Deconstructionism
Deconstructionism I
Derrida: takes an ethical turn in looking at literature. He critiques to a small extent Levi-Strauss' theory. He writes in a difficult style on purpose. In Deconstructionism it tries to deconstruct the grounds whereby we suppose our thinning can be derived from one or another definite concepts. Derrida is not a literary theorist. We cant discriminate against genre. There is discourse. There is a field of text that there are always differences but no discernible classification.
e.g. The Eiffel tower is a virtual object that organizes itself arbitrarily. Its arbitrarily placed in the free play of the natural world. A centre outside the centre. To infer a spatial moment from which the irreducibly temporal nature of experience is derived to infer a moment from the fact of this experience as a necessary cause of it is always problematic as always necessarily must put the sense of a spatial full presence of everything there at once in systematic order must put that under erasure: you cant do without it. If you want to get a sense of inference of this nature it is always tenuous and ephemeral.
The nature of myth: Derrida on Levi-Strauss: Levi-Strauss says that his approach to myth is a myth itself. This form of the myth is scientific. The other versions of the myth are not transcendental signifier. The meaning of the myth is discoverable only in my science. Freuds reading of the myth was also supposed to be scientific. Freuds meaning: 2 or 1. It was about the over and under determination of blood relations. It was about probability of incest. Levi-Strauss ' conclusions are already anticipated in Freud and Levi-Strauss is denying the influence of Freud - -Father, which is what happens in the primal horde. It is a perfect instance of the Oedipus complex: repudiating the father and in doing so falling into the very mythic pattern that Freud had been the first to analyze.
Derrida on Sausuree and the nature of the sign: He
Derrida: takes an ethical turn in looking at literature. He critiques to a small extent Levi-Strauss' theory. He writes in a difficult style on purpose. In Deconstructionism it tries to deconstruct the grounds whereby we suppose our thinning can be derived from one or another definite concepts. Derrida is not a literary theorist. We cant discriminate against genre. There is discourse. There is a field of text that there are always differences but no discernible classification.
e.g. The Eiffel tower is a virtual object that organizes itself arbitrarily. Its arbitrarily placed in the free play of the natural world. A centre outside the centre. To infer a spatial moment from which the irreducibly temporal nature of experience is derived to infer a moment from the fact of this experience as a necessary cause of it is always problematic as always necessarily must put the sense of a spatial full presence of everything there at once in systematic order must put that under erasure: you cant do without it. If you want to get a sense of inference of this nature it is always tenuous and ephemeral.
The nature of myth: Derrida on Levi-Strauss: Levi-Strauss says that his approach to myth is a myth itself. This form of the myth is scientific. The other versions of the myth are not transcendental signifier. The meaning of the myth is discoverable only in my science. Freuds reading of the myth was also supposed to be scientific. Freuds meaning: 2 or 1. It was about the over and under determination of blood relations. It was about probability of incest. Levi-Strauss ' conclusions are already anticipated in Freud and Levi-Strauss is denying the influence of Freud - -Father, which is what happens in the primal horde. It is a perfect instance of the Oedipus complex: repudiating the father and in doing so falling into the very mythic pattern that Freud had been the first to analyze.
Derrida on Sausuree and the nature of the sign: He