Jacques Derrida

Face METHOD Despite how the word may sound, deconstruction means to deconstruct, not to destroy. Deconstruction is always simultaneously affirming and undoing. Deconstruction refers to a technique for reading and analyzing texts developed by Jacques Derrida, Paul de Man, and others; this, in turn, is connected to a set of philosophical theories about language and meaning. As a result of the popularity of this technique and theory, the word “deconstruct” is often used as a synonym for criticizing

“The Death of the Auteur” 2 The concept of ‘author’ is originally derived from the Latin word for authority. From the theoretician’s standpoint, the author carries power over the text only to the extent that the ideas and scenarios within it are originally those of the author. French literary theorist Roland Barthes argues that the function of an author is to provide the semblance of originality and meaning in The Death of the Author. “Writing is the destruction of every voice, of every origin

1. Deconstructionism Deconstructionism developed in late 1980s by postmodern architecture. The core theory is deconstruction that eliminates construction then forms it together in different way. The first time of deconstruction speak of was Jacques Derrida in 1920s, after that a lot of architect influenced by him, like Peter Eisenman who designed The Wexner Center in OSU. Deconstruction is the critical of stands on modernist orthodoxy principles. It uses modernism vocabulary, but reversed and reform

A poststructuralist analysis, after Jacques Derrida and Paul De Man, would attempt to negate the idea of concept within language. The separation of the content plane and the expression plane cannot be achieved, thus literature demystifies itself and is demystified from the start. Concept does not exist in the form of language; once concept has taken the form of language it is already the second thought, has already been re-parsed and re-processed, and literature in particular is subject to a continual

An Analysis of George Bataille's The Story of the Eye ...awareness of the impossibility opens consciousness to all that is possible for it to think. In this gathering place, where violence is rife, at the boundary of that which escapes cohesion, he who reflects within cohesion realizes that there is no longer any room for him (Theory of Religion 10). When Georges Bataille first published The Story of the Eye in 1928, anonymously and "in a limited edition of 134 copies" (Lechte 118), he had

Can the Subaltern Speak? – Summary Gayatri Spivak Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak is an unsettling voice in literary theory and especially, postcolonial studies. She has describes herself as a “practical deconstructionist feminist Marxist” and as a “gadfly”. She uses deconstruction to examine "how truth is constructed" and to deploy the assertions of one intellectual and political position (such as Marxism) to "interrupt" or "bring into crisis" another (feminism, for example). In her work, she combines

A Deconstructionist Critique of Chopin’s The Awakening The multiplicity of meanings and (re)interpretations informing critical studies of The Awakening reveal a novel ripe for deconstructionist critique. Just as Chopin evokes an image of the sea as symbolic of Edna’s shifting consciousness (“never ceasing, whispering, clamoring, murmuring, inviting the soul to wander in abysses of solitude,”138), likewise the deconstructionist reading of a text emphasizes fluidity over structure: “A text consists

In Kierkegaard’s “Fear and Trembling”, we are presented with the views of Soren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Hegel and Kierkegaard’s pseudonym, ‘Johannes de Silentio’, in regard to the story, “The Binding of Isaac” and how Abraham’s religious beliefs made him sacrifice his son, which went against the rules of the ethical at that moment in time. We must ask ourselves, is it ever justifiable to commit an act that goes against a universal set of ethical rules in order to pursue an individual relationship

deconstructing the limits that divide the real and the unreal. By questioning the ontology that ties together the threesome living-real-existing, we could break the temporality and bring the phantasmagoric entities to a new kind of ontology. A hauntolgy as Derrida would call it, an ontology that does take into account the presence of the ghosts and specters. In my opinion, this deconstruction of the dichotomy between what exists and what does not exist, is necessary but not enough. In her book Frames of

“I would prefer not to.” —Bartleby In one of the final post cards in his book, The Post Card, Jacques Derrida provides his readers with a short philosophical discussion—“for your distraction,” he says. It goes like this: ‘—What is it, a destination?—There where it arrives.—So then everywhere that it arrives there was a destination?—Yes.—But not before?—No.—That’s convenient, since if it arrives there, it is that it was destined to arrive there. But then one can only say so after the fact?—When