Deconstruction The Writing Center

Brigham Young University

While much literary criticism (particularly formalism) has focused on the

determinate meaning present in literary texts, deconstruction questions the no-
tion that one meaning can be privileged over another. Deconstruction, a severe form of skepti-
cism, asks if the text might say something other than what it appears to say. An important axiom
to keep in mind when attempting to deconstruct a text is this: "Reading is always misreading." In
other words, deconstruction ultimately denies any culture or language system the possibility of
reaching absolute truth, meaning, or communication, challenging the basic western modes of
thought. This is not to say that deconstruction's sole purpose is to tear down or rip apart texts. On
the contrary, one purpose of deconstruction is simply to keep us from embracing incomplete or
inadequate positions as if they fully describe truth or reality.

Deconstruction, as described by Jacques Derrida, places an overt emphasis on language and the
paradoxes and contradictions found in language. The very term "deconstruction" combines
"destruction" and "construction" to emphasize paradox. This type of literary criticism is based on
the idea that our language systems are both limited and mutable. They are inadequate in incorpo-
rating wholeness and meaning. Because of this, truth or reality cannot be wholly represented by
language systems.

BINARY OPPOSITES AND HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS

Derrida, a French philosopher of language, argues that concepts in human thought have tra-
ditionally been defined in terms of their opposites (e.g. white/black, good/evil, male/female,
reason/emotion). Each pair of opposites (binaries) contains one term that is culturally
superior or positive (Derrida calls it privileged) and one term that is viewed as inferior or
negative. Derrida is interested in eradicating the boundaries that exist between these
dichotomies by taking exception to the order and values implied by the opposition in ques-
tion, and showing that those hierarchies are arbitrary or illusory.

“ABSENT PRESENCE”: SIGNIFIER AND SIGNIFIED

The concept of “absent presence” allows us to create words that represent (re-present or make
present again) the absent thing or concept we wish to convey in conversation (e.g. when we
say President of the U.S., the signifier brings the absent thing into conversation symbolically,
re-establishing its presence.) The signifier, or word, attempts to represent the object, or signi-
fied. As Derrida points out, "The sign represents the present in its absence. It takes the place
of the present. When we cannot grasp or show the thing, [. . .] when the present cannot be
presented, we signify, we go through the detour of the sign. [. . .] The sign, in this sense, is
deferred presence" (Cowles 108).
DE-CENTEREDNESS OF LANGUAGE: NO ABSOLUTE TRUTH

The problem with this system of absent presence is that any attempt to discover the ultimate
presence behind a word/sign uncovers only more layers of words behind words; the signifiers
link to other signifiers, forming a chain which surrounds the signified, but never accesses it.
It becomes impossible to get behind language because, as dictionaries show, language is self-
referential—they define words by using other words, indicating that the search for origin or
final meaning is impossible.

Because these signifiers can never access the signified, all language systems are decentered.
(For example, the concepts of masculinity and femininity cannot be defined without using the
terms of the very gender system they are supposed to ground. Also, as "gender signifiers,"
these centers are paradoxically both the nucleus of and outside of the system, making both
concepts somewhat problematic.) In addition, because all language systems are de-centered,
Deconstruction questions the possibility of reaching absolute truth. This de-centering does
not imply that meanings aren't possible or relevant, but rather that one should be aware of
how meaning is made. Therefore, deconstruction focuses on traditional assumptions about
language and truth and reveals the contradictions inherent in our language systems.

II. WHAT DECONSTRUCTION DOES FOR CRITICAL THINKERS

Deconstruction calls into question our natural tendency toward the "either/or" or binary
mentality. This causes us to consciously reconsider what we privilege and why, and to ques-
tion the supposed exclusiveness of the terms themselves. By demonstrating the limitations of
our language systems, deconstruction shows us how cultural biases play into the way we
create meaning. This forces us to question assumptions we have about knowledge, truth, and
reality, and ideally helps us understand how others create meaning which is as valid as our
own.

III. IDEAS FOR WRITING

1. Look for crucial oppositions in a text. Which term is privileged? How does it violate its
own claim to exclude the other? What does the collapse of this opposition suggest about
the text's strategies or themes?
2. Derrida claims that every text violates its own most crucial assertions in the very act of
making them. Try to discover this sort of paradox in a text.
3. Examine a critical analysis of a text. What does the analysis ignore or marginalize? How
does the "supplemental" material (that which is ignored) disrupt the critic's reading?
4. Try to disrupt a text's apparent "meaning" with the language of "play." How do words
bring in innumerable outside elements that distract from or distort coherent meaning?
5. How does a text demand to be read in different, contradictory ways? Is there any way to
decide which of its various "lines" to consider the main one?

Lynn, Steven. "A Passage to Critical Theory." College English 52 (March 1990): 258-71.
Cowles, David. The Critical Experience, 2nd ed. 1994: 106-138.
Lisa Carman, Winter 1995
Revised, March 2000