The role, position and actions of the author are important themes and plot points in Homestuck; furthermore, they inform the very shape of the story quite deeply.
So I thought I'd provide a brief presentation of the key concepts of Auteur Theory and Death of the Author, followed by the start of a reflection about Hussie's role in Homestuck.
I would be happy to know everyone's in-depth perspective about these topics!
AUTEUR THEORY
An angle of analysis postulating the director as the main and most significant creative force behind the movie. By extension, auteur theory is interesting in the declarations, actions, positions and previous trajectory of this one artist, as well as the possibility (explicit or not) that they may have a larger aesthetic project a single movie is only a part of.
Example: Film director John Carpenter is generally understood to be the main force behind the 1982 movie The Thing. He wanted to direct a remake to the eponymous 1951 story since a long time. He reworked the screenplay, chose the actors, worked closely with them as well as the creature designers and special effect specialists, and focused on the editing stage as well. Furthermore, John indicated the movie was part of his "Apocalypse trilogy", a thematic triptych continued with Prince of Darkness (1987) and concluded with In the Mouth of Madness (1994).
Consequently, it is interesting to know John Carpenter to better understand The Thing.
What Auteur Theory is not: Auteur theory never says that the director is the sole entity behind a movie, nor does it oppose entirely different approaches. It also does not mean the word of the main creator should always be trusted and constitutes the alpha and omega of intradiegetic truth and extradiegetics themes.
On the contrary, auteur theory encourages you to think of artists as human being, who can lie, who can fail, who can forget things, etc.
DEATH OF THE AUTHOR
An angle of analysis warning against considering the author and their decisions as the main and only key to understanding the work (see auteur theory above). The term was coined in an essay by literary theorist Roland Barthes, who proposed we should instead consider the perspective of every reader as paramount and fruitful by itself.
Example: Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein as a horror story and it expresses humanist themes, mostly exploring traditional philosophical and spiritual matters, in gothic and christian tradition. However, it is now considered as one of the first works of modern science fiction and countless analyses have been done with other perspectives. One could envision the creature as an incarnation of miscarriage, a subconscious expression of budding proletarian revolution, a symbol of freedom, of art itself. Any interpretation is possible, and all are valuable.
The fact a lot of analyses may develop themes the author knew nothing of, or did not wish to talk about, is not important: what’s important is the construction of new points of view and cross-section concepts which can then enrich the larger cultural conversation.
What Death of the Author is not: It does NOT postulate the idea the creator should be entirely dismissed as a factor.
In fact, a lot of Death of the Author analyses do include a model of the artist's intent, or at least trajectory and experiences. Some hybrid approaches advise to consider the author as first and foremost a vastly unwilling and inconscious relay of larger cultural developments.
AUTEUR THEORY IN HOMESTUCK
Auteur Theory is fundamental and unavoidable in most analyses of Homestuck. In fact, the work may as well have "Andrew Hussie's Homestuck as its official title".
First, Homestuck is a direct follow-up to the creator's previous webcomic, Problem Sleuth. From its first pages, it starts with the same general format: daily one-panel webcomic with "rough" pixel-serrated lines, monochromatic vision, parodic video game mechanics and multiple fourth-wall-breaking jokes.
Yet it is a different story. It is not situated in the same diegesis (fictional universe), it has a different tone, characters with defined names rather than nicknames, and it quickly adds dialogues (antithetical to the identity of Problem Sleuth).
So the MSPA form becomes a brand. This is Hussie telling us "It's Hussie again, and I'm continuing in the same line, but I'm doing a variation". Hussie is proposing us their unique touche.
Homestuck also integrates and reinvents significant elements of previous Homestuck works. It recycles a lot of matter from their unfinished novel Wizardy Herbert, references their previous comic strips (Lil Cal, Humanimals etc), some of their articles (most notably reviews of hypermuscular gay furry art) and their graphic novel Whistles. Even the Cherub aesthetics is rooted in previous comics they drew about a bizarre jester oscillating between prophetic green and threatening red, and about grandfather clocks disappearing.
Then, Hussie largely communicated around Homestuck, like never before or after. They were present on multiple forums, in a variety of newsletters, in blog posts, in a Formspring (website entirely dedicated to F.A.Q. approaches), they kept answering questions through multiple blogs and often commented on story elements in the official MSPA Forums unprompted. They positioned themselves as the person who knows about the story (author shares an etymology with authority). While they were including audience suggestions and remaining open to external ideas and modifications, they clearly positioned themselve publicly.
Later, they produced extensive book commentaries providing a lot of additional informations regarding their work, as well as anecdotes regarding removed/abandoned ideas, their personal feelings on events and characters and various extra jokes.
Last but not least, Hussie appeared in the diegesis on a regular basis. Their author avatar, explicitly called Andrew Hussie, was a tall individual with few facial features in a green shirt (later seen cosplaying as various characters). While they were mostly a running gag, in-story Hussie provided various summaries of the event (often radically recontextualizing them) and also interacted with multiple canonical characters. True to the bit, they ended up killed in their fiction, following a respected meta tradition.
All of this invites people to take Andrew Hussie, the author, in consideration when analyzing Homestuck. It's engaging with the work on its own terms.
In a way, it is BOLDER to ignore Andrew Hussie and to focus on the works, and we should do more of it!
DEATH OF THE AUTHOR IN HOMESTUCK
Death of the Author is equally fundamental.
First, because every analysis is, in a way, a Death of the Author. Another individual will propose their own read. Their interpretation of various elements, even when entirely rooted in Hussie quotes and factual truths of the story, will be a personal perspective. Even simply listing quotes of Hussie would already be a personal perspective, because the person is gonna select quotes in various ways.
Then, because from the start, Homestuck was a kind of game with the audience. It started with the quest/adventure format, inviting people to send suggestions/text commands. While Hussie dismissed this approach for Act 4 and later parts for it had become unusable, it was an important part of the experience and experiment. They then chose the name "Gamzee" after a specific terminallyCapricious roleplayer. And they kept interacting with the audience until the end, sometimes integrating fanarts and fan designs, sometimes correcting an insensitive joke or apologizing, etc etc.
They also removed themselves from the scene. They stopped publishing their author commentary, they stopped interacting with the fan communities. It was probably mainly because of online harassment, but it had an interesting effect: all interpretations of the work were now up for grabs. Suddenly, you could make Homestuck say ANYTHING.
When the Word of Deity is gone, what remains but the readers' perspective?
What do you think about Auteur Theory and Death of the Author? What are the scenes, dialogues and concepts that strike you the most in relation to these themes?
Read Alabaster here: https://mspfa.com/?s=236
People can try and push Death of the Author all they want, the work and ideas are still recognizably different (and often less cohesive) when written by someone else, with Homestuck being no exception.
DOA largely seems to me like an excuse for self indulgence with someone else's world and characters. It's not wrong, but it really seems to be all there is to it.
the Hussie self insert is by far the least impactful or interesting element of authorial interaction in the story. Dave dirk and Caliborn (also scratch) are intriguing for showing how Hussie viewed his own story over time, you can see the initial playfulness fade away and be replaced with bitter stoicism
tara and raven superfan
oh yea i forgot i meant to respond to this
I think both when understood and used in their proper literary sense and not the general colloquialisms people use them as are equally valid ways of reading into and interpreting a work, and I tend to go with a hybrid approach because a creator can say X all they want but if pretty much their entire audience thinks the work is saying Y then the artist kind of failed at making their own point and its compelling to try to understand what the author was actually getting at and also why and how it fell short or was "misinterpreted" by so many people and what that Means in a grander scheme of things.
which brings me to how (imo) thats kind of a core idea explored with the Ultimate Self (and arguably most if not all the post-canon works in general). Creating your own interpretations through fanwork, even if its something as simple as a coffee shop au, is still furthering yours (and potentially others) understanding of that character, and even if you dont notice it those fanworks interact with your understanding of the main body of work. "fanon" is a term that exists for a reason after all, and who among us hasnt complained about an off-skew fan interpretation being the main thing that people talk about. It wants you to consider what is more important, do you care more about the author and their hand in the process and which past events informed the work? do you care more about the infinite different ways to read and interpret a work? What even makes something belong to a canon body of work and does it matter at the end of the day?
