Derrida and Deconstruction

Derrida and Deconstruction

This blog forms part of a flipped learning activity focusing on Jacques Derrida's theory of deconstruction. It involves answering questions based on short videos that we've reviewed as part of this flipped learning process.

Video 1

1.1. Why is it difficult to define Deconstruction?

Deconstruction is a complex philosophical theory. It challenges the notion of having a fixed or singular meaning or definition, thereby making it difficult to pin down.

1.2. Is Deconstruction a negative term?

No, "deconstruction" isn't a negative term. It's a method of analyzing ideas and texts by questioning their assumptions and complexities. It's about understanding deeply rather than making judgments.

1.3. How does Deconstruction happen on its own?

Deconstruction started as a reaction to structuralism, which looks at everything in pairs of opposites or in a single way. The limits of structuralism led to deconstruction. Deconstructionists question the idea of opposites and the entire structure itself.

 Video 2

2.1. The influence of Heidegger on Derrida

Heidegger, a German philosopher, shook up Western philosophy with his 1927 book "Being and Time," where he questioned what it means "to be." His ideas had a big impact on Derrida. Saussure, on the other hand, focused on language, saying it's made of signs: the signifier (like a word) and the signified (what the word means). He said this connection is random. Derrida mixed these ideas, exploring how language and meaning shape our understanding of existence.

2.2. Derridean rethinking of the foundations of Western philosophy

Under the influence of Heidegger, Derrida developed the concepts of phonocentrism and logocentrism. He observed a historical bias favoring phonocentrism—speech—over logocentrism—writing—in critical discourse. Derrida's argument revolves around the idea that many concepts are explained through binary oppositions, where one side is privileged over the other. Similarly, he applies this binary to speech and writing, highlighting how speech is often favored while writing is marginalized in Western thought and culture.

Video 3

3.1. Ferdinand de Saussureian concept of language (that meaning is arbitrary, relational, constitutive)

Saussure's theory of language centers on signs: words (signifiers) and their associated meanings (signified). He emphasizes that the connection between signifier and signified is arbitrary, based on convention. Saussure identifies three key aspects: arbitrariness in how words are assigned meanings by agreement, relational meanings where words gain significance in contrast to others, and definitions based on oppositions.

3.2. How Derrida deconstructs the idea of arbitrariness?

Derrida questions arbitrariness by suggesting that the connection between a word (signifier) and its meaning (signified) is not purely random or fixed by agreement. He argues that meanings are fluid, influenced by context and supplemented by other signs, challenging the straightforward notion of arbitrariness proposed by Saussure.

3.3. Concept of metaphysics of presence

The "metaphysics of presence" says that what we can see and feel right now is more real and certain than things that are not here or are represented. Derrida criticized this idea for favoring certain kinds of knowledge and ignoring others, shaping how we understand reality and meaning in Western thought.

Video 4

4.1. Derridean concept of DifferAnce

Derrida's concept of "différance" shows how meanings in language are not fixed but always shifting and deferring to other meanings. It explores how language is complex and changes over time and context, challenging the idea that words have stable and straightforward definitions.

4.2. Infinite play of meaning

Derrida suggests that the meaning of one word isn't its definition but another word. Each word signifies another word, creating a chain where meanings endlessly refer to each other. He calls this ongoing process the infinite play of meaning.

4.3. DIfferAnce = to differ + to defer

Derrida combines the terms "to differ" and "to defer" because they both convey the same meaning, which is difference.

Video 5

5.1. Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences

This paper by Derrida, presented at Johns Hopkins University, critiques Claude Lévi-Strauss's foundational work and is considered the basis of deconstruction. Additionally, at Yale University, Derrida presented another paper critiquing structuralist anthropology. These works explore various arguments concerning the roles of speech, writing, and language, among other topics.

5.2. Explain: "Language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique."

Derrida argues that critics often use the same methods they criticize within traditional approaches. For instance, if critics critique the scientific method of interpreting a work, they end up employing that same method, rendering the critique meaningless. In deconstruction, when interpreting a work, critics critique the very idea of meaning itself.

Video 6

6.1. The Yale School: the hub of the practitioners of Deconstruction in the literary theories

The Yale school gained prominence as a leading advocate of deconstruction theory in the 1970s. This influence spread from America to global recognition. Key figures of this school include Derrida, Harold Bloom, J. Hillis Miller, Paul De Man, and Geoffrey Hartman.

6.2. •The characteristics of the Yale School of Deconstruction

In literature, figurative language creates many meanings. Critics question both how stories look and the history behind them. They focus a lot on Romanticism.

Video 7

7.1. How other schools like New Historicism, Cultural Materialism, Feminism, Marxism and Postcolonial theorists used Deconstruction?

Marxism shifts focus from capitalist power to the working class or oppressed groups. Postcolonialism changes perspective from colonizers to the colonized. Feminism advocates for equality between men and women within a binary framework. Cultural materialism emphasizes the material aspects of language. New Historicism explores the interplay between textual representation of history and the historical context of texts.