sense of their own canon playthrough, but also the version of the “canon” characters they experienced based on when they played the game.

as an example of this: my formative experience of halsin – my favorite character – was almost entirely prior to patch 5, a patch that made some fairly significant changes to his characterization. i do not personally feel myself required to change the character i love just because the game did after its full release. therefore, in most cases, when i am talking about and considering the character, it is in his pre-patch 5 iteration.

i’m sure there are others in similar positions, whether with the same character or other characters, and so it feels increasingly necessary to open these discussions.

[sistahscifi]

Congratulations, Nnedi!!!

Sistah Scifi Siblings, are you reading Death of the Author?

Credit to @nnediokorafor I’m featured in the New York Times, 🥹. You can find the story with a quick Google of “nnedi and New York Times”.

I love that the Binti pin on my coat made it into the photo. This photo was taken at Navy Pier in Chicago, not far from the Lake Point Tower (both places are *very* significant to the main character of DEATH OF THE AUTHOR).

#deathoftheauthor🤖

#rustedrobots

#nnediokorafor

#bintitrilogy

#SistahScifi

@harpercollins

@williammorrowbooks

@nytimes-article

[meteorcrab]

I think the problem now has "evolved" from people taking "the curtains are blue" literally and has turned into something much worse like "the author wrote the curtains are blue which means they hate all other colors and also I am 100% sure the curtains are actually purple (my fave color) #DeathOfTheAuthor"

[pebblysand]

hi pal, how r ye? weird ask ik but thoughts on bisexual!harry?

hello! not weird at all - a very valid question.

that said, i always feel a bit odd when people ask me for opinions about characters/canon events though, because i feel like there's always this expectation that i have a Strong Headcanon about these things, which honestly i mostly don't. i'm pretty neutral on most characters - like: yes, i have my view of them, but if someone has a different view, i'm not going to fight them, you know? i tend to bow out of conversations every time people start drilling into metas and text interpretations, because i find that everyone just seems to have much stronger thoughts than me about most things. i think there's a million ways to interpret canon, and i don't think my way is the only valid interpretation. i really don't feel that strongly about anything 🤣.

that said, from a writing/fic perspective: i guess i feel... neutral about it? i've said this before but i'll say it again: i think really good writing can sell me anything. it could sell me harry as a pirate, harry as a serial killer, harry as a god, if it wanted to, so i don't have any strong objections to anything. i'll read slash fics or fics with harry being bisexual if they're well-written. i suppose the one ship i really don't see is tomharry/harrymort - that seems very far-fetched to me, but again, i think a really good fic could potentially even sell that to me, if the characterisation work was done well.

having said that, i personally wouldn't write bisexual!harry because personally, in my own view of the text, i just don't see it, so it would be hard for me to sell it to other people. i know a lot of people will point to him calling men "handsome" all the time and label that as "basically canon", and if that's your boat, then by all means float it, but i personally think this is just JKR being a straight woman and describing people the way she sees them. also, calling someone of the same sex "handsome" doesn't make you bisexual/gay - i find women pretty all the time, but i identify as (mostly) straight, so. i think if you put a gun to my head and asked me: is "bisexual!harry canon?" i would say "no," because JKR clearly meant him as straight, and interpreting the text any differently is reaching. I appreciate that a lot of people are very #deathoftheauthor with JKR, but i am not.

that said, if you asked me: is is canon-compliant? sure, you can make a lot of things canon-compliant if you want to. you just have to build more on top of canon. there is nothing in canon that says: harry will never be attracted to a man ever, and as such, you can for sure make bisexuality canon-compliant. you just have to work on it and sell it. and, if you want to tell me that's your canon, then fine, why not? it's your interpretation and it's just as valid as mine or JKR's.

i think the way i view these things is more like: how big of a writing hurdle is it to make me believe them? so, for instance, if you were to write a hinny fic, my tolerance for mediocre writing is higher, because i already believe in that relationship. if you were to write a dramione, harmony, drarry or harry/ron fic, your writing hurdle might be a little bit higher, but i do generally think all of these relationships are within the realm of possibilities, and therefore i'll buy it if it's decently written. if you were to write harrymort or snarry, i'm like: mate, that's a Hard Sell, but sure look it, if you think you can pull it off, be my guest.

that's as far as shipping harry with canon male characters goes, though. if we're talking in the abstract, could harry be with another man? i think ... yeah. like, why not? i genuinely don't believe anyone is 100% gay or straight, i think we all sort of float somewhere on that spectrum, so maybe he could potentially meet someone he likes. again, it's probably not what JKR intended, but you can make it canon-compliant. i think it's unlikely, because i think he's probably like 90% straight, but that 10% is open. there's just other canon characters who i think are more likely to be bisexual than he is.

i also think that it's important to acknowledge that it's understandable and important that people write harry as bisexual. like, i totally understand why someone would do that. it's representativity, and openness, etc. but i also don't think changing the canon sexual orientation of canon characters (as in: giving them a different sexual orientation than the one JKR intended) is the only way that can be achieved. HP obviously lacks representativity in that area (esp in light of today's standards) but i tend to focus my diversity writing on OCs, and that's just my way to do it.

additionally, if i want to do something with canon characters, i tend to focus on the sexual orientation of characters who are a bit secondary, whose head you're not in, and for whom, thus, sexual orientation is a bit more of an open question. i think you can easily do that with ginny (in fact one of my favourite fics i've read in recent years in ginny/luna) or with people like seamus or dean, who are in the background enough that you just don't know what they think/who they're attracted to.

but again, i'm a canon-compliant writer. i'm a canon-compliant reader. if you're writing this wild AU where you're totally disregarding the canon characters and settings and just writing whatever you please, then obviously that's a different question.

[comfortandadam]

Did this commission for a friend of ours of his family in the #Potterverse. As fraught as that whole scene is these days, it's still a fun fiction to imagine in! #deathoftheauthor #inaliterarysense #notliterallythatsterrible https://www.instagram.com/p/CFurZrfhFDI/?igshid=18v145bbx6xl0

[danielvandernoon]

Socrates-Sized Irony 🪨 “You know, Phædrus, that is the strange thing about writing, which makes it truly correspond to painting. The painter’s products stand before us as though they were alive. But if you question them, they maintain a most majestic silence. It is the same with written words. They seem to talk to you as though they were intelligent, but if you ask them anything about what they say from a desire to be instructed they go on telling just the same thing forever." Socrates / Phædrus Dialogue approx. 370BCE #ancienne #ancient #writingtool #tech #writingtech #script #workofiction #calligraphy #natural #linearb #cursive #deathoftheauthor #athenian #socrates #greek #fictional #narrative #metaphor #emojifree #indianink #brushwork #imagefree https://www.instagram.com/p/Ckta2_ys1bl/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[marcain86]

More found poetry like gifts from the Gods. A more apt line I could not find. #artist #art #poetry #text #font #deathoftheauthor #rizomas (at Carbondale, Illinois)

[intermountainexile]

On the #gif pronunciation controversy. #unpopularopinion #literarytheory #rolandbarthes #deathoftheauthor #amwriting #writingcommunity #writingideas #writing (at San Francisco, California) https://www.instagram.com/p/BuW9VrKhsXi/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=11q2inw2136k3

[farawayeyes4]

Death of the Author

Re-read for annotation purposes the essay by Roland Barthes, “The Death of the Author” for my authorship chapter and research. 

Barthes wrote the groundbreaking and fundamental essay “The Death of the Author” in 1967/68. This piece asks us to set aside the notion that a text must have an author. Rather, Barthes asks us to question who it is that speaks. He starts his essay quoting Balzac, pointing out that the sentence in question most likely is spoken by a woman when the author, Balzac, is a man. Should this mean that he is the speaker even though this is clearly his character speaking instead? Barthes cites that authorship rose with the rise of the printing press and the Reformation. He remarks that literary criticism is often tangled in the web of authorship, as both authorship and criticism often go hand in hand. The main thrust of the argument Barthes makes is that for the reader to be able to interpret the text, the author must die or be dismissed as the center of its framework or meaning. Language is to be the key performer and indicator for the text and how a reader should engage with it. Barthes remarks that the all texts are a “tissue of citations, resulting from the thousand sources of culture,” which means that perhaps not only is an author someone who culture perceives as a creator, but in actuality is a scavenger who poaches for to put their own texts together. Barthes wants readers to reclaim texts for themselves, forgetting the author. In many ways, this may be impossible to do in the current climate. Literary theory may stretch itself to encompass this concept, but copyright and property right law will never do so. This means that Barthes and his theory may never actually reach true fruition, that authorship and text will forever remain linked rather than separated and weighed on their own merits.

Barthes, Roland. “The Death of the Author.” Image, Music, Text, translated by Stephen Heath, Hill and Wang, 1977, pp. 142–48.

[arikeia]

It's ridiculous that people still call LWJ and WWX moral ideals when the context of that quote was a romantic context. We all know MXTX loves to talk about how sexy and charming her boys are and this was just that. She sees them as good partners and has never said they we ethically perfect people. But even their viability as boyfriends is debatable #deathoftheauthor

[sistahscifi]

"Black Futures Month, observed each February, is a time to honor the rich heritage of the Black community while also looking forward to the possibilities and advancements ahead. 

This celebration is a visionary and forward-looking spin on the traditional Black History Month, encouraging us to reflect on Black individuals’ significant contributions throughout history and imagine and work towards a future filled with justice, liberation, and love." TARIK MOODY for Hyfin Magazine 

📕(S)KIN by @ibizoboi 

📕 DEATH OF THE AUTHOR by @nnediokorafor 

📕 HOW LONG TIL BLACK FUTURE MONTH by #NKJemisin

@hyphin.mke @Tarikmoody @harperplusbooksellers

#BlackHistoryMonth #BlackFuturesMonth #SistahScifi #Skin #IbiZoboi #DeathOfTheAuthor #NnediOkorafor 

[tsurangaconundrum]

yr blog tastes like really good salmon and the pish-tahh of a can being opened and lake water perfume and crumbles of sweet drywall (smells like books) not in an eating glass way but in a deathoftheauthor remodeling of the bodyhousejacket way

remodeling of the bodyhousejacket entering my brain immediately and sitting itself down on the couch

[letterfromajax]

Me: lol Harry Potter fan

Harry Potter fan: I don’t support JKR! I DONT! I separate work from the author #deathoftheauthor xoxo trans rights,,yes I know she’s racist and also using her platform to be the real life professor umbrella BUT death of the author also I don’t give her money so that makes it okay bc it’s my comfort series I grew up with it so don’t worry I’m critical TM of it and it’s okay I’m a cool person

[castielslostwings]

Death of the Author

Mini-Meta for 15x04, which was FULL of incredible references.

So, the death of the author is the birth of the reader. Chuck has to die for his work to be able to REALLY live on its own. For both the Winchesters & the fandom to be fully free.

"A narrator should not supply interpretations of his work; otherwise he would not have written a novel, which is a machine for generating interpretations." (Umberto Eco)

"Death of the Author is a concept from mid-20th Century literary criticism; it holds that an author's intentions and biographical facts (the author's politics, religion, etc) should hold no special weight in determining an interpretation of their writing. This is usually understood as meaning that a writer's views about their own work are no more or less valid than the interpretations of any given reader."

( https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathOfTheAuthor)

Chuck has always been a placeholder for SPN’s writers, but that was made ultra-textual this ep. That + all of what I wrote above has HUGE significance to the final season and the eventual resolution of this storyline. Considering how Becky (the stand-in for the fandom, who has GROWN and matured and who “doesn’t need [Chuck] anymore) encouraged Chuck to LET GO and he refused, doubling down on retaining both CONTROL and INTERPRETATION of his stories and “his” characters. Becky repping the fandom, telling him all the things that he needed to MOVE PAST so that he (and not for nothing, but the boys too) can be happy. Instead of hearing her though, Chuck Thanos-snaps everything that Becky has built to grow past him and then her. Chuck is still the villain, now because he CAN’T let go, can’t accept that his characters have grown past him. He SHOULD allow the story to tell itself, the story everyone wants to hear/see/read, but he can’t.

“Death of the Author” is a concept AND a metaphor, but you better believe it applies literally to Chuck!! We been knew Chuck has to go. Looks like the writers know it too.

Tl;Dr, i wouldn’t worry too much about Chuck’s planned unhappy ending. :-D  

[haloud]

just, yknow, dropping this here.....