A French author, critic and theorist – Ronald Barthes wrote an essay entitled “A Death of

an Author” in 1967 which was published in 1968 in the context of Parisian intellectual and

literary life. This essay marks a pivotal moment in the realm of literature and literary theories

most significantly in the theories of post - structuralism and post – modernism. It convictsthe

contemporary attitudes and patterns found in common culturedespotically concerned with the

author, his personality, and his lifestyle.

Barthes (1968) in this essay makes an argument against criticism that is based on the

identity of the author, whether it be political opinions, cultural settings, faith, nationality,

psychology, or individual characteristics.The author in this essay also calls for the abolition of

traditional critical theory through literary arguments, which examines a piece of literature well

within the autobiographical and personal backdrop of the author.However, the theoretical

ramifications ofThe Death of the Author (1968) go beyond literature and are intimately tied to

postmodern phenomena like the inevitability of God and Death, the disintegration of meaning,

and the absence of originality.

This essay is a seminal work in modern theory as it represents both the shift of an

author‟s objective and writing towards post - structuralism and also the traces of post – structural

tenets in the essay. The title of the essay itself is a foreshadowing of modernism indicating that

literary work should not be author centralized and hence, it should be free from the intention and

control of the writer or an author. As stated in the text:

Criticism still consists for the most part in saying that Baudelaire‟s work is the
failure of Baudelaire the man, Van Gogh‟s his madness, Tchaikovsky‟s his vice.
The explanation of a work is always sought in the man or woman who produced
it, as if it were always in the end, through the more or less transparent allegory of
the fiction, the voice of a single person, the author „confiding‟ in us. (Barthes
143).
The essay rejects the notion of authorial intention and purpose of writing, while giving

importance to the readers‟ intentions and perceptions, hence highlighting the traces of readers –

response theory. As stated in the essay:

The reader is the space on which all the quotations that make up a writing are
inscribed without any of them being lost; a text‟s unity lies not in its origin but in
its destination. (Barthes 148).

The word „quotations‟in the aforementioned excerptconveys the concept that a literary work can

never truly be originally produced orunique since it is usually composed of a combination of

previously published "quotations" or thoughts. Consequently, interpreting text and understanding

its meaning are the core tasks of the reader. As a result, the author may be categorised or entitled

as a scripter who compiles previously written materials instead of producing a genuine text.

It clearly states that through this essay Barthes has broadened the scope of the work of

art's interpretationin order to take into account how texts interact with each other and what are

the reader's reactions in response. This idea of the active reader adopted by many of the writers

focused on the reader's involvement in light of the reader-response literary theory and the effects

of several readings on the acts of interpretation. For Barthes, it is intertextuality and readers‟

perception that are considerably more significant than whether or not the author is dead as

presented in The Death of the Author (1968).

In line with the abovementioned fact and in literature, the essay The Death of the Author

(1968) might be interpreted in a number of ways, both literally and figuratively. The term “death

of the author” in critical literary studies refers to the „death‟ of the actual, physical creator of the

literary work who is inclined to draw attention through the text towards his presence, to address
the reader, to use a personal pronoun or to draw characters or details that are unrealistic and

cannot be perceived in real – life time.

On the other hand, in terms of culture, the death of an author may refer to the denial of

the discoverer who in the literature may be referred to as a „scripter‟. As a result, in culture

„discoveries‟ may appear to be notions that existed in the cultures before their creator and also

that the originator i.e. discoverer has merely confirmed its origin or existence. It is also pertinent

that according to multiple discovery theory, many individuals as a reader may have come across

the same discovery, idea, or conclusion independently.

Thus is revealed the total existence of writing: a text is made of multiple writings,
from many cultures and entering into" mutual relations of dialogue, parody,
contestation, but there is one place where this multiplicity is focused and that
place is the reader, not, as was hitherto said, the author. (Barthes 148).

In line with the multiple discovery theory, some common cultures deny the notion of multiple

discoveries while attributing the credit to a single individual, which can be exemplified through

patents, or copyright laws etc. Another aspect of this theory while focusing on the development

of the ideas, a discoverer is one out of many contributors working on or contributing to a similar

aim or purpose. In a similar way, it is the reader who is the true discoverer, hence, understanding

the multiplicity of text.

In addition to the aforementioned arguments, metaphorically The Death of the Author

(1968) is the death of God as described by Nietzsche. The actual world, which does not and

cannot function on a predefined design, purpose, or originator, is a metaphor for the world of

literature. As stated:

We know now that a text is not a line of words releasing a single „theological‟
meaning (the „message‟ of the Author-God), but a multi-dimensional space in
 which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash. The text is a
tissue of quotations drawn from the innumerable centres of culture. (Barthes 146).
And,
In the multiplicity of writing, everything is to be disentangled, nothing
deciphered; the structure can be followed, „run‟ (like the thread of a stocking) at
every point and at every level, but there is nothing beneath: the space of writing is
to be ranged over, not pierced; writing ceaselessly posits meaning ceaselessly to
evaporate it, carrying out a systematic exemption of meaning. […] Once the
author is removed, the claim to decipher a text becomes quite futile. To give a text
an Author is to impose a limit on that text, to furnish it with a final signified, to
close the writing. (Barthes 147)

The eventual disintegration of meanings results from the diversity of meaning, which is actually

defined as The Death of The Author. It is the emancipation from the limitations and restrictions

imposed through the interpretation of meanings and the author's intentions. The incapacity to

create, invent, or be unique is another aspect of the death of the author. It is the uncontrollable

spiral into the void of contradictory meanings and inescapable meaninglessness.

The essay "Death of the Author" largely discusses the author's capacity to comprehend

and analyse writing, as well as the reader's or listener's ability to overlook the work's context and

concentrate more on the work itself. When a piece of literature is being critically analysed, the

author, his person, his life, his preferences, and his passions are brought to light; the author is

then required to assume sole responsibility for the work's success or failure.As a result of the

"innumerable centres of culture," Barthes continues, the book itself appears to be a derivative of

previous works. Because of the translation from author to text to the reader, the book can wind

up reading more like an "immense dictionary" than the author intended. Due to the reader's

subjectivity, writing cannot fully express the author's "passions, touches of humour, sentiments,

and sensations" and is instead "lost, indefinitely delayed" The major argument made by Barthes

is that the reader bears a greater obligation to the text than the author.
 To sum up, Barthes contends that writing eliminates all voices and points of origin since

it takes place inside a functional process, namely the act of signifying itself. The true source of it

is language. Because of this, a writer lacks a unique brilliance that manifests itself in the text and

is instead a type of artisan who perishes while utilising a certain code. Finally, he claims that all

authors are like copywriters who inscribe a specific zone of language. He claims that a text's

language, not its creator, is, in a way, its true source. Additionally, he maintains that the author's

passing liberates the reader to reinterpret the book in their own words.