ireena 210216

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ireena-210216 1/8

Student Name: Ireena Kanhye Tutor: Farhad Khoyratty 1

1. In Search of the Author: From Paul et Virginie to Genie and Paul .

2. The Lives of the Author: From Paul et Virginie to Genie and Paul .

3. The Changing Face of the Author: From Paul et Virginie to Genie and Paul .

Entry point: The process of re-writing an earlier text changes the dynamics that exists between the tropes

of the author and the reader without necessarily at the detriment of one or the other. Instead, both can

function apparently simultaneously in a symbiosis when/if the text itself is conceived of as space of

creativity that permits re-appropriation, re-creation and re-productions of itself.

The author is a critical category that has undergone various changes that parallel its ongoing

conceptualizations. Protean by nature, the figure of the author has been understood differently over time

and under different theoretical lenses, moving from the divine, the inspired to the originary and also

crossing through a phase where its very existence was precariously balanced between a theoretical need to

do away without and to emphasize it. The continuing debate revolving around the rights of the

autonomous and genius author that emerged since the !th century has been perpetuated to the present day

where issues of copyright laws and analyses of plagiarism run rampant. "fter a brief period of purgatory

absence when the author was deemed too encumbering to be associated with the text and was thus

promptly disposed of as #dead$, %cf. &arthes, '()*, he re-emerged, albeit with the exact reason for his

existence still in dispute.

"s &ur+e %)* has succinctly pointed out in a comprehensive dissection of the wor+s of &arthes,

oucault and errida, the figure of the author is indeed an entity that cannot undergo a hurried effacement

without perpetuating a discontinuity within the process of meaning-ma+ing. hile &arthes$ essay #The

eath of the "uthor$ wishes to place the power of meaning-ma+ing into the hands of the reader 0 rather

than the author - in a 1ustified attempt to assuage the pitfalls of the biographical fallacy, that the reader is

the sole generator of meaning and the main occupant of the textual space is e2ually problematic. "s the

act of re-appropriating a text for its re-writing suggests, the author is indefinably eliminated by the reader

who in turn becomes the author proper. 3owever, what is insidiously woven into this much hoped-for usurpation is that the act of re-creation moves from a private act of reading and the construction of

meaning to a public act of reading, meaning-ma+ing, re-writing and publishing a text that is wholly the

reader$s 0 who has now been transformed into the actual author 0 and, following the rationale of having

to excise the author of his/her own creation, a text that is now completely beyond the latter$s control.

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



This act serves to demonstrate two +ey shifts within the paradigms of the author and the reader. irstly,

that the author$s presence in a text is li+ened to the undesired elephant in the room poses theoretical

2uestions that have already been tac+led since the first reported call for authoricide. Thus, for instance, it

is 2uite improper to cite the essay of #The eath of the "uthor$ as being the wor+ of another critic 0

poststructuralist or otherwise. "s much as &arthes$ contention is a matter of allowing language to spea+

for itself, as opposed to the voice of the author that drowns away the reader$s own perceptions of the text,

it is a case in point that to freely interpret the title of his essay can be worrying, to say the least. "s

oucault has candidly explicated, the author still exists as a functional tool within the discourse of his/her

text and this off-the-cuff rescue mission has, since, once again re-established the authorial space, even if

not within the text per se but at least in the legal domain. The elephant, after all, is still one of the

occupants of the room. "rguably, though, it may also be possible to have only the portrait of the elephant

in the guise of the authorial signature on the text. 4econdly, the figures of the author and reader have

been for too long diametrically opposed as incompatible entities that necessitate the absence of one or the

other for survival. 5n the one hand, construing the author as source of creativity and originality

previously relegated the reader to the passive position of mere spectator to the latter$s ideas while, on the

other hand, emphasizing only reader-response to a piece of writing meant that the author was

categorically written off as insignificant and a hindrance to textual interpretation. "t the crux of both

views, an insinuation of a power balance that seemingly tilts towards only one entity at a time is upheld.

"s the re-appropriation of Genie and Paul %))* from an ! th century pastoral and its re-writing implies,

the parallel processes of writing and reading, and conversely of reading and writing, are inherently co-

existent. 6endering public and legal the private process of meaning-ma+ing permits such texts to exist

independently. The act of ridding the text of its author is actually a deferment %pace errida* or a

postponement of the actual process of writing since the space it creates after its absence is in fact fecund

ground for more texts to emerge from. ar from being s2uarely replaced by the unassuming reader who

merely draws in intext based on his/her own life experiences, this space becomes the incubator for the

very reader to be transformed into an author. 7et again, recasting existing texts into another mould further

complicates the legal understanding of the authorship of a text. ine boundaries between slippery

concepts such as plagiarism, inspiration and creativity/originality are blurred as characters firmly secured

within certain texts are once again given liberty and life in new reproductions, even if fleetingly. This may

explain how !th century 8irginie, now modern-day 9enie, amongst many other characters, comes bac+ to

life in an island that has already undergone centuries of development and through the processes of

colonization, decolonization and eventually independence.

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



hat is also at sta+e within such instances of reproductions is that the author 0 defunct or almost 0 exists

in multiple. riting is always assumed to be carried out in a textual space by an autonomous author. " re-

written text therefore does away with this rather 6omantic notion by transcending the process of creation

through time, space and even gender. "llowing language to spea+ for itself clears the space for the reader

to flourish and to step into the shoes of the author, no matter how much later after the initial text has been

written. The liberated text, even after its re-writing%s*, is an open text %pace :co* that allows readers not

only to freely interpret their own way through it but to bring forth legal #versions$ of it. This shift in

author and reader roles is also noticeably prominent is other movements such as fan fiction and

adaptations of boo+s for the purposes of film-ma+ing, for instance. In another vein, superceding the

formalist and post-structuralist analyses of the theoretical underpinnings of the author and reader, the

contemporary Genie and Paul reflects a more mature understanding of the relationship between the two

entities. "s has already been pointed out earlier, the space between the two seemingly polarized tropes has

been reconfigured and re-imagined into a symbiotic relationship that does not necessarily negatively

impinge on the other. This may explain how 8irginie re-emerges not only as 9enie but also as Paulette in

9hosh$s Sea of Poppies, amongst others, for instance.

This later generation of author figures is yet another emerging facet of the socially constructed trope of

the author that differs, almost imperceptibly but surely, from earlier conceptualizations as the divine, the

inspired, the defunct or even the implied/inferred figures. The slippage that exists between the constructs

of the author and the reader thus permits the proliferation of texts 0 to infinity, as a matter of fact.

esearch !uestions:

o "o# to theoretica$$y conceptua$i%e the metamorphosis that ta&es p$ace #hen the

author 'ecomes a rea(er an( the rea(er the author)

o *here (oes one te+t 'egin an( en(, an( #here (oes the re-#riting 'egin)

o *hat is the ne# trope that resu$ts of such s$ippage 'et#een authors-rea(ers)

o "o# to p$ace the (ifferent te+ts against a 'ac&(rop of copyright an( p$agiarism

issues)

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



i'$iography:

&arthes, 6., ';<. Le Degré Zero de L’Ecriture, Paris= 4euil> trans. as Writing Degree Zero, ?ondon=

@onathan Aape %'(B*.

- '(. S/Z , Paris= 4euil> %'(C* S/Z %trans. 6ichard Diller*, Eew 7or+= 3ill F ang.

- '(). #The eath of the "uthor$, in 4ears and ?ord %eds*, '(), (-) and 3eath %ed.*

'((, C)-!.

- '(;. The Pleasure of The Text %trans. 6ichard Diller*, Eew 7or+= 3ill F ang.

- '((. #rom or+ to Text$ in 3eath %ed.* '((, ;;-BC.

&ennett, T. '('. Foralis and !arxis, Dethuen F Ao ?td, Eew 7or+.

&ently, ?. ''C. 6eview= Aopyright and the eath of the "uthor in ?iterature and ?aw. The !odern La"

#e$ie", ;(%B*, pp. '(< 0 '!B.

&la+e, D. );. The :mergent "uthor= "ffective 6esponse to a riend of a #8ery 4pecial, "rtificial

Gind$. %&LL&'() text theor* criti+ue, )'%);*.

&loom, 3. ''(. The ,nxiet* of -nfluence. , Theor* of Poetr* %)nd ed*. Eew 7or+ F 5xford= 5xford

Hniversity Press.

&ooth, . A. );. 6essurection of the Implied "uthor= hy &other In @ames Phelan F Peter @.

6abinowitz %eds* );. , %opanion to arrati$e Theor*. , #eader . HG= &lac+well Pusblishing ?td.

&ur+e, 4., ). The Death and #eturn of the ,uthor. %riticis and Su01ecti$it* in 2arthes3 Foucault and Derrida, :dinburgh Hniversity Press.

Aarringer, 6. ?. ). Aollaboration and Aoncepts of "uthorship. !odern Language ,ssociation, B%)*,

pp. <( 0 <('.

Aalinescu, D. ''<. #ereading . ?ondon= 7ale Hniversity Press.

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



Ahartier, 6. ''<. #The Practical Impact of riting$ In avid in+elstein F "listair DcAleery %eds* The

2oo4 5istor* #eader . ?ondon= 6outledge, pp.!-C).

Auller, @., %'(;*, Structuralist Poetics. Structuralis3 Linguistics ,nd the stud* of Literature, 6outledge,

?ondon.

arnton, 6. '!). hat is the 3istory of &oo+s Daedalus %<*, pp.B;-!<.

errida, @. 4tructure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences In avid ?odge F Eigel

ood %eds* '!!. !odern %riticis and Theor*. , #eader , HG= Pearsons :ducation ?imited.

oviJ, D. )'. Alassical 6oots of the Dodern "uthorial Aoncept. Primer1alna +n1iKevnost %?1ubl1ana*

<). 4pecial Issue, pp. )); 0 )<(.

:co, H. '('. The #ole of the #eader. Explorations in the Seiotics of Texts. &ollomington= Indiana

Hniversity Press.

:isenstein, :. ). 6eview of "drian @ohns$ The Eature of the &oo+= Print and Gnowledge in theDa+ing. -sis, '%)*, pp. <B-<(.

in+elstein, and DcAleery, ". );. ,n -ntroduction to 2oo4 5istor*, Eew 7or+= 6outledge.

oucault, D., '(;. #hat is an author$, Partisan #e$ie", L?II/C, B<-C> reprinted in 3arari %ed.*, '(',

pp.C-B.

9omez-"rostegui, 3. T. ). The Piracy ?oop. The #e$ie" of Politics, (<%*, pp.()-(;.

Iser, . '';. Interaction &etween Text and 6eader In "ndrew &ennett %ed* #eaders 6 #eading . Eew

7or+= ?ongman 9roup ?td. Pp. ) 0 <.

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



@amison, ". )B. Aollaboration v. Imitation= "uthorship and the ?aw. La" and Literature, !%)*, pp. ''

0 ))C.

@aszi, P. ''. Towards a Theory of Aopyright= The Detamorphoses of "uthorship. Du4e La" 7ournal ,

''%C;;*, pp. C;; 0 ;).

- '''. #5n The "uthor :ffect= Aontemporary Aopyright and Aollective Areativity$ In

Dartha oodmansee F Peter @aszi %eds* '''. &n The ,uthor Effect. #eco$ering

%ollecti$it*, urham and ?ondon= u+e Hniversity Press, pp.)'-;B.

@ohns, ". )). 3ow To "c+nowledge " 6evolution8 The ,erican 5istorical #e$ie", (%*, pp.B-

);.

- ''!. The Eature of the &oo+= Print and Gnowledge in the Da+ing. Ahicago=

Ahicago Hniversity Press, pp. -;(.

Gostylo, @. ). #rom 9unpowder to Print= The Aommon 5rigins of Aopyright and Patent$ In 6onan

eazley, Dartin Gretschmer F ?ionel &ently %eds* ). Pri$iledge and Propert*. Essa*s on The

5istor* of %op*right , HG= 5pen &oo+ Publlisher ?rd, pp. )-;.

?eitch, 8.&., '';. 6eader-6esponse Ariticism, In #eaders 6 #eading , ". &ennett %ed*, ?ongman 9roup

?td, Eew 7or+. pp.<)-BB

?ionnet, ., )). The 9no"n and the (ncertain. %reole %osopolitics of the -ndian &cean. Dauritius=

ID.

Dar+, 6. '!!. The "uthor as Proprietor= onaldson v. &ec+et and the 9enealogy of Dodern "uthorship.

#epresentations, Eo. )<, pp. ;- !;.

Dayer-4chMnberger, 8. F ong, ?. )<. an or oe an iction, "uthorship and the ight for Aontrol.

-DE, : The -ntellectual Propert* La" #e$ie", ;C%*, pp.-).

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



Dconald, P. )B. Ideas of the &oo+ and 3istories of ?iterature= "fter Theory. !odern Language

,ssociation, )%*, pp. )C 0 ))!.

Dortensen, P. F Girsch, 9. :. ''<. 5n "uthority in the 4tudy of riting. %ollege %oposition and

%ounication, CC%C*, pp. ;;B 0 ;().

Duhawi, I. );. The #"rabian Eights$ and the Nuestion of "uthorship. 7ournal of ,ra0ic Literature,

<B%<*, pp. <)< 0 <<(.

Eorth, D. ). "uthorship and "utography. !odern Language ,ssociation, B%;*, pp. <(( 0 <!;.

Pappas, E. '!'. "uthorship and "uthority. The 7ournal of ,esthetics and ,rt %riticis, C(%(*, pp. <); 0

<<).

6eiman, . 3. ''. 6eview of . . DcGenzie$s &ibliography and The 4ociology of Texts. The Papers

of The 2i0liographical Societ* of ,erica, !C%)*, pp. ('-!.

6iffaterre, D. '(<. The 4elf-4ufficient Text. Diacritics, <%<*, pp. <' 0 C;.

- '(C. rench ormalism In The Frontiers of Literar* %riticis3 .3. Dalone %ed*,

3ennessy F Ingalls, Inc., H4". Pp.'<-'

6oss, A. ''(. 6eading, Dourning and the eath of the "uthor. arrati$e, ;%*, pp. B( 0 (B.

4aid, :. . '(C. Aonrad= The Presentation of Earrative. &;EL. , Foru on Fiction, (%)*, pp. B 0

<).

- '(;. The orld, The Text, The Aritic. The 2ulletin of the !id"est !odern Language

,ssociation, !%)*, pp. - )<.

4elden, 6., iddowson, P., and &roo+er, P., );. , #eader’s Guide to %onteporar* Literar* Theor*,

9reat &ritain= Pearson :ducation ?imited. ; th ed.

7/26/2019 Ireena 210216



4choles, 6., '!;. The Textual Po"er. Literar* Theor* 6 The Teaching of English, 7ale Hniversity, 8ail-

&allou Press, &righamton, Eew 7or+.

4mith, . 6. )'. "uthorship, 4cholarship, and :rgonomics "uteurs, Publications et :rgonomie. Le

Tra$ail 5uain, ()%C*, pp. <'( 0 C<.

4oobramanien, E., )). Genie and Paul . Aroydon= Dyriad Aollections.

4topford, @., ''. The eath of the "uthor %"s a Producer*. Philosoph* 6 #hetoric, )<%<*, pp. !C- '.

4utherland, @. ''<. 6eview of Dultiple "uthorship and the Dyth of 4olitary 9enius by @ac+ 4tillinger.

The 7ournal of English and Gernaic Philolog*, ')%)*, pp. )) 0 );.

eingart, P., ). #" 4hort 3istory of Gnowledge$ In @ulie Thompson Glein F Aarl Ditcham %eds* ).

The &xford 5and0oo4 of -nterdisciplinarit*. 5xford= 5xford Hniversity Press, <-C.

hita+er, A. ?. ). The Eature of the &oo+= Print and Gnowledge in the Da+ing %6eview*.

%oitatus. , 7ournal of #enaissance and !edie$al Studies, <)%*, pp. 'B-'!.

Further references:

http=//bibliothe2ue.mu.refer.org/livresOupload/aupaysdepauletvirginie.pdf

http=//eduscapes.com/boo+history/intellectualproperty/<.htm

http=//www.news)C.com/orld/Eews/&ristow-&ovey-pleads-guilty-)<'

http://bibliotheque.mu.refer.org/livres_upload/aupaysdepauletvirginie.pdf


http://eduscapes.com/bookhistory/intellectualproperty/3.htm

http://www.news24.com/World/News/Bristow-Bovey-pleads-guilty-20030911


http://eduscapes.com/bookhistory/intellectualproperty/3.htm



ireena 210216

Documents