Opposition or Simply Non-identity
Perhaps what makes a literary work different from any other pieces of writing is its capability of being approached from different viewpoints. Works of literature are potentially capable of providing sufficient material for a vast variety of interpretations. Robert Frost's poem, 'The Road not Taken', an early 20th century, modern poem replete with numerous multi-layered significations, is a perfect example. Deconstructive reading of this poem is only one among many possible approaches, and, in my idea, not the most inclusive one. All the approaches, due to their limitations, have some deficiencies: deconstructive reading of Frost's poem is, thus, inevitably defective. Since deconstructive approach is endeavoring to hunt the binary oppositions of the text in order to reverse them, it is likely to magnify the oppositions. Overstating the oppositions is exactly what the deconstructive reading of Frost's poem, written by D. M. Bowers suffers from; actually, it exaggerates the differences between the two roads to the point that they are rendered as absolute opposites. Whereas, I believe, the two roads are far from opposing each other: they simply just differ. Following the example of Jacque Derrida, the French founder of deconstruction, in the process of reading a literary text, almost all deconstructive critics look for the binary oppositions. These oppositions are hold to be the constituents of the text's structure. Having found them, the deconstructive critic dismantles the text, through reversing the two opposing concepts, to reveal the new possibilities of meaning hitherto unknown, or in the deconstructive term to make the free play of the meaning possible. Observing the above procedure, Bowers, first of all, recognizes three binary oppositions: adventure or the unknown/the familiar or the known, traveling/staying, and finally fair and fresh/worn and old. Since my argument concerns the first and the third oppositions,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document