I found these kind of hard to read. Not hard in the way that a lot of philosophical
texts are in that they drop a lot of jargon on you that the author created to
define terms that other authors have already defined but that you are unaware
of because you had not gone through your first round of reading the whole of
philosophy yet; more like hard to read because of boredom. I couldn’t figure out why. They are short little texts, no more than ten
pages. The premise is sound, basically
pulling apart the mythos behind everyday objects.
Doing some thinking led me to think of a couple of major
reasons. First off, the essays in the
book are a touchtone for some very mid-century French objects and ideas. If I was familiar with most of what Barthes
writes on, it is only in passing and some of my favorite writers are his
countrymen from this period. It felt
disconcerting, but it is what I image it will be like to read a Chuck
Klostermann book fifty years hence – familiar but uncanny. Basically, my only context for what he is
writing about is what I am reading at the moment. That fact does not allow me to see anything from
a new angle; it is only from Barthes’s angle that I see it. By not being able to create my own
interpretation of the validity of Barthes’s ideas, I am left alone to trust
that he knows what he is talking about.
And I’m pretty sure he does, because in the texts that are
unmediated solely by a Barthes’s eyes, he does have some unique insight that I
have not thought about on everyday objects.
There is an essay on cleaners that is rightly noted, and I think my explanation
earlier serves a reason that it is noted.
There is a later essay on cars that rings the same bell.
The other reason that this felt hard to read is that what he
is doing is no longer new, if it ever was.
The edition I had ends with a long theoretical essay on “Myth Today”
that explains his approach, which is adding another layer to Sausseaurain
semiotics. The problem with reading such
an essay and the derivative works is that now Barthes’s influence is such that
it doesn’t feel new at all, and is part of the discourse. Overall, I’m glad I read it, and I am happy
that I read it now instead of back in graduate school as an assigned text.
No comments:
Post a Comment