Page 104 - DENG501_LITERARY_CRITICISM_AND_THEORIES

Literary Criticism and Theories

Notes This leads Derrida to his theory of the bricoleur inspired from Levi Strauss. He argues that it is
very difficult to arrive at a conceptual position "outside of philosophy", to not be absorbed to some
extent into the very theory that one seeks to critique. He therefore insists on Strauss's idea of a
bricolage, "the necessity of borrowing one's concept from the text of a heritage which is more or
less coherent or ruined, it must be said that every discourse is bricoleur." It is thereby important
to use these 'tools at hand' through intricate mechanisms and networks of subversion. For instance,
although Strauss discovered the scandal, he continued to use sometimes the binary opposition of
nature and culture as a methodological tool and to preserve as an instrument that those truth
value he criticizes, "The opposition between nature and culture which I have previously insisted
on seems today to offer a value which is above all methodological." Strauss discusses bricolage not
only as an intellectual exercise, but also as "mythopoetical activity". He attempts to work out a
structured study of myths, but realizes this is not a possibility, and instead creates what he calls
his own myth of the mythologies, a 'third order code'. Derrida points out how his 'reference myth'
of the Bororo myth, does not hold in terms of its functionality as a reference, as this choice
becomes arbitrary and also instead of being dependent on typical character, it derives from
irregularity and hence concludes, "that violence which consists in centering a language which is
describing an acentric structure must be avoided".
Derrida still building on Strauss's work, introduces the concept of totalization - "Totalization is….
at one time as useless, at another time as impossible". In traditional conceptualization, totalization
cannot happen as there is always too much one can say and even more that exists which needs to
be talked/written about. However, Derrida argues that non-totalization needs to conceptualized
not the basis of finitude of discourse incapable of mastering an infinite richness, but along the
concept of free-play - "If totalization no longer has any meaning, it is not because the infinity of a
field cannot be covered by a finite glance or a finite discourse, but because the nature of the field-
that is, language and a finite language-excludes totalization." It is finite language which excludes
totalization as language is made up of infinite signifier and signified functioning inter-changeably
and arbitrarily, thereby opening up possibilities for infinite play and substitution. The field of
language is limiting, however, there cannot be a finite discourse limiting that field.
Derrida explains the possibility of this free play through the concept of "supplementality" - "this
movement of the free play, permitted by the lack, the absence of a center or origin, is the movement
of supplementarily. One cannot determine the center, the sign which supplements it, which takes
its place in its absence-because this sign adds itself, occurs in addition, over and above, comes as
a supplement". Supplementality is thus involves infinite substitutions of the centre which is an
absence which leads to the movement of play. This becomes possible because of the lack in the
signified. There is always an overabundance of the signifier to the signified. So a supplement
would hence be an addition to what the signified means for already. Derrida also introduces the
concept of how this meaning is always deferred (difference), how signifier and signified are inter-
changeable in a complex network of free-play.
This concept of free-play Derrida believes also stands in tension with history. Although history
was thought as a critique of the philosophy of presence, as a kind of shift; it has paradoxically
become complicitous "with a teleological and scatological metaphysics." Free-play also stands in
conflict with presence. Play is disruption of presence. Free play is always interplay of presence
and absence. However, Derrida argues that a radical approach would not be the taking of presence
or absence as ground for play. Instead the possibility of play should be the premise for presence
or absence.
Derrida concludes this seminal work which is often regarded as the post-structuralist manifesto
with the hope that we proceed towards an "interpretation of interpretation" where one "is no
longer turned towards the origin, affirms freeplay and tries to pass beyond man and humanism".
He says that we need to borrow Nietzsche's idea of affirmation to stop seeing play as limiting and
negative. Nietzsche pronouncement "God is dead" need not be read as a destruction of a cohesive
structure, but can be seen as a chance that opens up a possibility of diverse plurality and multiplicity.

98 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY