606
PARTISAN REVIEW
theory of the work does not exist, so that lacking such a theory , those who
ingeniously attempt to compile an edition of collected works soon find their
undertaking stymied. And one can carry this farther , too : Can it be said that
the
Arabian Nights,
the
Stromatus
of Clement ofAlexandria, or the
Vices
of
Diogenes Laertus constitute a complete work? One perceives the multitude of
questions that arises over the notion of the complete work. So it is not enough
to say' 'Let's do without the writer, let's do without the author, and let's study
the work itself." The word' 'work" and the unity it designates are probably as
problematic as the individuality of the author.
Another notion conceals the author 's disappearance and preserves his
existence. This is the notion ofwriting . In a strict sense, this notion should not
only permit the abandonment of all reference
to
the author , it should also give
new status
to
his absence.
It
is not a question of either the act of writing or of
what someone meant ; one is forced to think of the general condition of the
entire text, of the space where it is dispersed, and of the time in which it
unfolds .
I wonder if, reduced as it is to current usage , this notion does not trans–
pose the empirical character of the author into a transcendental anonymity.
One is willing to erase the signs of the existence of the author which are too
visible , by putting into play, both parallel and in opposition
to
each other,
two kinds ofcharacterization : the critical mode and the religious mode . Does
not the representation of writing as an absence simply repeat in transcenden–
tal terms the religious principle that tradition is at once unalterable and never
complete , and the aesthetic principle of the survival of the work , its endurance
despite death?
* * *
But it is obviously not sufficient to repeat the empty affirmation of the
author 's disappearance. Nor is it enough to repeat ad nauseam that God and
man suffer the same death . What must be done is to trace a path through the
space thus opened by the disappearance of the author, and to examine the
new functions to which this disappearance has given rise .
First , I would like to allude briefly
to
the problems raised by the author's
name . What is the author's name? And how does it function? Far from pro–
viding a solution I will only indicate several of the difficulties raised by this
question.
The author 's name is a proper name and poses the same problems as all
proper names . It is obviously not possible to make a pure and simple reference
with a proper name . The proper name (like the author's name) has other
indicative functions . It is more than a finger pointing
to
someone ;
to
some
