([DPLQLQJ3DUDWH[WXDO 7KHRU\DQGLWV $SSOLFDWLRQVLQ'LJLWDO &XOWXUH 1DGLQH'HVURFKHUV 8QLYHUVLWpGH0RQWUpDO&DQDGD 'DQLHO$SROORQ 8QLYHUVLW\RI%HUJHQ1RUZD\ $YROXPHLQWKH$GYDQFHVLQ+XPDQDQG 6RFLDO$VSHFWVRI7HFKQRORJ\ $+6$7 %RRN6HULHV Managing Director: Lindsay Johnston Production Editor: Christina Henning Development Editor: Austin DeMarco Acquisitions Editor: Kayla Wolfe Cover Design: Jason Mull Published in the United States of America by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue Hershey PA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com Copyright © 2014 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Examining paratextual theory and its applications in digital culture / Nadine Desrochers and Daniel Apollon, editors. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4666-6002-1 (hardcover) -- ISBN 978-1-4666-6003-8 (ebook) -- ISBN 978-1-4666-6005-2 (print & per- petual access) 1. Content analysis (Communication) 2. Digital media. 3. Paratext. 4. Authorship. 5. Genette, Gérard, 1930---Influence. I. Desrochers, Nadine, 1971- editor of compilation. II. Apollon, Daniel, 1951- editor of compilation. P93.E93 2014 401’.4--dc23 2014007795 This book is published in the IGI Global book series Advances in Human and Social Aspects of Technology (AHSAT) (ISSN: 2328-1316; eISSN: 2328-1324) British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher. For electronic access to this publication, please contact: [email protected]. &KDSWHU 'LJLWDO3DUDWH[W (GLWRULDOL]DWLRQDQGWKH 9HU\'HDWKRIWKH$XWKRU Marcello Vitali-Rosati Université de Montréal, Canada $%675$&7 As shown by different scholars, the idea of “author” is not absolute or necessary. On the contrary, it came to life as an answer to the very practical needs of an emerging print technology in search of an economic model of its own. In this context, and according to the criticism of the notion of “author” made during the 1960–70s (in particular by Barthes and Foucault), it would only be natural to consider the idea of the author being dead as a global claim accepted by all scholars. Yet this is not the case, because, as Rose suggests, the idea of “author” and the derived notion of copyright are still too important in our culture to be abandoned. But why such an attachment to the idea of “author”? The hypothesis on which this chapter is based is that the theory of the death of the author—developed in texts such as What is an Author? by Michel Foucault and The Death of the Author by Roland Barthes—did not provide the conditions for a shift towards a world without authors because of its inherent lack of concrete editorial practices different from the existing ones. In recent years, the birth and diffusion of the Web have al- lowed the concrete development of a different way of interpreting the authorial function, thanks to new editorial practices—which will be named “editorialization devices” in this chapter. Thus, what was inconceivable for Rose in 1993 is possible today because of the emergence of digital technology—and in particular, the Web. ,1752'8&7,21 sisting in giving a structure to a text, organizing it, legitimating it and making it accessible. These Editorialization1 is t he set of elements t hat contex- practices do not form an alternative editorial tualize and give meaning to a particular content in model. The editorial model characterizing paper the digital space. In this chapter, “editorialization” publications is defined by a clear process, a sort will refer to a set of heterogeneous practices con- of procedure, starting with the selection of the DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-6002-1.ch006 Copyright © 2014, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. 'LJLWDO3DUDWH[W(GLWRULDOL]DWLRQDQGWKH9HU\'HDWKRIWKH$XWKRU content, going through its validation and arriving texts such as Qu’est-ce qu’un auteur ? (What is an at its formatting and printing. Editorialization Author?) by Michel Foucault (1969) and La mort practices are not analyzable as a model because de l’auteur (The Death of the Author) by Roland their structure is not fixed as one of a model. The Barthes (1968)—did not provide the conditions forms of editorialization and their functions in the for a shift towards a world without authors because production of a document’s meaning—in particu- of its inherent lack of concrete editorial practices lar a text—can be studied and analyzed starting different from the existing ones. Barthes and from what Genette called “paratext”: “a certain Foucault were writing at a time when the only number of verbal or other productions [which] editorial practice that existed was that of the surround [the text] and extend it, precisely in order paper edition. Their texts were published using to present it” (Genette, 1997, p. 1).2 In this context, 18th century practices, and there were no other this chapter’s objective is to show that today, in production and circulation practices available the case of digital texts, the authorial function is for texts. In more recent times, the birth and the no longer necessary to produce a text’s meaning diffusion of the Web—which came immediately or legitimation, since this function is taken on by after the publication of Rose’s book—have allowed the set of editorialization elements. the concrete development of a different way of Many scholars (e.g., Kaplan, 1967; Woodma- interpreting the authorial function, thanks to new nsee & Jaszi, 1993; Rose, 1993) have pointed out editorial practices. Thus, what was inconceivable that the idea of “author” (henceforth referred to to Rose in 1993 is possible today, due to the emer- without quotation marks to alleviate the text) is gence of digital technology, in particular the Web. not absolute or necessary. On the contrary, it came What needs to be stressed here is the fact that to life because of the very practical needs of an the Internet and the Web are in no way seen as emerging print technology which, at the time, was incarnations of 1960–70s theories as stated by searching for an economic model of its own. In Landow (1992), Bolter (2001) or Sassón-Henry this context, and according to the criticism of the (2007). For these authors, there is a convergence notion of author made during the 1960–70s (in between the ideas of writers such as Barthes, particular by Barthes and Foucault), it would be Foucault or Borges and the development of tech- only natural to consider the idea of author being nology, as if these writers, and in general the set dead as a global claim accepted by all scholars and of theories which can be reassembled under the readers. Yet this is not the case. While it is hard name of post-structuralism, had anticipated the to prove that the idea of author remains important Internet and the Web. This approach has been to the common reader—and this would be beyond questioned (Cusset, 2008), since the relationship the scope of this chapter—Rose’s position is quite between theory and technology has never actu- accurate for scholars. His book, a synthesis of ally been proven. While it is true that analogies previous works on the subject and a reference in between some post-structuralist ideas and the this field, comes to the conclusion that the idea Web can be found, for instance, in the need for a of author and the derived notion of copyright are reader’s active involvement in order to produce still too important in our culture to be abandoned: a text’s meaning, speaking of them in a cause “We are not ready, I think, to give up the sense and effect relationship is an abstraction and an of who we are” is the final sentence of his book idealization of the post-structuralist discourse. (Rose, 1993, p. 142). Instead, what is of interest here is how the birth But why such an attachment to the idea of of a new economic model and the emergence author? Let us start with the hypothesis that the of new editorial practices imply a change in the theory of the death of the author—developed in central concepts of the theory of literature.3 The 'LJLWDO3DUDWH[W(GLWRULDOL]DWLRQDQGWKH9HU\'HDWKRIWKH$XWKRU relationship between post-structuralist thinking to find this text, whether its access is based on and the Web aside, this chapter’s aim is to stress an algorithm or on a set of links. The document’s how new, concrete forms of content production and reliability is guaranteed by the platform—or the diffusion determine the necessity for new concepts, website—where the text is actually found (a review, namely how the concept of author is affected by Wikipedia, a blog, etc.), or even by the platform the change of economic model introduced by the providing the link to it (a search engine, a social Web’s presence and development. network, a friend’s recommendation). In other The modern idea of author came to life in words, the statement “I found it on Google” is the early 18th century, as publishing companies not as naive as one may think, or perhaps it is less needed an economic model to live and thrive upon.