St.

Vincent de Paul College Seminary,

Dagum Hills Calbayog City, Philippines

BARTHES AND THE BIBLE

Asp. Jessie D. Macapaz Jr.

Introduction
People are in pursuit of the meaning of the things that are present in their
experiences. Meanings make life meaningful. Things without meaning are mere bland
ideas that are not worth gaining. What makes a man truly human is his ability to
rationalize. Man has the capacity to give reason even to some unreasonable ideas. Man
can interpret everything in accordance with the dictates of his reason. However, there are
questions that a man needs also to consider. Does man’s interpretation always direct
toward accuracy, towards the idea of truth? Well, man interprets the text and can make a
new world out of it, nevertheless, his subjective interpretation is sometimes quite
distorting. He may distort the meaning of a thing if he denies the genesis and the context
of the thing that is being interpreted.
Barthes’ opus entitled “The Death of an Author,” for me is quite controversial. His
contention about the denial of the author gives rise to the question about the accuracy of
the text being interpreted. I understand very well that all of us have the capacity to
interpret the things around us, everything that is part of our experience. However, we are
not the measure of all things as opposed to the dictum of Protagoras and many other
philosophers. Truth is absolute. Truth remains unaffected from our way of thinking. That
is why we are in need of tracking the information back to its origin to the context which
includes the person who is responsible of the existence of the opus, the context, and the
real audience. This means that the author is always part of the interpretation process.
Barthes’ denial of the author implies the denial of truth.
This paper aims to expose Barthes’ contention regarding the uselessness of an
author when it comes to the interpretation of the text. The last part will criticize and show
the inapplicability of Barthes’ notion of the Death of the Author to bible text
interpretation.

The Death of the Author: Meaning

 Roland Barthes, one of the most popular thinkers in the 20 th century,1 states that
“writing is that neutral, composite, oblique space where our subject slips away, the
negative where all identity is lost, starting with the very identity of the body writing.” 2
This idea connotes the denial of the presence of the author. It simply means that the
author has nothing to do with interpretation anymore. The author is not anymore part of
the interpretation of the text. When one interprets the text, author is of no importance. 3 In
his writings, he gives more emphasis to the language or the text being interpreted.
Barthes quoted Mallarme who said that it is the language that speaks not the person who
is responsible for the text’s existence.4 He added in his contention, “the removal of the
author is not merely a historical fact or an act of writing; it utterly transforms the modern
text.”5 It means that what keeps the texts ever evolving and new is the removal of the
author.
For Barthes, “to give a text an author is to impose limits to the text to furnish it
with a final signified, to close the writing.” 6 Here is his another contention about linking
the text to an author. He believed that what draws borders to the wide space of the text is
the linkage of the text to the author. We put boundary to the interpretation of the text as
we consider the author as part of the process.
His last contention, I believe, is his emphasis on the reader. He said, “The reader is
the space on which all the quotations that make up a writing are inscribed without any of
them being lost; a text's unity lies not in its origin but in its destination.” 7 The emphasis
brings into light the idea, which Barthes wants to convey, the idea that the reader plays
more important role than to the author when it comes to interpretation.

Barthes Notion of the "Death of the Author" and the Biblical Texts: An Analysis
Barthes’s notion and contention had been exposed above. Briefly, the death of the
author implies the denial of the author when it comes to interpretation. It simply means
the omission of the role of the author in the process of interpretation. The biblical text is a
text that is believed to be a link to the history of the phenomenological events that had
happened before. All the biblical text (except some of the passages in the book of
Genesis) is a product of factual events. Historically, these text are rooted in its own
context. The old and new testaments are written accounts of the experience of the people,
especially the writer of the text. Hence, these texts are bound to what we believe, the
truth.
1
Brian L. Ott, “Barthes, Roland,” The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and
Philosophy, (October 2016): 1, DOI:10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect059.
2
Roland Barthes, The Death of the Author, (London: Fontana, 1977), 142.
3
Laura Seymour, An Analysis of Roland Barthes’s The Death of the Author, (No Place: Macat International, 2017),
10.
4
Roland Barthes, The Death of the Author, 143.
5
Ibid, 145.
6
Ibid, 147.
7
Ibid, 148.
 Generally, philosophy is defined as “the knowledge of all things through their
ultimate causes, acquired through the use of reason.” 8 Hermeneutics is a philosophical
discipline which principles are not separated and different from the principles of
philosophy. Both objective is to obtain truth. Now, interpretation without reference to the
cause will cause trouble and distortion. The problem of interpretation may come if we
abide only to the language being used. The problem of translation may also come in our
way if we fail to find the track where the context lies.
The accuracy of the text should be the focus of interpretation. When we interpret a
text, we always want to know the truth behind it. When we interpret the Old and New
Testament, we always referred back into its context, the context of the author.
Charpentier, in her book entitled, “How to Read the New Testament, said, “ in order not
to get lost and not commit too many blunders, (when it comes to interpretation) we
usually try to know the people back from their way of thinking, their way of life, the way
they speak and even move.9 Yes, we can make our own interpretation and open the new
possibilities for the new meaning of the text comes into being, but we must have to
consider also its accuracy.

Conclusion
To sum up, this paper has exposed Barthes’ notion of the Death of the Author. He
denies the role of the author when it comes to interpretation. It makes me then wonder, if
this is the case (subjective interpretation), who possess the truth then? The last part
contains my contention about the inapplicability of Barthes’ notion to the biblical text.
The denial of the author implies the denial of truth.

8
Mariano Artigas, Introduction to Philosophy (Manila: Sinag-tala Publishers, 1990), 10.
9
Etienne Charpentier, How to Read the New Testament, trans. John Bowden, (Quezon City: Claretian
Publication, 1981), 9.
References:
Books

Barthes, Roland. The Death of the Author. London: Fontana, 1977.

Charpentier, Etienne. How to Read the New Testament. Translated by John

Bowden. Quezon City: Claretian Publication, 1981.

Artigas, Mariano. Introduction to Philosophy. Manila: Sinag-tala Publishers,

1990.

Seymour, Laura. An Analysis of Roland Barthes’s The Death of the Author.

No Place: Macat International, 2017.

Website\s:
Ott, Brian L. “Barthes, Roland.” The International Encyclopedia of
Communication Theory and Philosophy, (October 2016): 1-5.
DOI:10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect059.