As Todorov 1 writes It was very difficult to categorize Barthes's texts as
belonging to one of the principal types of discourse with which we are familiar, and which our society takes as given,
(in D. Knight, p. 124). It is difficult to define the category or
categories in which he would fit. First of all, he is frequently seen as a literary critic. Much of his early academic achievement is composed of works of literary criticism written with a
semiotic approach. His later work would reflect his reading of Kristeva, Derrida, and others, and reflect more of a post-structural position. The post-structural critiques find his most
representative theme, an argument regarding the death of author
. 2 His books On Racine, Critical Essays, and Sade, Fourier, Loyola are works that advance
his thought on literature.
To some degree his literary criticism was influenced by Jean-Paul Sartre. The first book that Barthes wrote, translated into English as Writing Degree Zero, is in part a response to Sartre's What is Literature? This is important insofar as it would largely define Barthes's approach not only to literature, but to other media, as well as culture in general.
In brief, in What is Literature Sartre called upon the writer's and reader's commitment to not only their own, but also the human freedom but of others. In Writing Degree Zero
Barthes explored this idea of commitment through a concern with form. Barthes's notion of writing concerns that which is communicated outside or beyond any message or content
.
3
For Barthes, writing in its extreme form is anticommunication.
Barthes was also a cultural theorist. His thoughts are affected by existentialism, Marxism, structuralism and psychoanalysis. He developed these philosophical ideas and theories, and in turn had influence on later theorists. He was impressed in particular by Saussure, Levi-Strauss, Marx, and Jacques Lacan.
As Moriarty (1991) says, the label "theorist" as applied to Barthes is still reductive. With journalistic passion, his activity as a theorist of semiology moves into popular culture. His style as an essayist adopted other forms. He evolved a writing style that adopted both novelistic styles and critical or political discourse. Even if his writings do not resemble a typical novel, they offer everything the reader might desire from a novel. (Moriarty, 1991, p.5)
Barthes did not establish any specific theory, but he can be considered as an important thinker positioned between structuralism and post-structuralism. It is not only because of his
multilateral intellectual activities but also his continuous reflexive and critical consciousness about right here
wh ere he belonged; as a New Leftist
he said
that he was both Sartrian and Marxist,
which means existential Marxist
. 4 He was critical
about the platitudinous and depthless criticism against bourgeois literature; as a poststructuralist, he tried to overcome the limitations in structuralism.
- 2732 reads
