Discourse of human sciences

Name: Gohil Khanjaniba Mahipatsinh.

Roll No: 15.

Paper No: 7(Literary theory and criticism: The 20^th century Western poetics).

Unit No: 3.

Topic of an assignment: Derrida’s structure, sign and play in the discourse of human sciences.

Guided by: Dr.Dilip Barad.

Dedicated to: The Department of English,

          Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University,

          Bhavnagar.

              Introduction to Jacques Derrida

                        In the very beginning of Derrida’s structure, sign and play; he begins his argument with the word “Event” and he says that every ‘event’ is related or connected to the language in which writer is surrounded and he or she has use language as a tool.

             The New York Times argued that n its obituary for Derrida that “Structure, sign and play “, offered professors of literature a philosophical movement. Derrida has drawn criticism from Marxists such as Fredric Jameson who called deconstruction overly intellectual and distant from class struggles or class distinctions like lower middle class, upper class, and middle class. Derrida’s lecture at the university became a sign of post structuralism or it was beginning of the structuralism in the cities of United States. However some scholars have argued that his presentation has argued that it fits well with the current of radicalism developing in the United States.

Jacques Derrida is the spectacular success in the academic world although it requires some explanation. In other words we can say that when he argued structure sign and play he made his ideas and speech which he used in the lecture so that reader could not attempts that destination where he has been reached.

                     As in the beginning of the chapter Derrida gives his views for an event and he says that event is too loaded with meaning. Here I want to include my point that any event has its own context or content so how we can say that these events are mainly connected to philosophical ideas. However Derrida wants to report on something that happened, which is relevant to the concept of structure and he also allows events as a discussion. Any structure has old structure- its origin and cause.

                  In the next point Derrida says that there we can’t imagine structure without its center. Because it is the center from where thinkers starts thinking. Yes, we could not think without having any point but to begin thinking process we needs backward points as well, or we can use the word for this ‘reenergizing’.

                                Derrida demonstrates how structuralism as represented by the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss who sets out as a criticism or rejection of science and metaphysics. So that at the end of the essay we can conclude that interpretations of interpretations, of structure, of sign and of free play. Levy Strauss discovered a scandalous paradox inherent in the nature or culture opposition.

                                             Levis Strauss has made structuralism very popular. Generally structuralism means science and metaphysics. The center is paradoxically within the structure and outside the structure. The totality has its center. As interpretation of interpretation, of structure, of play, and of free play; one seeks to decipher, dreams of deciphering a truth or an origin which is free from play and from the order of the sign. When we puts force over free play it degenerates free signs and meaning in the structure.

             The other which no longer turned toward the origin, affirms free play and tries to pass beyond man and humanism. Thus the different kind of meaning is arises in the viewer's mind and it creates intrinsic to the structure of the language. Sometimes language in itself becomes more and more complex and we could not riches to the truth thus the language should not create any complexity. This apporia happens between two interpretations is due to force of difference intrinsic to the structure of the language. Thus here de-centering of the center makes curiosity in the play. That is it makes language characteristically 'centrifugal' and we mean by this moving away from the center by scattering of the philosophical system or by its dissemination into multiple or conflicting interpretations. Meaning is a product of language. Derrida also says that reinvent of the language ha has to rethink and he describes phonocentrism is a manifestation of logo centrism. It is the rethinking of the thinkers over the foundations of the westerns. Derrrida believes in the mode of an existence.

                  Presence is here superior and the absence of the play wrights is an inferior part of the thing. As logo centrism and felegocentrism are taken from Heidegger ha talks about western philosophy that how it was built? There we could see the positivity of the language. For example that if we minutely observe the good and evil facts we will absolutely find out the marginalization of these two groups. Privileged is logo. Another example is that man. When we interprets views of man and woman their woman is found as an inferior or we can say that their we can find out the facts of Felegocentrism. Here we can say that Bias is deeply structured in our minds and reflects its presence with the help of language. This language gives us a world view. What is written? - is becomes important because it is a static knowledge and was written as a part of truth, but it has different meaning also.

                  When reads a play we came to know the event which is presented to us in the form of the words but those words are sometimes proves to be as false then the writer of the event has to clarify that he wants to say this not that what you takes from the text. If there is any query in the play so writer has to clarify those difficulties, although many times it happens that the writer could not explain well what he want to say? in the text and it happens that may be writer is not alive so this is the limitation of the Free play according to the theory of Jacques Derrida.

                 But in the free play of the signs it happens that in the circle it spread out of the circle from the center and the reader becomes curious about that because it also covers up the outside of the circle or the book. In another case we can say that periphery becomes center and center becomes periphery and it is came across with the help of facts that makes center to periphery and periphery to center. These are the main differences in Jacques Derrida's structure, sign and free play of meaning.