COP2: seminar 1, The Death of the Author

• In the text I think Barthes is trying to urge people to criticise work in a 'new' way, or at least new for the 1960s. Instead of focusing on the author, we should criticise work for its own sake unbiased. 
• I was interested in his idea that nothing could truly be original, but everything is made up of others' ideas. Still, it is not impossible to make something that feels fresh combining them in an (almost) unique way.

• For my COP2 project I am considering studying galleries and the accessibility of art (and maybe design) to the general public. I'd also like to look into how aesthetic changes peoples' perceptions of things, and why people like some things more than others. The idea that the reader / scriptor / viewer is more important than the author/artist is something that would tie into this nicely. I have observed that with art in galleries is that it's often not understandable to a 'general layman' without the context of a written accompaniment, and even then sometimes not. Would it be more accessible or better if artists abided by Barthes' logic?

• This idea of the viewer being more substantial than the artist ties really closely with Illustration, I think. Whilst fine art may be able to get away with being confusing and ultimately maybe even deriding the viewer, illustration is often a consumer lead practice and needs to be accepted by its audience, for the sake of illustrator and client. Still, the illustrator does not need to spoon feed the viewer. Urging the viewer to think more or even just allowing them to see something else makes for an all the more interesting piece of work.