In the last section, she says "the devil is always painted black-by white painters" (383). This resonated with me because I had just reread the Wife of Bath's tale from The Canterbury Tales when she asks who painted the lion. She argues that if a lion had painted it, the lion would win. Just as if someone black painted the devil, he would not be painted black. This also reminds me of Gubar and Gilbert's argument of the way women were portrayed in literature. These writers are all advocating for different viewpoints. To truly understand anyone, one must know their viewpoint.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Who wrote what
Anna Julia Cooper's Our Raison D'Etre categorizes two types of authors: those that write to write and then those that use writing almost as propaganda. She says "those who write to please- or rather who write because they please... with no thought of audience" (380). I agree with her statement somewhat. I do think that there are those who write to convince you of their viewpoint and there are those who write just to write but I think inherently if someone is writing there is always thoughts of an audience. It may not be an explicit thought. The act of writing in itself produces author and reader. The author becomes the reader, the audience. He or she may not be writing for anyone else but after the text is written, the author is no more an author. Since the text is written already, the authorship is finished. Yes, the author is still the author, but then he or she becomes a more informed reader.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Preston -
ReplyDeleteI think the issues you write about address quite a lot of concepts at work in the re/presentation unit. Specifically, I am wondering how Butler's concept of "subject" would fit into the things you've noticed in the Canterbury Tales and Gilbert and Gubar. Butler writes that subjects are are produced by the powers that claim to represent them (2-3). What would this mean for the portrayal of women in literature?
Butler states,"...the juridical formation of language and politics that represents women as "the subject" of feminism is itself a discursive formation and effect of a given version of representational politics." You note that after the text is written, the authorship is finished. However, the re/presentation of the subject isn't. I wonder what would happen if we re-frame thinking about authors of books to thinking about re/presenters of subjects. The re/presentation then would not end in the way authorship might: the subject's representation is both a process engaged in by the author/represent-er, and the actual representation of the subject produced.
"I do think that there are those who write to convince you of their viewpoint and there are those who write just to write but I think inherently if someone is writing there is always thoughts of an audience."
ReplyDelete-While this has a definite point, most people do write towards an audience, what if the author is writing for himself? I wouldn't consider himself being an audience. If that's the case, would you see the text being its most honest or its least honest? By that I mean is the "intended audience" getting the most honest message when the author is writing for the audience, or is the text more honest when he's only writing for his private self?