In English class, we have learned that it is incorrect to introduce quotes by saying, “ this quote says this” because the quote is not talking but “the author wrote this” because the emphasis is on what the author said. Roland Barthes challenges the common notion of the importance of the author which is irresponsible imagination. While Piranesi emphasizes the importance of evolving from history to make better architecture, and Stern similarly highlights the Gray approach to postmodernism architecture saying “Grayness seeks to move toward an acceptance of diversity; it prefers hybrids to pure forms, it encourages multiple and simultaneous readings in its effort to heighten expressive content” (Stern 1976, 6). Recognizing the author puts literature into historical context for better analysis. Like Gray architecture, buildings better evolve and grow from past orders to make new orders. That growth is lost when one tries to approach a text as simply the literature alone, interpreting it in the present as the reader. Barthes recognizes “the Author’s empire is still very powerful” (Barthes 1967, 3) but his attempt to dispute that is in vain because rightfully people are greatly affected by who the author is even if the author is dead. Religious texts are worshipped and followed because they are the supposed words of divine higher powers. People follow laws and the constitution even though the authors are dead because the authors held enough power and recognition to back their words. While both the Bible and the Second Amendment are highly questioned by readers today, being able to see the text from the author’s point of view is imperative to fully understand the text from all sides. Literature comes with historical context with the author and should remain important, similarly to how Gray architecture uses historical reference when evolving new architecture.
Barthes, Roland. The Death of the Author, 1967.
Piranesi, Giovanni Battista. “Oppositions.” Thoughts on Architecture , 1765.
Stern, Robert A.M. Gray Architecture as Post-Modernism, or, Up and Down from Orthodoxy, 1976.
A very thoughtful response to the readings Mia, and I’m glad that you’re taking a position with regards to the question of ‘authorship’. Michel Foucault raised some similar questions, specifically regarding ‘seeing things from the author’s point of view in order to better understand the text,’ in his essay “What is an Author?” – I highly encourage you to have a read. Overall, great response to the readings.