Derrida’s Theory of Deconstruction: Plurality of Significance

French philosopher Jacques Derrida shows that text can be read as saying something quite different from what it appears to be saying, and that it may read as carrying a plurality of significance or as saying many different things which are fundamentally at variance with, contradictory to and subversive of what may be seen by criticism as a single, stable ‘meaning’. Thus, a text may ‘betray’ itself. A deconstructive criticism of a text revels that there is nothing except the text. In of Grammatology, Derrida makes the now well-known axial proposition that this is so (his key words are 'il n’y a rien hors due texte’, or alternatively, iln’y a pas de hors-texte’). That is, one can not evaluate criticism or construe a meaning for a text by reference to anything external to it.

Thus, Jacques Derrida's theory of deconstruction is a method of textual analysis that seeks to reveal the hidden meanings and contradictions within a text. Derrida argues that all texts are unstable and open to multiple interpretations, and that the meaning of a text is never fixed or definitive.

Derrida carries his logic still further to suggest that the language of any discourse is at variance with itself and, by so being is capable of being read as yet language. Derrida’s work focused on language. He contended that the traditional, or metaphysical, way of reading makes a number of false assumptions about the nature of texts. A traditional reader believes that language is capable of expressing ideas without changing them, that in the hierarchy of language writing is secondary to speech, and that the author of a text is the source of its meaning. Derrida's deconstructive style of reading subverted these assumptions and challenged the idea that a text has an unchanging, unified meaning.

Jacques Derrida

The internal stage of Derrida’s deconstructive theory is the contention that both speech and writing are signifying processes which lack ‘presence’. Derrida destabilizes and displaces the traditional ‘hierarchy’ (he calls it a ‘violent hierarchy’) of speech over writing to suggest that speech can only ever be subject to the same instabilities as writing; that speech and writing are forms of one science of language, grammatology. This is not a reversal of the priority, since Plato, of speech over writing but a displacement which produces a state of ‘indeterminacy’.Drawing on psychoanalysis and linguistics, Derrida questioned this traditional approach to texts and the assumption that speech is a clear and direct method of communication. As a result, he insisted, the author’s intentions in speaking cannot be unconditionally accepted. Derrida’s approach multiplied the number of legitimate interpretations of a text. Derrida did not negate meaning, but he showed that there were many possible meanings that depended on the reader and the reader’s context as much as on the author.

One of the key concepts in Derrida's deconstruction is the idea of différance. Différance is a neologism that Derrida coined to refer to the "play of difference" that is always at work in language. Différance is not simply difference, but rather the difference that makes meaning possible. It is the difference between the signifier (the word or sign) and the signified (the concept or meaning that the word or sign represents).

Derrida argues that différance is always deferred, meaning that it is never fully present or complete. This is because the meaning of a word or sign is always dependent on other words or signs. For example, the meaning of the word "cat" is not simply the animal itself, but also the difference between "cat" and other words, such as "dog" or "mouse".

The concept of différance leads to the idea of the undecidable. The undecidable is a term that Derrida uses to refer to the moments in a text where the meaning is ambiguous or uncertain. These moments are often the most revealing, as they point to the instability of meaning and the play of difference within the text.

Deconstruction is a complex and challenging theory, but it has had a significant impact on the study of literature and philosophy. It has been used to deconstruct a wide range of texts, from literary works to philosophical treatises. Deconstruction has also been used to challenge the traditional ways of thinking about language, meaning, and truth.

The plurality of significance is one of the key insights of deconstruction. Derrida argues that texts can be read in multiple ways, and that there is no single, definitive meaning. This is because texts are always open to interpretation, and the meaning of a text can change depending on the reader's perspective.

Deconstruction can be a helpful tool for understanding the complexity of texts and the multiple meanings that they can contain. It can also be used to challenge the traditional ways of thinking about language and meaning. However, deconstruction is not without its critics. Some people argue that it is too abstract and difficult to understand, and that it can lead to a relativist view of meaning.

Despite these criticisms, deconstruction remains an important and influential theory in the study of literature and philosophy. It has helped to challenge the traditional ways of thinking about language and meaning, and it has opened up new possibilities for interpretation.

Key Knowledge of Derrida's theory of deconstruction:

• All texts are unstable and open to multiple interpretations.
• The meaning of a text is never fixed or definitive.
• The meaning of a text is always dependent on other texts.
• The meaning of a text is always deferred, meaning that it is never fully present or complete.
• There are moments in a text where the meaning is ambiguous or uncertain, these are called the undecidables.
• Deconstruction can be used to challenge the traditional ways of thinking about language, meaning, and truth.
• Deconstruction can be a helpful tool for understanding the complexity of texts and the multiple meanings that they can contain.

Here are some examples of how deconstruction can be used to analyze a text:

• One could deconstruct a poem by looking at the way the poet uses language to create meaning. For example, one might focus on the use of metaphors, similes, and other figures of speech.
• One could deconstruct a novel by looking at the way the author constructs the plot, the characters, and the setting. For example, one might focus on the way the author uses symbolism or foreshadowing.
• One could deconstruct a philosophical treatise by looking at the way the philosopher uses language to argue their point. For example, one might focus on the way the philosopher uses binary oppositions or relies on assumptions.

 Comparative Study:  

1. Ferdinand de Saussure's insistence on arbitrariness of verbal signs.

2. Observations of Harold Bloom, J. Hillis Miller, Paul de Man, and Geoffrey Hartman.

3. Why controversial?

Ardhendu De

Ref: "Deconstruction." Britannica Student Library. Encyclopædia Britannica. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.