What are the arguments /against/ the Death of the Author?

File: 45981235i543.jpg (8KB, 247x210px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 247x210px

It's alive!

File: stepacrosstheborder.jpg (21KB, 600x345px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 600x345px

>>9483075
you see, the author may die, but haha, such as jesus who remade the world with the foundations already layed down by his father, the author comes back to life, not as lazarus, but as jesus himself. You see, the author is dead and that should be the first analysis, but once you take into consideration this way of thought about a particular work and its motions, you take into consideration how the author is actually, ALIVE. You see, then this adds another layer toa more complete, objective, perspective on any novel. For example, Cervantes is alive, thus the character of Cervantes in Don Quixote is a self-insert for whatever purpose we may deduce.
Cervantes is dead, now the character of Cervantes in Don Quijote is but a simple creation with a non-ironic purpose
Cervantes now has come back to life, thus the the character of Cervantes in Don Alonso Quijano, is a self-insert yet a simple character with no reality to him! HAHA!

Yes, I'm hegelian

death of the author has always been the last refuge for the college student, eager to read the spark-notes, and quick to trash the book!

>>9483075
arguments for and against is such a liberal internet forum way of thinking. if you think every statement has to be a debate between two sides, you should prolly just keep to twitter fights

File: 1493226308323.png (213KB, 367x415px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 367x415px

REMINDER DEATH OF THE AUTHOR REFERS TO THE FACT AN AUTHOR DOES NOT HAVE FINAL AUTHORITY IN INTERPRETING HIS OWN WORK

IT DOES NOT MEAN HIS INTERPRETATION MAY BE USEFUL OR THAT HIS BIOGRAPHY MAY NOT GREATLY INFORM THE READING

I JUST SAVED YOU A RETARDED NEWFAG THREAD

>>9483075

why does /lit/ deal in absolutes? every thread theres some faggot spouting of his favorite deceased philosopher's ideas as unshakable pillars of truth. It's fucking irritating. Stop it. STOP IT.

>>9484275
No, it means there is no final interpretation.

>>9484287
It hasn't been refuted.

>>9484308
>No, it means there is no final interpretation.

Alone as a concept, no it does not

>>9484275
Except that's not the valuable conclusion to take out of this.

The point is that while you cannot argue against the fact that obviously there is always something beyond the author's intent, this argument is used for the advance in relativity and in taking away from the individuum.

The concept is factually correct, the ideology behind it is disgusting.

>>9484321
>The concept is factually correct, the ideology behind it is disgusting.

Bah bullshit. Any advance in reason should be appreciated, if any ideology is disgusting here its you who is placing personal commitments over the reason upon which they're founded.

>>9484331
I'll be more clear: It's not a bad concept in itself (although certainly not original or a great advance in reason) but the way it is used (and the reason why it suddenly became a popular concept instead of just common sense in the back of everyone's mind) is bad.

Eugenics are an advance too but if the prime motivation behind that was to eradicate everyone with brown eyes, you'd be allowed to call that out instead of acting like every concept exists in a vacuum.

>>9484315
Yes it does.

File: 1491777149928.jpg (25KB, 480x336px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x336px

>>9484271
> being this triggered by the concept of debate

>>9484315
>>9484362

This is what /lit/ has become

>Was ihr den Geist der Zeiten heißt,
>Das ist um Grunde der Herren eigner Geist,
>In dem die Zeiten sich bespiegeln