The Death of the Author, discusses the theory of how an author enters his own death as the act of writing is taking place. This theory no longer allows the author to have definitive authority over the reader. To prevent “interpretive tyranny,” the reader must be able to separate a work from the inventor and conclude one’s own viewpoint. Acknowledging Barthes’s theory allows the reader to break free of dictatorship the author may posses by promoting the reader to freely think about the pieces of literature such as Balthazar’s Marvelous Afternoon. Autonomous thinking gives the reader the advantage of discovering the duplicity of a potential underlying connotation or simply deciding not to delve deeper for hidden implications that may be sought out by the author.
At the other end of the spectrum, Crane sets John Livingston Lowes in the foreground, stating that criticism is the only justification to literature. He does not say that we should ignore history, but rather should use it as tool to understand human emotion and to find the deeper meaning through literature. In Crane’s argument for history, he proposes we ask what is involved in writing history and apply those findings to literature, when it is considered an art form. He says what we take from historical criticism is the same thing we take from any type of historical study: we want to know how humanity has changed. While he believes this is all good, we need to see that it is not the only thing, or the best thing, when it comes to literature.
This is the part that is autonomous to the physical body. Descartes then went further to illustrate that human beings or matter go on with their own business and follow their own laws until the mind/soul intervenes which interferes with the physical nature of humans. He therefore believed that the mind and body of human beings were therefore two distinct elements. Hobbes on the hand tried to rationalize philosophy using dualism. He proposed that in order to understand societies one needed to understand wh... ... middle of paper ... ...le at the time but is later shown to be false.
It is also important here to understand what Althusser means by ‘lived experience’. He uses the term to indicate the staleness of experience. In another word, the writer shares what he wants with the reader. What he shares are the premeditated thoughts which Althusser terms as “lived experience”, the stored or
"Society is a legal fiction," says Lacan; however, according to Buxton , it is not so much society that is a legal fiction, but rather the defining characteristic, and eventually the economy, of society. But if the cultural paradigm of expression holds, we have to choose between neoconstructivist objectivism and neotextual objectivism. The subject is interpolated into a socialist realism that includes reality as a totality. In the works of Gibson, a predominant concept is the concept of material truth. Thus, the main theme of the works of Gibson is the genre, and some would say the defining characteristic, of postcapitalist sexual identity.
Therefore it is a writers’ job to find innovative ways to craft a story, without pushing boundaries for the sake of shock value, or to play devil’s advocate. As opposed to the realist and naturalist movements which proceeded, experimental literature puts forth the notion that content is subordinate to the form of the text. Experimental novelists such as, Alain Robbe-Grillet, K... ... middle of paper ... ...with Robbe-Grillet on the basis that writing is an art form which is constantly changing. Writers must adapt their writing style in order to intrigue and inspire their audiences. Experimental literature is the answer for writers who want to push the boundaries of the conventional text to create an original art piece.
Writing Style is Important Before expounding on the elements and forms of style, there are two main questions that should be asked: What is style, and why should one be concerned with it? In answer to the first question, I believe that style is choice. One’s style is determined by the types of words he chooses, and the diction with which he displays them. A style can be casual or formal, simple or verbose; every time an author writes something, he is making decisions on how he wants to present his information. For instance, I just chose to use the pronoun ‘he’ in this paragraph, rather than ‘she,’ or the epicene ‘they.’ I made this decision feeling that by using ‘he’ I am being as clear as I can, though I know the consequence is that I may sound sexist.
One key difference that will, if we read their works casually, make most readers assume that Marx and Locke are incompatible, is Marx’s critique of private property. Even with that said, we can still argue that Locke complements Marx. Looking at their theories from the perspective of a linear spectrum, a question and answer standpoint, we can infer that Locke’s promotion of property rights based on one 's own labor is later challenged by Marx to argue against private property. Even though Marx was opposed to private property, in a capitalist sense, he still believed that there should be property owned, in a collective sense. Marx states that true freedom is achieved when man is able to contemplate himself in a world he created.
He explains how one must write with originality and make sure that it has an effect on the reader. Then he has to decide whether it would be best to write with incident or tone. Throughout the essay, Poe is explicit in detail, explaining his philosophy of composition (“The Philosophy” 1). Poe disliked didacticism and allegory. However, he did believe that a writer should make the meaning lie underneath the surface.
Historically, many sociologists have seen society as derived from Subject with the implication of axiomatic inalienable rights. This also implies a sort of contract between individuals where Subject defines the shape and structure of societies. This notion is turned upside down by the postmodernist suggestion that the Subject is a creation of society. This mirrors Foucault’s idea of the “discursive production of the subject,” or that the discourses of power relations create an imposed self-identity. This is not a new idea to sociology – and Foucault was more of a structuralist than a postmodernist—but Derrida’s main work centers around “deconstruction” pivoting around the idea of “différance,” essentially declaring that “there is nowhere to begin” when it comes to tracing the universality or truth status of individual “narratives,” whether scientific or political.