Purity in writing and criticism

One of our goals in this class is to identify the ways in which the various readings respond to and build off of one another. While reading "Death of an Author" by Barthes, I found similar ideas as those presented in Burke's "The Philosophy of Literary Form." Both authors express ideas relating to "pure" literature.

Of proverbs, Burke says, "You will note, I think, that there is no 'pure' literature here. Everything is 'medicine.' Proverbs are designed for consolation or vengeance, for admonition or exhortation, for foretelling. Or they name typical, recurrent situations" (Burke 293). He seems to criticize proverbs because, "The names for typical, recurrent social situations are not developed out of 'disinterested curiosity'" (Burke 294). "Here there is no 'realism for its own sake'" (Burke 296). Inexplicitly, Burke is saying that "pure" literature is born out of "disinterested curiosity" and "realism for its own sake." What he observes with proverbs is that they seek to accomplish a certain task, and that is not a "pure" act.

Barthes echoes Burke when he writes about the result of the death of an Author. "In the multiplicity of writing, everything is to be disentangled, nothing deciphered... but there is nothing beneath: the space of writing is to be ranged over, not pierced; writing ceaselessly posits meaning ceaselessly to evaporate it, carrying out a systematic exemption of meaning. In precisely this way literature (it would be better from now to say writing), by refusing to assign a "secret," an ultimate meaning, to the text (and to the world as text), liberates what may be called an antitheological activity" (Barthes 877).

It seems Barthes is advocating for a more "pure" criticism that is not riddled with interpretations having to do with the personal life of the author. Burke wants "good taste" in the writing process. Both criticize "secret" readings and agendas.

I am curious to see how these ideas pan out in the other pieces we will read. I have particularly heard sentiment related to Barthes's commentary on how the Author and his work are made intertwined. I have heard people criticize writers for simply reiterating their own life experiences. That act appears to lack creativity; however, the writer has to be somewhat tied to his work because he has to have some experience or knowledge about its contents and subject. Certainly the author and his work are still joined together today.