
The Pleasure of the Text
Barthes, Roland85 USD
Date
1973
Category
Linguistics
Description
If I agree to judge a text according to pleasure, I cannot go on to say: this one is good, that bad. No awards, no "critique," for this always implies a tactical aim, a social usage, and frequently an extenuating image-reservoir. I cannot apportion, imagine that the text is perfectible, ready to enter into a play of normative predicates: it is too much this, not enough that; the text (the same is true of the singing voice) can wring from me only this judgment, in no way adjectival: that's it! And further still: that's it for me! This "for me" is neither subjective nor existential, but Nietzschean (" ... basically, it is always the same question: What is it for me? ... ").
Excerpt
The qualities of a first-rate writer cannot be defined,
but only experienced. It is just the thing in him which
escapes analysis that makes him first-rate. One can
catalogue all the qualities that he shares with other
writers, but the thing that is his very own, his timbre,
this cannot be defined or explained any more than the
quality of a beautiful speaking voice can be.
In the puritanism of our expressivity, what can be said is
taken-is likely-to be no longer experienced, certainly no
longer enjoyed. Cinema captures the sound of speech close up and makes us hear in their materiality, their sensuality, the breath, the gutturals, the fleshiness of the lips, a whole presence of the human muzzle (that the voice, that writing, be as fresh, supple, lubricated, delicately granular and vibrant as an animal's muzzle), to succeed in shifting the signified a great distance and in throwing, so to speak, the anonymous body of the actor into my ear: it granulates, it crackles, it caresses, it grates, it cuts, it comes: that is bliss.