Ong, Barthes & Audience

There is one quote in Ong's essay that I believe ties up his idea of audience very well. Ong writes, “For the speaker, the audience is in front of him. For the writer, the audience is simply further away, in time or space or both. A surface inscribed with information can neutralize time by preserving the information to its recipient over distances that sound cannot traverse" (Ong, 10)

    When comparing Ong and Barthes there are many similarities. Ong begins his essay by distinguishing the difference between a speaker's audience and a writer's audience. With writing and reading however he believes that the term "audience" is not the correct one to use. He implies the term "audience" as one whole group, when in reality they are not. He explains how reading is in fact an individual task, and how each process information at different times, which therefore leaves the author to fictionalize his audience and in turn the reader must fictionalize themselves, basically, as he concludes in his essay, "mask" themselves in the way the author intended. And in that sense it makes the reader disregard the author completely which can lead to Barthes essay. Barthes argues that the reader must separate the literary work from the author to interpret it the correct way. The essential meaning of a work depends on the impressions of the reader, rather than the "passions" or "tastes" of the writer.

    If we were discussing in technicality, authors truly never die. Writers and their works can be passed down forever and truly never die because their words are still out there for others to read and experience. I believe Ong's example of the reader shows the true meaning of an author "dying." His words will be there always, however what he is asking of the reader is simply to forget about the author and his personal passions, interests, etc.

   What I agree with the most that Ong explains is how all readers process information differently and at their own time. They do so in their own voice, due to their personal context that only they would understand. Not everyone has the same ideas or voice, and therefore for authors to write for the sole purpose of the audience would defeat the purpose entirely. And that is where I agree with Barthes because the "death" of the author is necessary. It obviously must not be seen in a literal sense, but metaphorical. To read a novel and continuously ask questions in the back of your mind about how the author came up with such ideas might be inevitable for some, but questions such as that are irrelevant. The story that is being told is the crucial part of the whole thing and I believe that is what Barthes was trying to convey.


- Kayla Gonzalez