THE GREAT IDEAS ONLINE Aug ‘05 No 337 Don't explain your author, read him right and he explains himself. —Mark Twain BEWARE OF THE FALLOUT: UMBERTO ECO AND THE MAKING OF THE MODEL READER Gary P. Radford This book will perhaps be understood only by those who have themselves already thought the thoughts which are ex- pressed in it—or similar thoughts. It is therefore not a text- book. Its purpose would be achieved if there were one person who read it with understanding and to whom it gave pleasure (Ludwig Wittgenstein, in Kolak, 1998, p. xxxi) 2 This foreword should perhaps be headed ‘Directions for Use.’ Not because I feel that the reader cannot be trusted—he is, of course, free to make what he will of the book he has been kind enough to read. What right have I, then, to suggest that it should be used in one way rather than another? (Michel Foucault, 1970, p. ix) elcome, dear reader, to this text on Umberto Eco. Let me Wintroduce myself. I am, of course, the text. This statement may surprise you. Perhaps you were expecting me to introduce myself as the author. Let this be the first point made in this discus- sion of the work and thought of Umberto Eco: authors do not really matter, only texts. Eco (1994a, p. 11) writes: “I’ll tell you at once that I really couldn’t care less about the empirical author of a nar- rative text (or, indeed, of any text)” and that “the author should die once he has finished writing. So as not to trouble the path of the text” (Eco, 1983a, p. 7). So forget about the author who created me. He is not here before you now. Only I am. The text. It is I who rests in your hands. And it is I that speaks to you. These remarks concerning my status as a text are not made lightly or randomly. The relationship between a text and a reader is perhaps the central theme that runs throughout the works of philosopher, literary theo- rist, and semiotician, Umberto Eco. Eco’s work has attempted to articulate this relationship through an analysis of the systems of communication and signification which make it possible. Put in more concrete terms, understanding Eco’s work is understanding how it is you are able to make sense of this text that you are hold- ing in your hands right now. Consider the following questions: By what labor was this text produced? By what labor is this text read and understood? What does this text mean? In itself? To you? To some other reader? What are the codes that enable your understanding of these words. What competence are you relying on to make sense of this text? 3 How is misinterpretation possible? Or over-interpretation? How does this text connect with other texts? Does the meaning of this text reside in these words or as part of a network of knowledge? What is the nature of this network? Is the network structured like a dictionary or an encyclope- dia? Is the network a part of an inexhaustible labyrinth? Where does interpretation start? More importantly, where does it stop? What are its limits to interpretation? Questions such as these, form the heart of Umberto Eco’s work in the academic field known as semiotics. The word “semiotics” comes from the Greek root seme, as in semiotikos, an interpreter of signs where a sign is “everything that, on the grounds of a previ- ously established social convention, can be taken as standing for something else” (Eco, 1976, p. 16). The term “semeiotics” origi- nally referred to the branch of medical science relating to the inter- pretation of symptoms (Simpson & Weiner, 1989, Volume XIV, p. 959). Thus red spots “stand for” the measles or swollen neck glands “stand for” the mumps. In its modern usage, semiotics is defined as “the science of communication studies through the in- terpretation of signs and symbols as they operate in various fields, esp. language” (Simpson & Weiner, 1989, Volume XIV, p. 959). The two key terms in both definitions are “sign” and “interpreta- tion.” The physician considers the headache and sweaty palms as signs indicating an underlying medical condition. She reads, or in- terprets, the signs to arrive at a diagnosis and treatment. For the modern academic discipline of semiotics, anything in a culture can be considered as a sign: a text, an image, a building, the design of a car, a hairstyle. These signs are read and a meaning imputed to them. Interpretation allows us to make sense of the objects we en- counter. 4 The words you are reading now are signs. The presence of the words in them-selves is not as important, or as interesting, as the “something else” for which they stand; the content they convey. This much would seem obvious. As a semiotician, Umberto Eco would ask the following questions: How are you able to arrive at this content? How are you able to interpret these signs and make sense of them? Like the doctor looking at the red spots on the pa- tient’s body trying to interpret her sickness, so you too must look at these words and interpret meaning from them. How is this pos- sible? By what process are you able to do this? These are the questions which will drive this discussion of the thought of Umberto Eco. As you can see, this will be not be an ab- stract discussion of esoteric concepts. Your reading of this text about Umberto Eco and semiotics is also your concrete engage- ment in those very processes that Eco will describe in his theories. Ultimately, this reading of Eco’s semiotics will not only lead to an understanding of Eco, but also, and more importantly, to an under- standing about you; in particular, of how you read, interpret, un- derstand, and communicate. Further, this understanding will inevitably change the ways in which you read, interpret, under- stand, and communicate. As Eco (1976) writes: If semiotics is a theory, then it should be a theory that permits a continuous critical intervention in semiotic phenomena. Since peo- ple speak, to explain how and why they speak cannot help but de- termine their future way of speaking. At any rate, I can hardly deny that it determines my own way of speaking (p. 29). Your engagement with this text and how, as a result, you are able to understand it, forms the heart of Eco’s semiotic theory. So, take a deep breath and be prepared to take center stage. This text is not about Umberto Eco at all. It is really about us, and especially about you, the reader. So welcome. It’s good to meet you. Understanding Texts Reading texts is a matter of reading them in the light of other texts, people, obsessions, bits of information, or what have you, and then seeing what happens (Richard Rorty, 1992, p. 105) So, who are you? Where has this text landed and who has picked it up? Are you an undergraduate student with a course assignment? A 5 graduate student coming to grips with semiotics for the first time? An English major exploring a new corner of her field? A member of the public who, inspired from reading Eco’s (1983b) novel The Name of the Rose, wants to know more about the man who wrote it? These questions are important because each reader brings something different to this text: Different backgrounds, education, exposure to European theories of communication, motives, moti- vation, and so on. Since this text is being written for a wide audi- ence, and for the greatest number of readers possible, these inevitable differences in background, culture, and knowledge will lead to a number of different “readings” of this text even though the actual words and sentences remain the same for all readers. As Eco (1992) describes, this variety is the very nature of the reading experience: “When a text is produced not for a single addressee but for a community of readers—the author knows that he or she will be interpreted not according to his or her intentions but according to a complex strategy of interactions which also involve the read- ers, along with their competence in language as a social treasury” (Eco, 1992, p. 67). The important concept here is that of “social treasury:” I mean by social treasury not only a given language as a set of grammatical rules, but also the whole encyclopedia that the per- formances of that language have implemented, namely the cultural conventions that that language has produced and the very history of the previous interpretations of many texts, comprehending the text that the reader is in the course of reading. (Eco, 1992, pp. 67- 68). There is a textual journey you have taken in order to reach the point where you hold this text in your hands. You are not reading this text at random, but rather in conjunction with other texts that you have read or are familiar. These texts may be Eco’s novels: The Name of the Rose (1983b), Foucault’s Pendulum (Eco, 1989), or The Island of the Day Before (Eco, 1995); his collections of popular writings such as How to Travel with a Salmon (Eco, 1994b), Misreadings (Eco, 1993), Travels in Hyperreality (Eco, 1986), The Bond Affair (Eco, 1965), or Conversations about the End of Time (Eco, 2000a); or his theoretical works, especially A Theory of Semiotics (Eco, 1976), The Role of the Reader (Eco, 1979), Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language (Eco, 1986), or Kant and the Platypus (Eco, 2000b).