Flipped Learning : Derrida & Deconstruction.
Introduction : This blog is written as a response to the questions asked in the Flipped Learning activity of Derriddean idea of 'Deconstruction' or 'Post-Structuralism.' In the further course of the blog, I will be answering several questions asked as an activity assigned by my revered professor Dr Dilip Barad Sir in order to have the students understood the basics of the idea of Deconstruction or Post-Structuralism. In this task, we have been instructed to watch fifteen videos, and from the seven videos, we have been asked to answer all the questions asked from each of the seven videos.
Jacques Derrida (1930–2004) was the founder of “deconstruction,” a way of criticizing not only both literary and philosophical texts but also political institutions. Although Derrida at times expressed regret concerning the fate of the word “deconstruction,” its popularity indicates the wide-ranging influence of his thought, in philosophy, in literary criticism and theory, in art and, in particular, architectural theory, and in political theory. Indeed, Derrida’s fame nearly reached the status of a media star, with hundreds of people filling auditoriums to hear him speak, with films and televisions programs devoted to him, with countless books and articles devoted to his thinking. Beside critique, Derridean deconstruction consists in an attempt to re-conceive the difference that divides self-consciousness (the difference of the “of” in consciousness of oneself). But even more than the re-conception of difference, and perhaps more importantly, deconstruction attempts to render justice. Indeed, deconstruction is relentless in this pursuit since justice is impossible to achieve. (Source : Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Question 1 : Why is it difficult to define Deconstruction?
Answer : The term 'Deconstruction' as a critical concept encompasses various ranges of utility and methods to achieve desired aims through necessary use of it. So, it is not limited only to the critical analysis or deconstruction of any given literary text, but expands to the day-to-day usage of language, patois, colloquial usages, etc. Basically, the idea of 'Deconstruction' is a never-ending debate when it comes to a proper definition of it, for the very concept itself tends to destruct the present meaning or allusion of any word - written or spoken.
Question 1 : The influence of Martin Heidegger on Jacques Derrida.
Answer : The ideas about phonocentricism or privileging spoken words over written are the key criticism of Sir Martin Heidegger which he propounds in his 'Sein und Zeit' (1927), translated from German language into English language by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson in 1962 as 'Time and Being.' So, in his work he sets out to put spoken language over written one which Derrida calls it as 'Phonocentricism' and critiques the very concept propounded by Heidegger, and comes up with 'Logocentricism,' the approach of deriving and then deconstructing meanings from a written and authentic document rather than relying on spoken words. So, the study of History, for example, is something which can be done through written texts only, and at the least point, through legends, folklores, and other teeth-chewed stories, now the question is that how far this spoken stories are reliable and authentic enough to be recorded and understood in respect of the real historical events? The answer will be flailing and unreliable, and here is when Derrida comes in the scene with subverting Heidegger's idea to privileging written word over spoken one.
Question 2 : Derridean rethinking of the foundations of Western Philosophy.
Answer : As and when the reference of Western Philosophy comes, one starts getting ideas of bunches of philosophical reasonings advanced by the masters of philosophical thinking. But here with the context of Deconstruction or Post-Structuralism, the very idea of Western Philosophy alludes to its tendency of privileging 'presence' and neglecting - either deliberaey or unknowingly - the 'absence' or 'silence.' This tendency of Western Philosophy is thoughtfully criticised by thinkers and philosophers like Jacques Derrida for its shallowness and peripheral derivations of meanings that were tend to be meant by writers themselves, but this silences the hidden meaning of written or spoken text which is similar to Indian Aesthetician Aacharya Rajanaka Kuntaka with reference to his Dhvani Theory.
'Inferring' is one of the several finest and most accurate literary devices which writers employ in their writings in order to tell what they want to do but cannot do it in explicit manner and thus they do it by putting passing reference to various problems, either by silence or with hinting and less information and here is when the role of an ideal reader comes in the scene who can read between the lines, i.e., what is not expresses by words but is implicitly alluded to by the writers in their respective work of art. This - as felt by Derrida - was lacking in Western Philosophy as it has totally been inclined to look outwardly and towards grossness and shallowness of everything, but not to profundity of any work of art or literary work.
Question 1 : The Yale School : The hub of the practitioners of 'Deconstruction' in the literary theories.
Answer : Indeed the school of Deconstruction pioneered by Jacques Derrida who taught in Yale University at New Haven, United States, has become indispensable part of Literary Criticism for it being a cornerstone of "reading the absence" rather than just relying on "the presence of written or spoken words."
This school subsequently furthered by the four "notorious" Yale Mafias who are Paul de Man (1919 - 1983), Joseph Hillis Miller Jr. (1928 - 2021), Harold Bloom (1930 - 2019), and Geoffrey H. Hartman (1929 - 2016.) So, each of these juggernauts propounded the theory initiated by Derrida who was inspired by and later on criticised Martin Heidegger (1889 - 1976.)
Paul de Man's essay 'Blindness and Insight' provides the understanding of expanding one's mental horizons in order to get the maximum ideas and viewpoints for critical thinking.
Question 2 : The characteristics of the Yale School of Deconstruction.
Answer : One can classify the Deconstructivism under the following three characteristics :
(1) Looking at Literature as Rhetoric or Figurative Construct - Puts Language as Problematic Entity - Literature can Create Multiplicity of Meaning by Focusing on Various Figures of Speech.
(2) Questioning both the Aesthetic as well as Formalist approach to Literature; and also Questioning the Historical or Sociological approach to Literature - Language is not transparent component, Figurative Language makes it Opaque - Signifier and Signified create Aesthetic Illusion.
(3) Preoccupation with Romanticism - In 'Blindness and Insight : Essays in Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism' (1971), Paul de Man sought to Deconstruct the Privileging of Symbol over Allegory and Metaphor over Metonymy in Romantic Thought - Subject-Object Binary - Transcending this Binary achieved through Metaphors - Freeplay of Meaning.
Sir Jacques Derrida & Deconstruction :
Video 1 : Defining Deconstruction :
Question 1 : Why is it difficult to define Deconstruction?
Answer : The term 'Deconstruction' as a critical concept encompasses various ranges of utility and methods to achieve desired aims through necessary use of it. So, it is not limited only to the critical analysis or deconstruction of any given literary text, but expands to the day-to-day usage of language, patois, colloquial usages, etc. Basically, the idea of 'Deconstruction' is a never-ending debate when it comes to a proper definition of it, for the very concept itself tends to destruct the present meaning or allusion of any word - written or spoken.
We can give an analogy of the Ouroboros or a serpent eating its own tail to the very concept of 'Deconstruction,' for the very idea of demolition of words states the arbitrariness and variability of meanings that no meaning is ultimate, but leads to another words and meanings and thus inviting further interpretations of what is being or has been interpreted. Thus, we can say that it is difficult to define the term 'Deconstruction' due to its own characteristic and function of questioning whatever is proposed which thus makes the concept 'Deconstruction' difficult to define, for defining something itself is limiting the existence of the thing being defined which is not at all accepted by a post-structuralist or a deconstructionalist.
Question 2 : Is 'Deconstruction' a negative term?
Answer : The term 'Deconstruction' is neither positive nor negative, it is a neutral tool used by a post-structuralist or a deconstructionalist to achieve the nearest possible meanings of given word, discourse, or text. So, the idea of negating the term is not the correct way to approach the concept, at the same time, it is either positive or negative, or can be both at the same time. When a structuralist aims to find or even give meaning to something that is not properly defined, then the post-structuralist come up and deconstruct the meaning found or given by the structuralist, then the idea of 'Deconstruction' will become negative for structuralist if s/he is not of liberal mind, but simultaneously becomes positive for the rest who want to know the nearest possible meaning of any given word or literary text. Thus, we can say that the term 'Deconstruction' is neither negative nor positive or it is either positive or negative depending upon user of it.
Question 3 : How does 'Deconstruction' happen on its own?
Answer : Here Sir Jacques Derrida is worth quoting : "language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique, deconstructive criticism aims to show that any text inevitably undermines its own claims to have a determinate meaning, and licences the reader to produce his own meanings out of it by an activity of semantic 'freeplay.'"
As the criticism goes along with linguistic aspect, Derrida has rightly stated that the criticism is a quintessential part of anything written or spoken, for meaning (signified) of the word (signifier) is arbitrary and contextual as well as limited to regional usage, but deconstruction allows linguists to focus of absence rather than what is present in form of word, so reading between the lines are the necessity to understand any text in a better manner than to just take what is intended by writers to take from what is written, one famous example in relation to this can be seen in 'Mansfield Park' novel by Jane Austen wherein she writes that the central character is rich because he has great plantation in Jamaica, now an average reader lacking historical sense would read it as a mere description of the character whereas a reader having historical sense would read it as a post-colonial literature by knowing that Jamaica and other Caribbean Islands have been the asylum for coloured and indentured slaves to be kept and exploited by the European colonizers, and thus the central character although depicted generous will turn out to be the cruel exploiter in the psyche of the reader with historical sense. Thus the reading of 'silence' or 'absence' or what is not stated is a natural way for analyzing any spoken or written word in light of Deconstruction. Thus, the 'Deconstruction' happens on its own without any further need of another literary device.
Question 2 : Is 'Deconstruction' a negative term?
Answer : The term 'Deconstruction' is neither positive nor negative, it is a neutral tool used by a post-structuralist or a deconstructionalist to achieve the nearest possible meanings of given word, discourse, or text. So, the idea of negating the term is not the correct way to approach the concept, at the same time, it is either positive or negative, or can be both at the same time. When a structuralist aims to find or even give meaning to something that is not properly defined, then the post-structuralist come up and deconstruct the meaning found or given by the structuralist, then the idea of 'Deconstruction' will become negative for structuralist if s/he is not of liberal mind, but simultaneously becomes positive for the rest who want to know the nearest possible meaning of any given word or literary text. Thus, we can say that the term 'Deconstruction' is neither negative nor positive or it is either positive or negative depending upon user of it.
Question 3 : How does 'Deconstruction' happen on its own?
Answer : Here Sir Jacques Derrida is worth quoting : "language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique, deconstructive criticism aims to show that any text inevitably undermines its own claims to have a determinate meaning, and licences the reader to produce his own meanings out of it by an activity of semantic 'freeplay.'"
As the criticism goes along with linguistic aspect, Derrida has rightly stated that the criticism is a quintessential part of anything written or spoken, for meaning (signified) of the word (signifier) is arbitrary and contextual as well as limited to regional usage, but deconstruction allows linguists to focus of absence rather than what is present in form of word, so reading between the lines are the necessity to understand any text in a better manner than to just take what is intended by writers to take from what is written, one famous example in relation to this can be seen in 'Mansfield Park' novel by Jane Austen wherein she writes that the central character is rich because he has great plantation in Jamaica, now an average reader lacking historical sense would read it as a mere description of the character whereas a reader having historical sense would read it as a post-colonial literature by knowing that Jamaica and other Caribbean Islands have been the asylum for coloured and indentured slaves to be kept and exploited by the European colonizers, and thus the central character although depicted generous will turn out to be the cruel exploiter in the psyche of the reader with historical sense. Thus the reading of 'silence' or 'absence' or what is not stated is a natural way for analyzing any spoken or written word in light of Deconstruction. Thus, the 'Deconstruction' happens on its own without any further need of another literary device.
Video 2 : Heidegger and Derrida :
Answer : The ideas about phonocentricism or privileging spoken words over written are the key criticism of Sir Martin Heidegger which he propounds in his 'Sein und Zeit' (1927), translated from German language into English language by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson in 1962 as 'Time and Being.' So, in his work he sets out to put spoken language over written one which Derrida calls it as 'Phonocentricism' and critiques the very concept propounded by Heidegger, and comes up with 'Logocentricism,' the approach of deriving and then deconstructing meanings from a written and authentic document rather than relying on spoken words. So, the study of History, for example, is something which can be done through written texts only, and at the least point, through legends, folklores, and other teeth-chewed stories, now the question is that how far this spoken stories are reliable and authentic enough to be recorded and understood in respect of the real historical events? The answer will be flailing and unreliable, and here is when Derrida comes in the scene with subverting Heidegger's idea to privileging written word over spoken one.
Question 2 : Derridean rethinking of the foundations of Western Philosophy.
Answer : As and when the reference of Western Philosophy comes, one starts getting ideas of bunches of philosophical reasonings advanced by the masters of philosophical thinking. But here with the context of Deconstruction or Post-Structuralism, the very idea of Western Philosophy alludes to its tendency of privileging 'presence' and neglecting - either deliberaey or unknowingly - the 'absence' or 'silence.' This tendency of Western Philosophy is thoughtfully criticised by thinkers and philosophers like Jacques Derrida for its shallowness and peripheral derivations of meanings that were tend to be meant by writers themselves, but this silences the hidden meaning of written or spoken text which is similar to Indian Aesthetician Aacharya Rajanaka Kuntaka with reference to his Dhvani Theory.
Video 3 : Saussure and Derrida :
Question 1 : Ferdinand de Saussure : Concept of language (that meaning is arbitrary, relational, constitutive.)
Answer : Ferdinand de Saussure has proposed that the nature of language is contextual and its meaning is arbitrary, relational, and constitutive. So, whenever any word is spoken, it will generate different meanings in different cultures, for instance, if an English person says 'Carry' in order to refer to a verb of movement, then a Gujarati (Indian) person would have connotation of the word 'કેરી' which denotes a pulpy sweet fruit or mango, so the nature of derived meanings as soon as any word spoken have arbitrariness into it which varies from culture to culture.
Another aspect of meanings is that they are relational, so, if a fisherperson says "Give me net." being on a riverbank, then relational meaning of the word 'net' would be the net which is used for capturing fish, but if the same words are uttered by a fried holding mobile phone and struggling for network and internet, then meaning of the word 'net' will be that of the Internet, but not the net which is used by fisherperson to capture fish from the water-bodies.
This type of arguments are criticised by Derrida, thus he sets out to deconstruct the theory of 'Metaphysics of Presence.' The metaphysics of presences lays a special stress on the importance of what is present and tends to compare what is not present, thus the binary opposition becomes an outcome of that. For illustration, the gender-bias of Male and Female is observed in the patriarchal society where phallagocentric viewpoint is present, by that a female will be seen as a lacking traits of masculinity, because male is dominant in such a stratum.
Another thing in relation to it is that creating differences is not at all problematic, but moreover serves the purpose of systematic functions in any aspect of lifestyle, but privileging one over other creates imbalance and thus the contention emerges, which is highly problematic and at what Derrida has hit.
Question 2 : How does Derrida deconstruct the idea of arbitrariness?
Answer : As Saussure has still stuck at one meaning from another in context of the given culture or language, Derrida goes a step ahead and states that we never get a truly definite and ultimate meaning of anything spoken or written. He tells that a meaning of one word leads to another word and this is what which keeps one stuck in the whirl of nearest meanings but not ultimate one.
Derrida opines not to naturalize what is not natural, i.e., he alludes to the artificiality or a delusional sense of having known the meaning by different contextual point of views, but he stops here and digs deeper and asks whether one has really approached to ultimate meaning or yet there is something that is not in grasp of one's mind, then the arbitrariness also subsumed within the deconstructive reading of any word or text which sets apart the definite and indefinite nature of meanings of language. Another thing is socially related, when Derrida tries to signify that language and its power over people's minds, and thus it has become indispensable to read language in much broader sense rather than confining it into the cultural boundaries of meanings which limit and destroy the true function of word either written or spoken.
Answer : Ferdinand de Saussure has proposed that the nature of language is contextual and its meaning is arbitrary, relational, and constitutive. So, whenever any word is spoken, it will generate different meanings in different cultures, for instance, if an English person says 'Carry' in order to refer to a verb of movement, then a Gujarati (Indian) person would have connotation of the word 'કેરી' which denotes a pulpy sweet fruit or mango, so the nature of derived meanings as soon as any word spoken have arbitrariness into it which varies from culture to culture.
Another aspect of meanings is that they are relational, so, if a fisherperson says "Give me net." being on a riverbank, then relational meaning of the word 'net' would be the net which is used for capturing fish, but if the same words are uttered by a fried holding mobile phone and struggling for network and internet, then meaning of the word 'net' will be that of the Internet, but not the net which is used by fisherperson to capture fish from the water-bodies.
This type of arguments are criticised by Derrida, thus he sets out to deconstruct the theory of 'Metaphysics of Presence.' The metaphysics of presences lays a special stress on the importance of what is present and tends to compare what is not present, thus the binary opposition becomes an outcome of that. For illustration, the gender-bias of Male and Female is observed in the patriarchal society where phallagocentric viewpoint is present, by that a female will be seen as a lacking traits of masculinity, because male is dominant in such a stratum.
Another thing in relation to it is that creating differences is not at all problematic, but moreover serves the purpose of systematic functions in any aspect of lifestyle, but privileging one over other creates imbalance and thus the contention emerges, which is highly problematic and at what Derrida has hit.
Question 2 : How does Derrida deconstruct the idea of arbitrariness?
Answer : As Saussure has still stuck at one meaning from another in context of the given culture or language, Derrida goes a step ahead and states that we never get a truly definite and ultimate meaning of anything spoken or written. He tells that a meaning of one word leads to another word and this is what which keeps one stuck in the whirl of nearest meanings but not ultimate one.
Derrida opines not to naturalize what is not natural, i.e., he alludes to the artificiality or a delusional sense of having known the meaning by different contextual point of views, but he stops here and digs deeper and asks whether one has really approached to ultimate meaning or yet there is something that is not in grasp of one's mind, then the arbitrariness also subsumed within the deconstructive reading of any word or text which sets apart the definite and indefinite nature of meanings of language. Another thing is socially related, when Derrida tries to signify that language and its power over people's minds, and thus it has become indispensable to read language in much broader sense rather than confining it into the cultural boundaries of meanings which limit and destroy the true function of word either written or spoken.
Question 3 : Concept of Metaphysics of Presence.
Answer : The phrase 'Metaphysics of Presence' is taken into consideration by Derrida when mulling over the Binary Oppositions arisen by privileging the presence over absence. So, 'absence' is something Derrida focuses upon and urges to be preferred over what is shown, 'presence.' To draw an example, we refer to the famous colloquial adage that is 'darkness is nothing but an absence of light,' so, here again we find that the presence of 'darkness' is not seen as an individual entity but is complementarily attached to the superior position of 'light' to darkness itself which might be signifying good and evil relation in mythological realm too!
This is what Deconstruction is about, to find loopholes and with that try to dismantle the structure in order to reach to the nearest possible truth of language and its conventionally accepted usage amongst different cultures all the way.
Answer : The phrase 'Metaphysics of Presence' is taken into consideration by Derrida when mulling over the Binary Oppositions arisen by privileging the presence over absence. So, 'absence' is something Derrida focuses upon and urges to be preferred over what is shown, 'presence.' To draw an example, we refer to the famous colloquial adage that is 'darkness is nothing but an absence of light,' so, here again we find that the presence of 'darkness' is not seen as an individual entity but is complementarily attached to the superior position of 'light' to darkness itself which might be signifying good and evil relation in mythological realm too!
This is what Deconstruction is about, to find loopholes and with that try to dismantle the structure in order to reach to the nearest possible truth of language and its conventionally accepted usage amongst different cultures all the way.
Video 4 : DifferAnce :
Question 1 : Derridean concept of DifferAnce.
Answer : Derrida played a necessary pun by coining the word 'Differance' which is a French term meaning 'difference and deferral of meaning.' This new term is cleverly coined for the word 'Differance' does not have any pronunciation difference to the word 'Difference' itself, by which he again questioned the privileging speech over writing, and thus again enunciating the privileging writing over speech, for it is only through written word 'Differance' one can get true meaning, but not by pronunciation, for the words 'Difference' and 'Differance' sound same on pronounced.
Question 2 : Infinite play of meaning.
Answer : To begin with, one can take an example of Dictionary in order to understand the infinite play of meaning, for instance, if one comes across the word 'trunk,' and which is new to one, then Dictionary will have different meanings of the same word as a main part of a tree, luggage-keeper space in automobiles, and a nose-like limb of elephant. So, we remain under impression that we have understood the meaning, but it is not so, as we have been promised to be given the meaning, but instead we are take to the the other words which keeps on revolving us from one word to another word in an infinite space, that is referred to as "an infinite play of meaning."
Question 3 : DIfferAnce = to differ + to defer.
Answer : The word 'Differance' seems to be a combination of two verbs that are 'to differ' (ˈdɪfə) meaning 'to separate' and 'to defer' (dɪˈfɜː(r)) meaning 'to postpone.' It contains the two-fold function of both the verbs, as it separates and divides the things in order to classify them and it postpones the meaning of what is divided. And this what exactly Deconstruction does which separates and differentiates amongst various elements of literary text with reference to history, culture, time, place, mores, etc. and keeps the ultimate and definite meaning far-far away in the realm of infinite space which is not possible to be achievable, by which Derrida hints to the Transcendental aspect of language.
Answer : Derrida played a necessary pun by coining the word 'Differance' which is a French term meaning 'difference and deferral of meaning.' This new term is cleverly coined for the word 'Differance' does not have any pronunciation difference to the word 'Difference' itself, by which he again questioned the privileging speech over writing, and thus again enunciating the privileging writing over speech, for it is only through written word 'Differance' one can get true meaning, but not by pronunciation, for the words 'Difference' and 'Differance' sound same on pronounced.
Question 2 : Infinite play of meaning.
Answer : To begin with, one can take an example of Dictionary in order to understand the infinite play of meaning, for instance, if one comes across the word 'trunk,' and which is new to one, then Dictionary will have different meanings of the same word as a main part of a tree, luggage-keeper space in automobiles, and a nose-like limb of elephant. So, we remain under impression that we have understood the meaning, but it is not so, as we have been promised to be given the meaning, but instead we are take to the the other words which keeps on revolving us from one word to another word in an infinite space, that is referred to as "an infinite play of meaning."
Question 3 : DIfferAnce = to differ + to defer.
Answer : The word 'Differance' seems to be a combination of two verbs that are 'to differ' (ˈdɪfə) meaning 'to separate' and 'to defer' (dɪˈfɜː(r)) meaning 'to postpone.' It contains the two-fold function of both the verbs, as it separates and divides the things in order to classify them and it postpones the meaning of what is divided. And this what exactly Deconstruction does which separates and differentiates amongst various elements of literary text with reference to history, culture, time, place, mores, etc. and keeps the ultimate and definite meaning far-far away in the realm of infinite space which is not possible to be achievable, by which Derrida hints to the Transcendental aspect of language.
Video 5 : Structure, Sign, Play :
Question 1 : Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences.
Answer : The paper read at the colloquim on 'Structuralism' at Johns Hopkins University - 'Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences." (1966) by Jaques Derrida, which deals with how the language can be structured, signified and used in any given culture of human land.
So, structuring language leads the whole age of its users into the world of limitations wherein one who speaks such language becomes unable to entertain thoughts coming from other languages from the different cultures of the different parts of the world. Although it does pave the way for an unbarred communication within any given community or social stratum, but at the same time it obstructs the way to approach foreign thoughts which are expressed in foreign languages, which is the limitation of structuring any language in any given culture of the world.
'Sign' is something that signifies and the meaning which gets generated in the mind of a listener or a reader is something that is signified through sign. So, we can say that word is signifier and meaning is a signified understanding. It has got its loopholes too, amongst which, one apparent one is that it is prone to be misunderstood if taken out of context. So, a word pronounced in a specific culture can have a specific meaning whereas the same word pronounced in a different culture can lead to some other meaning perceived in the collective subconscious of the people belonging to respective culture.
Derrida used the phrase 'free play of words' to refer to the "field of infinite substitutions in the closure of a finite ensemble." So, if a word constitutes multiple meanings and connotes to the diverse range of meanings which varies from culture to culture.
Question 2 : Explain: "Language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique."
Answer : Yes, the aforementioned statement by Jacques Derrida is to the point correct in reference to the criticism and linguistic studies. Any language - either spoken or written - is put in the lab of critiquing its own self when set out to criticise other forms.
So, if a language is employed to make a critique of something, then the very language has to pass out itself from the Deconstructive check as Derrida proposes that the totality has its center elsewhere, and the center is not the center. If particular language is set as a fixed parameter of judging and criticising other things or literary text particularly, then the very language seems to have fixed which is against the ideas of Deconstructivism, for it questions the institutions pre-established by former and bygone generations.
Answer : The paper read at the colloquim on 'Structuralism' at Johns Hopkins University - 'Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences." (1966) by Jaques Derrida, which deals with how the language can be structured, signified and used in any given culture of human land.
So, structuring language leads the whole age of its users into the world of limitations wherein one who speaks such language becomes unable to entertain thoughts coming from other languages from the different cultures of the different parts of the world. Although it does pave the way for an unbarred communication within any given community or social stratum, but at the same time it obstructs the way to approach foreign thoughts which are expressed in foreign languages, which is the limitation of structuring any language in any given culture of the world.
'Sign' is something that signifies and the meaning which gets generated in the mind of a listener or a reader is something that is signified through sign. So, we can say that word is signifier and meaning is a signified understanding. It has got its loopholes too, amongst which, one apparent one is that it is prone to be misunderstood if taken out of context. So, a word pronounced in a specific culture can have a specific meaning whereas the same word pronounced in a different culture can lead to some other meaning perceived in the collective subconscious of the people belonging to respective culture.
Derrida used the phrase 'free play of words' to refer to the "field of infinite substitutions in the closure of a finite ensemble." So, if a word constitutes multiple meanings and connotes to the diverse range of meanings which varies from culture to culture.
Question 2 : Explain: "Language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique."
Answer : Yes, the aforementioned statement by Jacques Derrida is to the point correct in reference to the criticism and linguistic studies. Any language - either spoken or written - is put in the lab of critiquing its own self when set out to criticise other forms.
So, if a language is employed to make a critique of something, then the very language has to pass out itself from the Deconstructive check as Derrida proposes that the totality has its center elsewhere, and the center is not the center. If particular language is set as a fixed parameter of judging and criticising other things or literary text particularly, then the very language seems to have fixed which is against the ideas of Deconstructivism, for it questions the institutions pre-established by former and bygone generations.
Video 6 : Yale School :
Question 1 : The Yale School : The hub of the practitioners of 'Deconstruction' in the literary theories.
Answer : Indeed the school of Deconstruction pioneered by Jacques Derrida who taught in Yale University at New Haven, United States, has become indispensable part of Literary Criticism for it being a cornerstone of "reading the absence" rather than just relying on "the presence of written or spoken words."
This school subsequently furthered by the four "notorious" Yale Mafias who are Paul de Man (1919 - 1983), Joseph Hillis Miller Jr. (1928 - 2021), Harold Bloom (1930 - 2019), and Geoffrey H. Hartman (1929 - 2016.) So, each of these juggernauts propounded the theory initiated by Derrida who was inspired by and later on criticised Martin Heidegger (1889 - 1976.)
Paul de Man's essay 'Blindness and Insight' provides the understanding of expanding one's mental horizons in order to get the maximum ideas and viewpoints for critical thinking.
Question 2 : The characteristics of the Yale School of Deconstruction.
Answer : One can classify the Deconstructivism under the following three characteristics :
(1) Looking at Literature as Rhetoric or Figurative Construct - Puts Language as Problematic Entity - Literature can Create Multiplicity of Meaning by Focusing on Various Figures of Speech.
(2) Questioning both the Aesthetic as well as Formalist approach to Literature; and also Questioning the Historical or Sociological approach to Literature - Language is not transparent component, Figurative Language makes it Opaque - Signifier and Signified create Aesthetic Illusion.
(3) Preoccupation with Romanticism - In 'Blindness and Insight : Essays in Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism' (1971), Paul de Man sought to Deconstruct the Privileging of Symbol over Allegory and Metaphor over Metonymy in Romantic Thought - Subject-Object Binary - Transcending this Binary achieved through Metaphors - Freeplay of Meaning.
Video 7 : Other Schools and Deconstruction :
Question 1 : How did other schools like New Historicism, Cultural Materialism, Feminism, Marxism and Postcolonial Theorists use Deconstruction?
Answer : As it has been stated above that Deconstructivism pioneered by Jacques Derrida has become a part and parcel of Literary Criticism, so it has a constant influence on various other schools of philosophy and humanities; for example, the schools like New Historicism, Cultural Materialism, Feminism, Marxism and Postcolonial Theories have taken help of Deconstruction in order to conduct further and profound discoveries in their respective areas, for instance :
(1) Post-Colonial Studies : Postcolonial theories were fascinated by Deconstructivism, for its ability to show that the texts or the discourse of the colonizers can be deconstructed from within the narratives.
(2) Feminism : Feminism also share interest in Deconstructivism, for it provides the platform standing upon which a feminist can subvert the binary between male and female, and patriarchal discourse.
(3) Cultural Materialism : Cultural Materialism is interested in Deconstructivism in order to emphasize materiality of language, for language is material construct and it has got ability to unmask the hidden ideological agendas.
(4) New Historicism : According to Louis Montrose, the theory of New Historicism is “a reciprocal concern with the historicity of texts and the textuality of history”. So the History is know through text, and Literature is also a written history, thus what Derrida proposes to privilege written over spoken is applicable to the idea of New Historicism.
Thank you!
▪︎ Word Count : 3465.
Comments
Post a Comment