|
Derrida and "Differance" Provider:
Kevin Chen / ³¯«µ½å 17 October 2000
I. Differance, both the domination of nothing and "the subversion
of every realm," "solicites" the "ontology of presence"(Derrida
401).
A. Derrida uses "-ance" instead of "-ence," which is appropriated
from the French verb "differer" meaning "to differ" (to be different)
and "to defer," to point out that a significance is given by
its difference and, ambiguously, it can never come to its definite
end, keeping ceaselessly deferring (Derrida 385).
B. Differance is something beyond our understanding, never being realized
in logic (Derrida 386).
1. Its "graphic difference" is only graphic,
for that the "a" replacing the "e" can be written or read
but never can be heard. (Derrida 386)
2. It appears and hide, being present and absent,
belonging to "no category of being" (Derrida 388).
3. Differance (with an a) is neither active nor passive; it acts as a
compensation for the sense of difference (with an e) that can never
reach the goal "to differing," "to temporalizing" (Derrida 389-390).
C. Trace is the "self-effacing" of meaning in any spoken or written
utterance. The play of trace has neither meaning nor depth.It points
to nothing, belonging to no place. Trace could be the simulacrum
of a presence and refers beyond itself; "in presenting itself it
becomes effaced" (Derrida 403-04).
II. How Derrida looks at the Western philosophers.
A. For Husserl sign is expressed by
"being present," and our knowledge comes from experiencing the presence
of the perceptual world. Derrida argues that there is no pure
expression of presence; signifier always points to another signifier,
and there is no direct, definite referring to the signified (Sarup
35-36).
B. Rousseau thinks speech is the originality and writing its supplement. Derrida
shows us how Rousseau in his Essay on The Origin of Languages
contradicts himself (Sarup 39).
C. Levi-Strauss, based on a sort of binary opposition, attempts
to discover the general structure of human activity, and writing
for him functions as an instrument to regain the primitive mind
that has long been lost.Derrida questions the existence of
general law, for whom Levi-Strauss¡¦ idea of writing only shows illusive
nostalgia (Sarup 39-40).
D. Freud relates writing to the "dream work": condensation as metaphor,
displacement as metonymy, consideration of representability as image.
And secondary revision as an apparent connectedness.Derrida
develops Freud¡¦s theory to the extent of reading text; for the text
we examine the moment when the text slips from the law it designs
for itself (Sarup 42-42).
E. Lacan takes the structure of language to explain the unconscious.
It is impossible, in Lacan's view, for an individual to reach his
total personality; "the subject" is everlastingly detached from
the object at which his desire aims. Derrida thinks that Lacan
believes himself reveal the "true" Freud, and he questions Lacan's
idea of "truth" and "authenticity" (Sarup 43-44).
F. For Nietzsche, there is no single truth and fixed, concrete
"self-identical meaning" in reality, and every idea emerges from
"an equating of the unequal. The "will to truth" is the "will to
power." Derrida follows Nietzsche's interpretation of
language and meaning. Metaphor works in language and constantly transfers
from one reality to another, thus structuring discourses and forming
our conceptions (Sarup 45-48).
III.
Deconstruct "Little Red Riding Hood"
Works Cited
Derrida,
Jacques."Differance."Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan.Literary
Theory: An Anthology.Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell, 1998.
Sarup, Madan.An Introductory Guide to Post-structuralism and Postmodernism.2nd
ed. Hertfordshire: Harvester, 1993.
(external)
|
