MICHEL FOUCAULT
x
LANGUAGE,
COUNTER-MEMORY,
PRACTICE
Selected Essays
and Interviews
ted with an Introduction by
DONALD F. BOUCHARD
Translated from the French by
DONALD F. BOUCHARD
and SHERRY SIMON
Comell University Pressx
What Is an Author?
in proposing this slightly odd question, I am conscious of the
eed for an explanation, To this day, the “author” remains an
{ex question both with respect tots general faction within
dyovure and ia my own writings tat i this question permits
fe fortum to certain aspects of my own work which now appear
[Badvised and misleading. In this regard, I wish to propose a
ecomary eis and revaluation
For nstanco, my objective in The Onder of Things baa been to
tusie verbal elusters as scusive layers which fall outside the
faniiar categories of a book, a work, or an ethor. Bt while 1
tonideed “nutral story” the “analysis of wealth and “polt-
fel economy’ in general terms, I neglected similar analysis of
the eutbor and his works; fis pechaps du to this omison that
Tenployed the names of authors throughout thie book in a
talv and often erde fashion, I spoke of Bln, Cuvier, Ricard,
‘his sey orginally appeared nthe Bulletin de la, Soc
ott de Phish, 3, No.9 (1963), 72104. 1 was dled
{ot incre beloe the Secty atthe Collage do rane on Febresry
30" es Wak ping Were cited Prt
z r “ind ls Powis aod he
didnt tit flowed hr esta: Fooeels ial salenet,boweve,
Ins been fterpaated the fist paragagh of the tulaton Tae
‘test of the dicussion that flowed Fousrlts paper layin Its
een tel vey Lacn Colina eth Fre
Sas sopomsed suc enterprise. Be athe
Statin The Archacology of Knowladar (esp Pp. 200-001),
Frost focfally denier ts connection This stay eprodoced
See by pein of th Sot (A foot spd by Be114 comermnsensone
and others as wall, bot fed to realize that Ls allowed th
fnues to funtion ambiguously. This has proved an embarassment
to me in that my oversight has served to aise two Pettinet
objections.
Te was angued that I had not propsly decribed Buffon or hig
work and that my handling of Marx wns pitifully inadequate
term of the totality of his thought Although these objection
were obviously justified, ehey ignored the tack I had st msc
Thad no intention of dserbing Bulfon oF Mars oF of repoding
their statements or Implicit meanings, but, simply sated, 1
wanted to locate the rales that formed a ert number of con
cepts and theoretical relationship in their works” In ation,
it was argued that [had ereated monstrous files by ringing
together names as disparate as Buon and Linnaeus on placing
(Cuvier nest to Darwin in defence ofthe most readily observable
family resemblances and natural tex* This objection also seems
Inappropriate since Thad never tried to establish « genelogel
table of exceptional individuals, nor was Teoncemed in fortng
tan intellectual daguezeotype of the scholar or naturalist of the
seventeenth and eighteenth century, Tn fact, I had intention
of forming any family, whether holy or perverse. On the com
‘rary, T wanted to determine—a mul more modest task—the
functional conditions of specie discursive practes
‘Then why did T use the names of authors in The Order of
1 Pte ra en
ee ER ener e ne
Stat Gate tr a ee
fier nol, as ooo cee
‘Form spprecition of owes tciigus, sce Jonathan
(ile, “tie igure Hate of Sruseram’ Sustouing at
Intrdacion, ok David Rabny” (Ox Clateodon Pees, 1073),
mies
7
ours acmmon? 115
Ce ee
eS eer
Descent nme etie
Sela epee epoeinrl
Saar eee
eee
eee
ee See
pee ee
ie noes ud eters nt tof oy
Sees
se oe rh te eof scene
ai eee
eee eras
ee
rg me as
ae
eee een ee
ee
FS Se eect
pee
coe eee
SE rama pending a
abel peler cmt ply
ee et eee
ee
a
Bh wre tor ans
4. The of, Krouledge, tam. A.M. Shecdan Seth
(London: “Tavistock, 1912) was pated In Fence i 1980, for
SEcuton of tho ator, so esp. pp. 92-6 122.
1, Surtacl Bechaty ‘Tents for Nothing tenn. Becket (London:
‘alie& Boyr, 1074, p18.z
118 couwrsnsimdony
‘ch as this we most recogalze one ofthe fundamental ei,
Principles of contemporary waiting, tis not simply “ethic
cause it characerlees our way of speaking and writing, bar
Deas it stands es an immanent mule, endlesly adopted and
yet nover fully applied. As principle, i dominates watng
fn ongoing practice and sights our customary attention to the
‘niched product* For the sake of Iastration, we need only
‘consider two of is major themes. Fit, the waiting of our dy ay
freed itself from the necesty of “expression; It only refers to
ts, yeti snot restsotd tothe cones of intesecity. On he
contrary, we recognize It in ts exterior deployment.” This 2e-
versal transforms writing into an interplay of signs, regulated
less by the content it sigies than by the very nature ofthe
sigue. Moreover, t implies an action tht is aways teatng
the limits ofits regularity, transgresing and reversing an order
that i acepts end manipulates. Wang unfolds like a game that
Inevitably moves beyond ss own rules and finally eaves them
Dbehind, Thus the essential bass of this writing isnot the exalted
‘emotions related tothe act of compostion or the insertion of «
subject into language, Rather, tis pemsily concerned with
creating an opening where’ the ‘writing subject endlesly
iappeare’
‘The second theme is even more familar: it is the kinship
‘etoen writing and death. This relationship inverts the age-old
ft Of tard Sl, “Th his f Langage” Dirt, 4 (197),
7. On eer” ad wig sess Je co
‘Benoist, “The End of Structuralism,” Twentieth “Conta Stas 3
{GB}, 3 and and Hanes, Cigna ar, Cac
eel 180). Ae the flowing tne ipl ter
‘rloment” a ring ete Farina Be Saar cones
ye gy ie eno
rm epee onal ea a
sonar aur? LIT
conception of Creck naveative or epe, which was desigied to
taantee the immortality of a ez. The hero accepted an early
ach because his fe, consecrated and magnifed by. death,
(posed Into immortality; and the nareative redeemed his ac
France of death In a diferent sense, Arabic stores, and The
‘aban Nights in particu, had as thee motivation, their heme
fad pretest, this strategy for defeating death Storytlers con-
five their narratives late into th night to forestall death and
te delay the incvtable moment when everyone must fall lent
Suheheraade’s story isa desperate inversion of murder; it isthe
fort, throughout all those nights to exclude death frm the
‘ule of existence? This conception ofa spoken or writen nar
tive as a protection aghast death has en tansfomied by out
falter. Welding ls now linked to sucrifce and tothe sacri of
He elie w vohintary obliteration ofthe sf that does not
egtie tepresentation in books because it takes place jn the
heyday existence ofthe writer, Where a work had the day of
treating immortality, i now atsins the right to Kil, to Become
the murderer of its euthor. Flaubert, Prous, and Kaha are ob-
vious examples of this rovers In ation, we find the Tink
tween writing and death manifested inthe total ellacament of
the individual charactorstice of the writer, the quibbling and
‘enfrontations that a weiter generates between himself and his
text cancal out the signs of his particular individuality. If we
wih to know the writer in one day, 4 will be though the
Sogulaity of his absence and in his link to death, which as
teansformed him into a viet of his own waiting, While all of
ths is Familiar in philosophy, as in Iterry erticsm, Yam not
‘eran thatthe consequences derived from the disappearance or
teath of the author have been fully explored or that the in
portance of this event has been apprcelated. To be speci, it
1, Se above, "Language to Init" p 58
10, Tho racent toa af Jal Berth, elected in Lost tn the
Funhouse ond ‘Chinera, supply Tntrsting examples of Pouca
‘hes "The Iter wor Salads, in fat & novels reworking of
Arabion Nights,-
us.
seems to me thatthe themes destined to replace the privileged
‘postion accorded the author have merely served to Artest he
Possibility of genuine change. Of these, I wil exumine two tha
Seem particalilyinportant.
"To begin with the thesis concerning «work. Tas been under
stood thatthe task of etic is nt to restablish the ts be
fwwoon aa author and his work or to reconstitute am she’s
fought and experience ehrough hie works and, further, thie
criticism should concer itself with the stractares of work, it
aehitetonle forms, which ae studied for tel ntsc and i
termal relationships" Yet, what ofa context that questions the
cconoept of a work? What, i short, ithe strange wat designated
by the term, work? What is nocosary to its composition, if «
work is not something written by @ person called an “anthor?™
Dificutes aise onal sides if we aise the question in thls way.
Tf an individual isnot an author, what are we to make of hose
things he has valtten oF said left among his papers orca
‘municsted to others? Is this not propery & work? What, for
instance, wero Sade’ papers before he was conocrated as an
author? Little more, perhaps, than roles of paper on which be
‘endleslyunravelld his fantasies while in prison.
“Assuming that we are dealing with an autor, i everything he
‘wrote and sald, everything ho let behind, to be inched ln is
‘work? This problem is both theoretical and practical. If we wish
‘to publish the complete works of Nietzache, for example, where
‘do we draw the line? Certainly, everything must be published,
Dut can we agree on what “everything” means? We veil of
course, Inchde everything thet Nctsche hinvelf published,
slong with the drfts of his works, is plans for aphorisms, his
‘marginal notations and corzections. But what if, in a notebook
filled with aphorisms, we Oud a reference, a reminder of an apy
pointment, an address, or «laundry bil, should this be nehded
11, Piya prescription fr crc at diverse a8 C. Won
Knights The Whoa of Bee (Landon, 1930) and Roland Bathe?
(On Racing, ats. Richard Howard (New Yorks Hil & Wang. 1863)
uo
ur 8 sermon
his works? Why not? These praca! conideratons are end
once we consider how a work ean be extracted fram the
"tions of traces left by an indvidal after his death, Pin,
‘tack a theory to encompass the questions generated by &
Weak and the empirical activity of those who naively unde
Te the publiction of the complete works ofan author often
‘ters frm the absence of this framework. Yet more questions
Gise. Can we say that The Arabian Nights, and Stromates of
Clement of Alexandria, or the Lives of Diogenes Laces coo:
State works? Such questions only begin to suggest the rang®
‘Four diiclties, and f some have found it convenient to y=
jos the lndividoality ofthe vitro his status as an autor to
‘Ercentate on a work they have failed to appreciate the equally
problematic nature ofthe word “wo and the unity it designates.
“hnother thesis has detained us fom taking ull measure of the
thors dispearance. I avoids confronting the sper event
that makes i possible and, tn subte ways, continues to preserve
the existence ofthe author, hiss the notion of éerture.» Stcly
speaking. it should allow us not only to circumvent sferences
{Dan author, but to situate his recent absence The conception
of Grr, a curently employed, is concerned with neither the
fet of writing nor the indications, as symptoms oF sigas within
2 text, ofan authors meuniog: rather, it stands for a remazkably
profound attempt to clborste the conditions of any tet, both
tho conditions of its spatial dsperion and ts temporal
deployment.
"Te appears, however, that this conoept, a8 currently employed,
12. We have lop the French, dvr, wih ty dole teerence
tothe at of writing and othe prenorda (and metaphyseal) nate
wing ex an ent i enc es theta tat bat Sent
the progisn of forquer Der be the thane of nllerntal
tri too buds on a themy of he inane dents wing
{Be inipiy of proven and absence fa that “sgn represent the
[eset in ts buance™ ("Diferanc,” In Spech and Phonomene,
Toe David Br Alm [Ener fs Northwestern Uni, Pras,
18ta),p, 198), Soe. Deda, De Ta granmatloge (Pass Eins
(Misi, 1907),129 oooerenseencony
‘nas merely transposed th emplieal characterises of an autor to
‘transcendental anonymity, The extremely vsble sins ofthe
futhors empirical activity are effaced to allow the play, iy
panllel or opposition, of religious and cite modes of char
fcterzation, In granting » primordial status to writing, do we
‘ot, in eect, simply reineibe in transcendental tems the
theological allimation ofits stred origin or a cetcl bell in |
ates anceps vase cto
ogy Sai ended gat ow
lise cen ce
Rip panier nh se
Sisnlestac omen ae olson
ty Sata ca eas eatin
Serta kien Ceatee acer
see ceca amiga ede ed
Ss ao en ee pce
Sha oti of i
Seistenats nile
aa ptt ete
a ora og
rs Nebel cn
Scorn ep ch wa
EE Soe take aoe ate
Sni'h Pa wy tw ere
fue Soca oan
sa bt tw on
Faerie pa
i
(ESS RS plehtmeres rt
{Ss Maret Ladpno) on ell od ety on Se oer
Risto aerenac ee ae
sities mene tied Sete
muraisgeeAenhceoaae
cea
ee
murs avr? 121
x
‘Its obviously insufliciont to repeat empty slogans: the author
as dimpposred; God and man ded a common death Rather,
we should reexamine the empty space It by the authors ds
Dopearence; we should attentively observe, long is gaps and
fal lines now demarcations andthe rexpportionment of tis
told we should wat dhe sd functions released by this diay
earece. In this contet we ean briefly consider the problems
finale ln the so ofan authors name. What ithe ame of an
tuthor? How doer it function? Far frm oferng «sation, T
tl attempt to indleate some of the eifcutes related to these
ston
he name of an euthor ‘poses all the problems related to the
category ofthe proper name, (Her, Lam refering to the work
ff John Sears" among others) Obviously not a pure and
tnple referees, che proper name (and the authors name a
wr) has other thin indicative functions. Tis more than a
Beto, ger pointed at someone its, to a certain extent, he
quant of description. When wo sy “Arist” we ae
tng a word tht means one oF series of deinit desrptions
tf tho type: “the author of tho Analyin,” or “he fonder of
tetology” and a0 forth” Furthemore, «proper name has ther
fontins than that of signieation: when we dlicover tha
baud has not writen La Chase spiel, we cant mala-
tun thatthe meaning of the proper name or ths sath name
as been altered, Tho proper namo and the name of en ator
cals between the poles of description and designton, and,
‘ing that they ae inked to what they name they ae not
tially determined either by their doseiptive or desgntive
fanctlns* Yer ts here hat the spc dificateatend-
1B Net a ete 8
Seu Speech Ate At Eaay te the Poophy of
Lente (Goi Coat Baten Pr 108), 1
r,t,» 100
18 Tap7
ng an authors name appoar—the link between a proper nme
snd the individual being named and tho link between an authors
‘namo and that which t names are not isomorphons and do not
fanetion in the same way; and these diferences require
larifcation,
‘To lear, for example, that Pere Dupont does not have bbe
eyes, dacs not live in Pais, and i nota doctor doesnot validate
‘the fact thatthe name, Pierre Dupont, continues to zler to the
same person; there has been no modification ofthe designstin
that links the name tothe person. With the name of an autho,
however, the problems are far more comples, The disclosure that
Shakespeare was not bom in the house tht tourists now vist |
‘would not modify the functioning of the author's name, bt,
ft were proved that be had not welten the sonnets that we a
tribute to him, thie would constitute a siguiaat change and
‘fect the manner in which the author's mime fonctions. Mote
‘over, if we establish that Shakespeare wrote Bacon's Organon
and that the same author was responsible for both the work of
Shakespeare and those of Bacon, we would have invodaced a
‘hid pe of alteration which completly modifi the function
ing ofthe author's name. Consequently, the name of an author
‘snot precisely a proper name among others.
Many other factors sustaln this paredosial singularity ofthe
name of an author. Ie altogether diferent to malatain tht
Pierro Dupoat does not exist and that Homer or Hemet
‘Trisegstes have never existed. While the Bist negstion merely
Amplles that thre Is no one by the name of Pierre Dupont, the
second indiates that several indvidaals have been refered f
by one name or thatthe veal author passessed none of the tats
traditionally asoiated with Homer or Hermes. Neither is
the same thing to say that Jaoques Durand, not Pecte Dupont,
1s the veal name of X and that Stndhals natne was Hensi Boyle
‘We could also examine the Function and meaning of such stat:
‘ments as "Bourbali i this or tht person” and “Vitor remit,
CClimacus, Anticlinacus, Frater Tacitarms, Constantin Con.
stunts, al ofthese are Kierkegnara”
122 coeerenaemons
mice sauna? 188
‘These diferences indicate that aa author's name isnot simply
am element of speech (as @ subject, a complement, or an ele-
feat that could be replaced by a pronoun or other parts of
Ipecth). Its pretence is Functional in that i serves a8 a means
tf easilcation, A name can group together @ number of texts
tao thus diferente thon frm others. A name alo establishes
{igerent forms of relationships among texts. Neither Hermes
tot Hippocrates existed la the sense that we can say Balzac ex
bed, but the fact that a mimber of texts were atached to 4
single same implies that relationships of homogeaelty, lation,
tecjproel explanation, authentication, or of common utilization
tree established among them, Finally, the author's name char
tries a particular manner of existence of discourse, Discourse
that possesses an authors name isnot to be immediately eon
sumed and forgotten; neither sit accorded the momentary atten
tion given to ordinary, Heeting words. Rather, it tae and it
manner of reception are regulated by the elture in which s
ict.
‘We can couche that, unlike « proper name, which moves
from the interior of a decourse tothe real person outside who
produced it the mame of the author semains at the contours of
terts—separating one from the othe, defining thelr form, and
Characterizing thee mode of existence, It points tothe existence
of certain groups of discourse and vefrs to the stats of this di
sours within a socity and culture. The autho’s name is not a
fmetion of a mas eivlsate, nor eit Scion iis wtnated
Inthe breach, among the discontinuities, which gives ise to new
ups of discourse and their singular mode of exstince Con
10, This a patclely smportent point and brings togetber a
many of Fawcitt tg cooing the easy. a
Shs" Gdbee) to lvoe sess he detuning ote
Uediinal end ben rend trier of dintouse wows ata
‘docontinties are sesved in eer of two waye by seeence toa
becgating subject oto Innguage,concelved ws plelade, which
Soporte tistics of comocsary ar intettion Bee ce
Fouci rcts the bei in te presumed falls of ngage that
tndedies ico, tho euthor is sbjetod to the sane gentzy
sequently, we can say that in our culture, the name of en auth
‘sa variable that accompanies only certain texts tothe exclusion
of others: a private letter may have a signatory, but i doot not
‘have an author; a contract ean have an underwiter, But not aq
author; and, simialy, an anonymous poster attached to a wall
may havea vate, but he cannot be an author In thi ens, the
fonction of an author i to characterize the existence, culation,
and operation of certain discourses within a society.
x
In dealing with the “author” as « function of discoures, we
rust consider the characteristics of lscourse that support this
tse and determine ity diference from other discoarss. If we
Timit our remarks to only those books or txts with authors, we
can toate for diferent features,
Fin, they aze objects of sppropsation; the fm of propery
‘hey have become is of «particular type whose leg eodiestion
‘was accomplished some years ago. Te is portant to noice, a
well that is status as propery is historically secondary tothe
penal code controlling is appropsiation. Speeches and books
‘were assigned real authors, other than mythical or important
zaligiousSgure,enly when the author became subject to panih-
‘ment and to the extent that his dicoarse was considered trans-
sresive. Tn ou eultare—undoubtedly in others ax well—disouee
‘was not orginally a thing, a product, or a possession, but an
sotion stated in bipolar Sed of sacred and profane, lawful
‘and unlawful, religious and blasphemous. Tt was a gesture
‘charged with risks Tong before it became a posession extght
4 clrait of property values But it was atthe moment when &
‘im which carcises dacoune and bo i Gdieated as « di
onmoes srr for xanpl, seo LOnde de dicous pp. B35
fd tes
30. In seminar ealied “L'pruve at Fengudte” which Foucault
conducted at the Uaivety af Mansel fn he sping of 1974, be
entered th debut tround the fellowing quent. geal
mviction tt uth rvs fom and sustained by Tooele
mae a avn? — 185
system of ownership and sit copyright rules were established
(toward the end ofthe eightenth and begining of tho nine-
{oeath century) that the transgressive properties always ital
tho act of writing bectne the forceful nperative of itertare* Ie
J ifthe author, at dhe moment he was sceepted ito the social
twder of property which gover our calture, was compensating
for his new status by reviving the older bipolar eld of dsourse
in a systematic practice of transgression and by restoring the
danger of walling which, on another side, had been conferred
the benfts of property.
‘Secondly, the "authorfunction"™ is not universal or constant
in all dlsoouse, Even within oor civilization, the same types of
teste have not alas required authors; there was atime when
those texts which wo now call “teray” (stories, folktales, epics,
tnd tragedies) were aceapted, creulated, and valorized without
tiny question sbout the identity oftheir anther. Theis anonyasty
‘nat lanored boctise thee real er supposed age was a suficient
uaratee of tele authenticity. Texts, however, that we now call
elentifc” (dealing with cosmology and the heavens, medicine or
‘ness, the natural slences or goography) were only considered
nt simply, «reset phenomenon, lnited ase ofthe anceat and
‘dcsend ‘lef tat tu aft of evets In an older
me and in other cultures, the Search for uth was hazaroa a the
fuee and truth resided inp danger ze, but i this as 80 end
{Fert cold oly be approached ater «Tong propaton or
the detais o's hitalze! procodte -war bose represented
pst, Discus, for these salen, was um acuve porapration of
Fant and the ett that as saccenl conte the power
‘Perth tal, charged wil al hs vis sd bone.
31 GL The Order of Things, p. 300, and above, “A Prtac to
Teagan, pp. 90-93
a Pouca paring ofthe “suthocfaeton” has Been rained
‘This eonept shel nt bo emma (ae wat by Collin ithe