1

3.Deconst
ruct
ion.

Deconst r
uction,f or m ofphi losophi calandl i
teraryanal ysis,der i
vedmai nlyfrom wor kbeguni n
the 1960s by t he Fr ench phi l
osopherJacques Der r i
da,t hatquestions the f undament al
concept ualdi stinctions, or“opposi tions,”inWest ernphi losophyt hroughacl oseexami nationof
thel anguageandl ogicofphi l
osophi calandl i
teraryt exts.Int he1970st het erm wasappl iedto
wor kbyDer r
ida, PauldeMan, J.Hil
lisMi l
ler
,andBar baraJohnson, amongot herschol ars.Inthe
1980si tdesignat edmor el ooselyar angeofr adicalt heor et
icalent er
pri
sesi ndiversear easof
thehumani t
iesandsoci alsciences,i ncl
uding—i naddi t i
ont ophi losophy andl i
terature—law,
psy choanalysi s,ar chi
tect ure,ant hropol ogy,t heology ,f emi nism,gay and l esbian st udies,
politi
calt heor y,hi storiography ,andf i
lm theor y.Inpol emicaldi scussionsabouti ntellectual
trendsoft hel ate20t h-century,deconst ructi
onwassomet imesusedpej orat
ivel
yt osuggest
nihili
sm andf rivolousskept i
cism.I npopul arusaget het erm hascomet omeanacr it
ical
dismant li
ngoft radi ti
onandt r
aditi
onal modesoft hought .

Theopposi t
ionschal lengedbydeconst ruct i
on,whichhav ebeeni nherentinWest ernphilosophy
sincethet i
meoft heanci entGreeks, ar
echar acteri
sti
call
y“binary”and“ hi
erarchical,
”involvi
nga
pairoft ermsi nwhi chonememberoft hepai risassumedt obepr i
mar yorf undament al
,t he
othersecondar yorder i
vat
ive.Exampl esi ncl
udenat ureandcul t
ure,speechandwr iti
ng,mi nd
andbody ,presenceandabsence,i nsideandout side,li
ter
alandmet aphori
cal,intell
igibl
eand
sensibl
e,andf orm andmeani ng,amongmanyot hers.To“ deconstruct”anopposi tionist o
exploret he tensions and cont radicti
ons bet ween the hierarchi
calor deri
ng assumed ( and
somet i
mesexpl icit
lyasser t
ed)int het extandot heraspect soft het ext
’smeani ng,especial l
y
thoset hatar eindirectori mpli
citort hatr el
yonf igurati
veorper format i
veusesofl anguage.
Throught hisanal ysis,theopposi t
ioni sshownt obeapr oduct,or“construction,”oft het ext
rathert
hansomet hinggivenindependent lyofit.

Inthewr i
ti
ngsoft heFrenchEnl i
ghtenmentphi l
osopherJean- JacquesRousseau,f orexampl e,
societyandcul t
urear edescr i
bedascor ruptingandoppr essivefor cesthatgr adual l
ydev el
op
outofani dy l
li
c“ stat
eofnat ure”inwhi chhumansexi stinself-
sufficientandpeacef ulisol
ati
on
from oneanot her.ForRousseau,t hen,nat ureispr iortoculture.Yett herei sanothersensei n
whichculturei scer t
ainl
ypr i
ort onat ure:t hei deaofnat urei sapr oductofcul t
ure,andwhat
countsas“ nature”or“ natural
”atanygi venhi stor
icalmomentwi llvarydependi ngupont he
cultur
eoft het ime.Whatt hisfactshowsi snott hatthetermsoft henat ure/cultur
eopposi ti
on
shouldbei nver t
ed—thatcultureisreallypr iortonat ure—butratherthatt her elat
ionbet weenthe
termsi snotone- sidedanduni di
rect
ional ,asRousseauandot hershadassumed.Thepoi ntof
thedeconst ructi
veanal ysi
sist orestr
uct ure, or“ di
splace,
”theopposi ti
on,notsi mplytor ever
se
i
t.
 2

ForDer rida,themostt ell

ingandper vasiv eopposi t
ionist heonet hatt reat swr iti
ngassecondar y
toorder ivativeofspeech.Accor dingt ot hisopposi t
ion,speechi samor eaut henticf orm of
l
anguage,becausei nspeecht heideasandi nt enti
onsoft hespeakerar ei mmedi ately“pr esent”
(spokenwor ds,i nt hisi dealizedpi cture,di r ectlyexpr esswhatt hespeaker“ hasi nmi nd”),
wher easi nwr iti
ngt heyar emor eremot eor“ absent ”from t hespeakeroraut horandt husmor e
l
iablet omi sunder standing.AsDer ridaar gues,howev er ,spokenwor dsf unctionasl ingui sti
c
signsonl ytot heext entt hatt heycanber epeat edi ndi f
ferentcont ext s,int heabsenceoft he
speakerwhoor igi
nal l
yut terst hem.Speechqual i
fiesasl anguage,inot herwor ds,onl yt ot he
extentt hati thas char acteri
sti
cs t r
adi ti
onal l
y assi gned t o wr i
ti
ng,such as “ absence, ”
“dif
ference”( from t heor i
ginalcont extofut ter ance),andt hepossi bilityofmi sunderstandi ng.
Onei ndicationoft hisf act,accor dingt oDer ri
da,i st hatdescr i
ptionsofspeechi nWest ern
phil
osophyof tenr elyonexampl esandmet aphor sr elatedt owr iti
ng.I nef f
ect ,theset exts
descr i
bespeechasaf orm ofwr iti
ng,ev eni ncaseswher ewr i
ti
ngi sexpl i
citlyclaimedt obe
secondar ytospeech.Aswi t htheopposi ti
onbet weennat ur
eandcul t
ur e,howev er,thepoi ntof
thedeconst ructiveanal ysisi snott oshow t hatt het ermsoft hespeech/ wr it
ingopposi t
ion
shouldbei nv erted—t hatwr it
ingisr eallypr iort ospeech—nori sitt oshow t hatt herear eno
diff
erencesbet weenspeechandwr iting.Rat her ,i
ti stodi splacetheopposi tionsoast oshow
thatnei thert erm i spr i
mar y.ForDer r
ida,speech and wr iti
ng ar e bot hf ormsofa mor e
gener al
ized“ arche-wr it
ing”( archi-
écriture),whi chencompassesnotonl yal lofnat urallanguage
butanysy stem ofr epr esent ati
onwhat soev er.