The Author of Life and the death of the author
A tenet of postmodern hermeneutics is that the author is dead. This means that the author "loses control" ot the text they have written and it is open to interpretation. The reader can interpret the text in light of their experience of the text, without the author saying they have interpreted incorrectly.
It seems to me that this is too big a stride, but it is in the right direction. The creation of anything--including texts (and there are things besides texts)--is never ex nihilo. It is always from somewhere. This "somewhere" is not completely open or known to the author and so the text (or whatever else) is beyond their control; it is bigger than they are.
The grand context of creation, however, is one of redemption and resurrection and the grand agent in this creation is God. God is the author telling a continued story by his Spirit. Were the author still alive and in control of the text, any text would fall under their tyranny. Now (as always), however, the true Author is able to shape and form interpretation to fit the context of the world's redemption. Perhaps an open hermeneutic like the death of the author creates is even more open to the Spirit.
It seems to me that this is too big a stride, but it is in the right direction. The creation of anything--including texts (and there are things besides texts)--is never ex nihilo. It is always from somewhere. This "somewhere" is not completely open or known to the author and so the text (or whatever else) is beyond their control; it is bigger than they are.
The grand context of creation, however, is one of redemption and resurrection and the grand agent in this creation is God. God is the author telling a continued story by his Spirit. Were the author still alive and in control of the text, any text would fall under their tyranny. Now (as always), however, the true Author is able to shape and form interpretation to fit the context of the world's redemption. Perhaps an open hermeneutic like the death of the author creates is even more open to the Spirit.
posted by Aaron Perry at
5:44 PM
11 Comments:
I find it interesting that American deconstructionists find their arguments for the death of the author in Derrida who, consistently, says they miss his point.
SGFMB
OH yeah. ANd he is now dead. So he can't say that anymore.
SGFMB
This is because American pop-culture is ubiquitous and pathetic. Deconstruction is not for its own sake in Derrida, but for justice. Hence, "deconstruction is justice." (That is, of course, if there is such a thing as "justice.") American pop-culture thinks it is doing the job of politics and theology in simply naming the beast that it sees. (Where have all the bands gone who played Live Aid? I still hear Bono working, but where did Green Day go?)
That does not negate deconstruction's point, though: Taking the text from the author need not make it incessantly fluid (though it is fluid to some degree), but puts it in a larger (and *perhaps* better) context.
And Canadian pop culture does not do the same deconstructive thing?
AP DEFENDS DERRIDA! (Nate faints, wakes up, thinking he had a weird dream, only to find out the dream was true.)
AP, I think you are write on. Derrida never said the text had no author, just that the author loses importance. And American deconstruction is nothing like Derrida. Or is it? Well, these are the questions to ask.
nathan,
i, too, am shocked by some of the things that AP has been typing as of late. it seems that my prayers for his salvation, err, uh, i mean, "enlightenment," are being heard from on High. ;)
jo--does Canadian pop culture do the same things? i don't know. i haven't lived in Canada long enough in the last three years to say. i suspect that liberal Canadians are hoping they have a pop-culture (adn funding it through CBC) more than finding the one that already exists there and seeing what it's really like.
typing as of late jo? i doubt it. nate could mention our joined efforts in defending merold westphal against the attacks of jerry walls. some guy can attest that my pomo tendencies have arisen since reading Oliver O'Donovan (at least two years now).
nate--ha--glad the dream wasn't false. i don't think US deconstruction as revealed in pop-culture does what derrida wants. i don't know enough about US deconstructionists to say whether or not they succeed. if US pop culture is as ubiquitous as i think, then i suspect they fail.
Canadians, as socialist believers in big government, cannot believe in deconstruction "all the way down."
For it would mean subjecting our dear dreams of (enforced) equality, abortion on demand, respect for religion (read, fear of radical Islam), and nanny-state health lines (oops, I mean care) to critical scrutiny. We don't have the courage for such a project.
Be that as it may, I intended American to mean only "this side of the Atlantic." There are no anti-American intentions in this author! (As AP will attest)
SGFMB
ok ok ok! jeez, don't everybody lighten up all at once now. i wasn't even half serious in my above comments.
"pomo" --great word!
btw, ap, "as of late" meant to me SINCE you've been blogging. it seems to me that you do not think the same way you did the summer of college ministry team travel (which was my reference point). but then, i shouldn't pretend to know or speculate such things. my bad.
i'm glad you guys challenged dr. walls....he needs it, and i am certainly not up for the task.
cheers.
if summer ministry is your point of reference, then i'd have to say i think differently. but i was reading alot of c.s. lewis, then, and he still influences my thought...anyway...
the reason i love debating with jerry is because 1) he admits when you have a point; 2) he remembers arguments and doesn't make you start all over again by offering the same critiques; 3) he doesn't straw-man opinions.
i readily admit your defending of westphal and that i think we cornered dr. walls.
on the american deconstructionist side, it seems like derrida is used to promulgate completely nonsensical reading of texts. texts aren't read carefully. like westphal said, derrida is the most careful reader of a text one could find.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home