Death of the Author

Hey there, Writers!

It's me, Kenneth! I've been wondering how I should begin this blog, and after a bit of thought, I decided that a healthy starting point would be with a bit of literary theory; specifically, I want to talk about Death of the Author.

When I say "death of the author" I don't mean the actual passing from life of a writer such as you, me, or Edgar Allen Poe. Rather, the death of the author refers to how readers interpret a piece of writing out of the context of the writer's intent. Death of the Author poses the question of how exactly does one separate a piece of work from the person who made it. This is an important question to ask, because criticism is a necessary part of human development, and because of how differently people can view one specific thing, there is no way to regulate how this thing should be interpreted or received. People attach meaning based on their own experiences to literature, and it's important to be aware that just because you write something doesn't mean that's what it will mean to every reader, and this is especially important in the field of creative writing.

This theory exists because of how we as readers tend to understand writing. When a writer has a character punished for committing acts that we as everyday people see as wrong, we assume that the writer, too, agrees that these actions are wrong and should be punished (in certain ways). Just because a writer creates a character who commits terrible acts does not mean the writer condones these acts; however when the character faces no negative consequences for these actions, readers tend to question why that is--does the author condone these actions? Most of the time, the answer is simply unknowable. An author does not owe their readers an explanation to every mystery, and as a writer, every stroke of the pen can bring forth numerous questions and possibilities--perhaps the character simply was not published yet.Ultimately, when a writer does something that contradicts a message in their writing, or otherwise slights against the ethical or moral standards of their books, (in serious ways or otherwise) the question arises of should the books, with literary and rhetorical value, be disenfranchised because of their author's actions.

 An example of Death of The Author could be found in the first book I'll be analyzing: Sherman Alexie's Indian Killer. Alexie's writing focuses on the plight of Native Americans, and he writes to make readers think about their actions and inactions, as well as what it means to be Euro-American or Native American. Much like stated above, in this novel, a character is admonished for his actions in taking advantage of Native American women for sexual purposes--despite this, in recent years, it has come forward that Alexie himself is guilty of the same thing, coercing Native American women into sexual acts with him using his own power as an established writer and publisher against them. So the question arises, should his writings be taken less seriously because of what he has done?


Lindsay Ellis' video essay Death of the Author goes into further detail on the subject, and I would highly suggest giving it a watch if you have the time.