There was a question in the text that asked how do you get from being a writer to an author (p11). Clearly it's asking how do you gain the authority to be labeled as an author. But is authority necessary to have the tite as an author? Frankly, I believe that "author" is often thrown around pretentiously. In my Fiction Writing class we were asked to name off our favorite authors. Students named off authors that have been studied in school, ones that are popular and ones that have the most well known books. Many people do not understand that anyone is really an author. Whether they've authored a book or a building, they've authored something. How they gain the title as an author, well, that apparently lies into the amount of authority they carry. And authority governs. But who decides who gets that authority?
Discourse is very powerful. Mostly people listen, believe and agree with authority. People follow without reason. As long as the authority is on their side, they agree and understand. And also, there are people that disagree with discourse, which obviously is an okay and normal thing to do. Discourse can be dangerous because it can formulate different meanings than intended. The meaning is up to the reader or listener, but generally follows along the meaning the authority has given. Authority governs. People often do not have ideas of their own and latch on to discourse. People often do not question and just agree because since the discourse has authority, it is correct. Discourse is dangerous but it is up to each person to listen and agree or disagree before or after they investigate further... if they investigate further. Discourse is dangerous, powerful but necessary.
1 comment:
Hmmm. . .what exactly about discourse does Foucault think is dangerous?
I like your early summary of the author/ity debate; it raises the questions Foucault began to tackle in this essay. How does the "author-function" explain his view of how we determine authority?
Good start.
Post a Comment