![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
barthes liked men!
Mar. 7th, 2004 05:16 pmI've been spending the day reading Roland Barthes's book S/Z, an analysis of Balzac's short story Sarrasine.
I first read the story and thought 'wow'. Then I started reading Barthes and thought, 'why did he choose this particular story?' The reason he gave himself seemed inadequate because, as you will see if you read Balzac's story, one central theme in it is sexuality, homosexuality, heterosexuality, transsexuality (I list all of these but leave out anything that might *really* spoiler). Barthes's book was published in 1970 so I thought, hm, maybe he still had reason to hide something?
The next thing I came across was Barthes's explanation of the title of his book: S/Z. Barthes writes:
S and Z are in a relation of graphological inversion: the same letter seen from the other side of the mirror: [elided for spoilers] Hence the slash (/) confronting the S of SarraSine and the Z of Zambinella has a panic function: it is the slash of censure, the surface of the mirror, the wall of hallucination, the verge of antithesis, the abstraction of limit, the obliquity of the signifier, the index of the paradigm, hence of meaning.
Wow.
I have always loved Barthes, ever since I read Mythologies on a trip from Sydney to Canberra when I was 21, and after reading this paragraph I suddenly love him even more. I know he's not writing about *slash*, as in *our* slash, but his sentence seems so resonantly apt and applicable!
I suddenly thought, 'this man has got to be gay.' So I googled Barthes and homosexual and sure enough. :-)
God, and what we real slashers couldn't do with that Balzacian story! Because Balzac (if not Barthes) drew back from the brink that he was drawn, fascinatedly, to the edge of. (Yay, and I just ended a sentence in a preposition!)
Note for those who care: I've also read Percy Lubbock and Henry James now, as I promised some time ago in my last tell-not-show rant. Will report back later.
I first read the story and thought 'wow'. Then I started reading Barthes and thought, 'why did he choose this particular story?' The reason he gave himself seemed inadequate because, as you will see if you read Balzac's story, one central theme in it is sexuality, homosexuality, heterosexuality, transsexuality (I list all of these but leave out anything that might *really* spoiler). Barthes's book was published in 1970 so I thought, hm, maybe he still had reason to hide something?
The next thing I came across was Barthes's explanation of the title of his book: S/Z. Barthes writes:
S and Z are in a relation of graphological inversion: the same letter seen from the other side of the mirror: [elided for spoilers] Hence the slash (/) confronting the S of SarraSine and the Z of Zambinella has a panic function: it is the slash of censure, the surface of the mirror, the wall of hallucination, the verge of antithesis, the abstraction of limit, the obliquity of the signifier, the index of the paradigm, hence of meaning.
Wow.
I have always loved Barthes, ever since I read Mythologies on a trip from Sydney to Canberra when I was 21, and after reading this paragraph I suddenly love him even more. I know he's not writing about *slash*, as in *our* slash, but his sentence seems so resonantly apt and applicable!
I suddenly thought, 'this man has got to be gay.' So I googled Barthes and homosexual and sure enough. :-)
God, and what we real slashers couldn't do with that Balzacian story! Because Balzac (if not Barthes) drew back from the brink that he was drawn, fascinatedly, to the edge of. (Yay, and I just ended a sentence in a preposition!)
Note for those who care: I've also read Percy Lubbock and Henry James now, as I promised some time ago in my last tell-not-show rant. Will report back later.