1. Won 1
Matthew Won
1342-31st Ave
San Francisco, CA 94122
(415) 794-7838
Matthew.Won1@gmail.com
Below is an excerpt from part of my senior thesis project as an undergraduate of the SJSU
English program. It is based on the critical literary and artistic theory known as
Deconstructionism, focusing specifically on philosopher Michel Foucault’s views on the
topic. If you would like to see the paper, references, and project in its entirety, please email
me.
What’s in a Name? A Paper on Foucault’s Author-Function Deconstructionism
Deconstructionism-A Brief Summary
Deconstructionism, a response to Saussere’s structuralism, which aims to
reorganize systems of meaning into commonalities, instead seeks to undermine the
“intended” meaning and structure of a text. In doing so, deconstructionism
multiplies the meanings of a text, allowing the reader much more liberty in
interpreting the text and questioning the language of the text as well as the reader’s
own position within the text (Lynn 108). In order to practice deconstructionism,
one must first identify binaries1, two polar oppositional forces that serve to contrast
one another as conceit within the text. Then, the reader must establish a hierarchy,
or privilege one term above the other, acknowledging that one term is
conventionally superior to another. Finally, the reader organizes a reversal or
differance, of those terms in the aspect of privilege to convey an unlikely or creative
meaning to the text; for instance, a practitioner of deconstructionism may find that a
negligible or antithetical aspect in a discourse may instead be central, by reversing
and analyzing the meaning of the text. Therefore, deconstructionism, as a literary
theory, constantly explores alternative meanings to the text, extricating the text’s
1 A list of terms in deconstructionism can be observed on Lynn 135.

2. Won 2
language from the grasp of its intended meaning and allowing innovative
interpretations arbitrary of the reader.
Michel Foucault and His Unique Deconstructionism
The three main proponents of deconstructionism, Jacques Derrida, Roland
Barthes, and Michel Foucault, all agree with the basic premise that the author of a
text should not interfere with the reader’s interpretation of a text. In fact, Barthes,
who metaphorically kills the author in his essay, goes as far as to say “To give a text
an author is to impose a limit on that text, to furnish it with a final signified, to close
the writing”. (Barthes 1325). Barthes, in this quotation, demonstrates that the
inclusion of the author in a reader analysis restricts the interpretation of the
discourse, completely contrary to deconstructionism’s main intent. Foucault also
argues “the essential basis of writing is not…the insertion of a subject (author) into
language. Rather, it is primarily concerned with creating an opening where the
writing subject (author) disappears.” (Foucault 1447). Each author posits the
premise that a text has its own language; authorship limits the meaning and reading
of a text and thus, one should not read a text in relation to the author. However, in
his essay, “What is an Author?”, Foucault stops short of murdering the author as
Barthes does, and rather quips that his contemporaries have, instead of murdering
the author, simply transferred the author’s characteristics to a “transcendental
anonymity” which he calls ecriture, or written language (Foucault 1479).
Furthermore, Foucault rations that the disappearance of the author is in itself
important, questioning the necessitation of a creator of a “work”. As a result,
Foucault concludes that the death of the author is ineffective, but rather the
interstices of the author’s absence should be reexamined as a function (Foucault

3. Won 3
1479). For example, Foucault suggests a simple function of an author’s name as a
multi-descriptor influences the interpretation of a text without altering the language
of the text itself. Therefore, Foucault emphasizes the functionality of the author’s
name itself as a separate but essential facsimile called the author-function.
The Author-Function: Purpose
The impermanent entity of the author-function attempts to achieve three
goals of classification, establishing relationships and solidarity of text, and
maintaining the existence of discourse. Firstly, in the aspect of classification, the
author-function reorganizes categorization; for example, a library browser
searching for a novel would primarily utilize the author’s name to find the book. In
addition, as Foucault notes, the author’s name is attached to a work or a body of
work to differentiate them from others (Foucault 1481). Secondly, the author-
function attempts to unify works through homogeneity, such as by subsuming it
under similar ideas or themes, and to authenticate works under a single entity.
Thirdly, the author-function seeks to preserve the future discourse of the text; as
Foucault illustrates, the text’s permanence, circulation and status in its society, and
proper acclaim allow the text itself to survive in a more pragmatic sense. Thus, the
author-function exists as a name, still quite practical to the reader, but nonetheless
still prohibited from changing the language of the text itself.
The Author Function: Characteristics
In addition to its teleological final cause, the author-function, as Foucault
would argue, has four major components: its impact on the legal system, its
difference in operation in varying systems, its relationship to the author, and its

4. Won 4
intangibility. Firstly, Foucault notes that the author-function provides ownership
and possession of a text, since discourse was assigned an author-function and
became property under the jurisdiction of a legal system, such as copyright.
Secondly, Foucault argues that the author-function operates differently in models
other than literature, such as science or math, in which certain discourses may not
have a clear author-function (Foucault 1482). Thirdly, Foucault states that
associated status with the author-function could change not only the reader’s
understanding of the text but completely influence the actual reading of the text
itself, as Foucault writes “literary discourse was acceptable only if it carried an
author’s name” (Foucault 1482). Lastly, Foucault maintained again that the author-
function was not a physical being but rather a consciousness of the author with a
relationship similar to the ego of a writer and his or her narrator.
Foucault’s Author-Function and its Relationship to Deconstructionism
In his essay, Foucault conveys the importance of the disappearance of the
author, seeking to examine the role of the author as the author-function, or rather,
why the author himself/herself should not be allowed to engage with the text.
Foucault writes, “[the author] should be reconsidered…to seize its functions, its
intervention in discourse and its system of dependencies”. (Foucault 1489). In
terms of the practicality of Foucault’s own deconstructionism methods, the author-
function exists to remind the reader of externalities that may influence his or her
reading of the text, such as the context in which it was written and who wrote it2.
However, this does not imply that the author’s intent or voice should interfere;
Foucault was implicit that the original text should remain unadulterated and that
2 In this sense, I mean the author-function, and not the author.

5. Won 5
the language of the discourse should exist untainted. Thus, the presence of author-
function now poses to the deconstructionist reader questions of the existence of the
text itself.