Author/Scripter in Barthes

Roland Barthes makes quite an eye opening statement in "The Death of the Author." Barthes' alarming discovery regarding the loss of authorship in modern writing honestly is something that may actually hold true in some aspects. He claims that a better term for author would be "scriptor," based on the actions and techniques that people use in order to complete a writing. When discussing the actual procedure of the scriptor while writing, Barthes says, " the writer can only imitate a gesture that is always anterior, never original. His only power is to mix writings, to counter the ones with the others, in such a way as never to rest on any one of them (p. 876)." Barthes believes that true originality in writing has been tossed out the door. It does not exist. Completely original ideas never happen because every angle has already been used. The only leftover is to take a few of those writings and compare and contrast them with each other to try and make a somewhat new idea. The initial reaction might be to completely disagree with what Barthes is saying in the text. We all like to believe that our writing is original, but in some facets, Barthes claim of the removal of the author in writing holds some truth.
To honestly think about what we all do as English majors in our classes, almost every paper we right puts us in a relative role of a scriptor. We are told to normally read a text and then pull a claim out of that text by using other texts for proof or something to add on or further the discussion of the claim we are trying to make. Students mix and match pieces of other author's writing in order to better the the caliber of our own papers because that is what we are supposed to do. That is what we are taught as the correct way to write something. One must have sources. In this sense, it is strange to think that complete originality in a writing is frowned upon or seen as not correct. The real question is, is it a bad thing to write this way? Has the author really been transformed, and if so is the role of scriptor not producing new or original thoughts and ideas? Honestly, it is difficult to say. I have been taught this method my entire life so its hard to claim that it is wrong and their is a better way. One would have to completely revamp the education system of teaching English and Literature in schools, which seems totally insane. I honestly cannot say that I don't think this method is productive because I do think original authorship still is achieved today, maybe just in a different way than in the past.