Taking a look a Jack Derida’s Differance in class helped a lot to understand his actual theory. It is important to see that he refers to previous theorist like structuralist De Saussure or Post-structuralist Barthes to convey his ideas but he goes a step further: he claims that language is important in order to understand ourselves, that words are central. When we see a signifier and part of it is missing we still fill in the gaps subconsciously. This gap is what he calls the trace. It is gone but somehow we know it is still there. This trace is what influences our reading of the text and the less aware we are of this trace, the best it functions because we do not realize the manipulation.
De Saussure states that there are only differences in language but what Derrida tells us is we are only left with differences. I liked when in class we used the example of “dog” and looked in the dictionary. This made us realize that we define words by other words, therefore by difference. These differences create a chain, a system in which every concept is inscribed. Barthes would argue this refers to the intertextuality at play and Foucault would argue with the concept of systems. Also, defining words by differences means defining it the other. This relates to the idea of Othering. We have not studied these texts in class yet but theorist like West and Hook would agree that by noting difference, we define the Other, we choose to see them as different. And all this is based on language.
No comments:
Post a Comment