Barthes and Miller

Now, for something a little topical to this week's discussion of Paul Miller's book, Rhythm Science.

Of course, phonetically, a topic sentence would seem to be quite topical indeed (if you don't believe me, sound them both out). Therefore, I offer you my main argument right off the bat: Miller's Rhythm Science bears striking resemblances to the arguments of Barthes, covered near the start of the semester.

It simply wouldn't be polite to let such a topic sentence stand without some further explanation and examples, however, and so I have taken the liberty of writing here a couple of the more obvious ones. Others are most likely present, but these will serve our purposes well enough.

For one, the most obvious similarities are in the distinctions drawn between the reality of language and the perceptions of language. The sign and the signified, claims Miller, blend together and form the comprehension of music as well as literature. And, like Barthes, Miller places the bulk of the importance upon our own perceptions of the medium, transforming music into statement and statements into music. Of course the material source of the mix exists as its own entity, argues Miller; the true art of the work lies in both the transformative work done and the interpretive reaction provoked from the audience.

The second type of resemblance between the two works is a more subtle statement, yet more ubiquitous. Barthes challenges the contemporary notion of the author, decrying the influence of the author's own experiences and influences upon the work, yet acknowledging the association of the author with the consequences for the work they produce. Similarly, Miller works towards the idea of a common knowledge of sounds, saying that there is no sound from his experience that could surprise his imagination at this point in his life. The creation of new works from the stuff of old authors that are not themselves beholden to their "original" sources is an affirmation of the Barthes concept of "dead" authorship. However, like the arguments of Barthes, this too flies in the face of current culture and law, as violators of copyright are hounded by the legal system and credit given mainly to the original sources.

Having made a few points, I come to the close of this post. However, feel free to make your own arguments, with whatever materials you wish. How you go about making your own arguments is simply up to you.