Derrida: pre-class

I thought that “Differance”, by Jacques Derrida, was an interesting read because he connects so well with many different theorists we have learned thus far. He talks about how language is important in order to understand ourselves and that words are key in doing so. De Saussure believes that “in language, there are only differences”, but Derrida says we are only left with differences. He talks about differance, which is the origin of differences in language. It is the gap (Barthes) in the language and we have to fill in the missing pieces. He suggests that words are understood by what they do not say and it is the differences that define a word. This relates to Macherey’s, ‘rupture’, because of how what is not said is the most important, just like the differences are the most important in a word because that is what defines it.

On page 127, Derrida states, “Every concept is necessarily and essentially inscribed in a chain or system, within which it refers to another and to other concepts, by the systematic play of differences” (Derrida 127). This idea of difference can be related to Zizek when he talks about ‘othering’, which is comparing us vs. them and seeing the differences between the two. This also relates to Habermas’ notion of ‘public sphere’ and Marxs’ idea of ideology, because both of these are part of a system in a certain society that refers to another concept.

Derrida also talks about signifier’s (De Saussure) and when we see one and part of it is missing we still fill in the gaps subconsciously, because we are used to seeing it that way. He says that meaning isn’t in the signifier itself, but exists in relation to other things and that a word’s value is determined by the use of other words. This reminds me of Macherey’s notion of intertextuality and how everything derives from something else and everything is related.

“On my honor I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work”