Derrida 4 dummies

[Tom Stanton]

At 03:06 PM 5/27/97 PST, MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu wrote:
>Those people who flamed you were morons, Tom.  

Well, "moron" is pretty strong. Intolerant pedagogs describes them better.

[snip]

>Risking outraged cries of *but that's not it at all* from certain
quarters, I offer
>tentatively this very general understanding: Derrida sez [snip] we give too 
>much power to the signified (i.e. the concept) and not enough to the
signifier 
>(i.e. the material outward form of the sign). 

Finally, a basic premise that at least hints at what's being talked about. Now
I see why this stuff is so heavily rooted in philosophy as opposed to the more
traditional lit-crit I used to read. I never quite understood the basis of
Derrida.


>[more snips]That's why *writing* (in an extended sense of any form of 
>inscribing: graphic, oral, even conceptual) is considered as being logically 
>prior to *speaking* in his philosophy (in contrast to *common sense* notions 
>of the relationship of speech to writing).

Hmmm...so, even at a subconscious level, we engage in the selective act of
composition and deliver speech that emphasizes the signified by default, in
a manner of speaking, rather than catching ourselves and balancing the
communication. He's blending psychology & philosophy then.

Now I'm curious. I'll take up the "Derrida for Beginners" & see what happens.
Rest assured there will be no subthread on PoMo for Dummies as a result
(well, maybe a few questions...)
Tom