Postructuralists and their discontents
On P.44 of Grusin's article "What Is an Electronic Author?", he states that Derrida claims that the "concepts of the trace suggest that the contents of the mind or the spoken word are no less forms of writing for their spatial fragility and temporal simultaneity." He then makes the claim that "for Derrida, writing is always a technology and already electronic." While it may seem typical of deconstructionist to make such a claim, it is relatively hard to believe? Does Derrida actually believe that the distinction between the "sign" of a written text and that of electronic media has the same characteristics, thus negating the fact that electronic media conveys information in any new way?
One of my frustrations with a lot of deconstructionist theory is that it seems to embody a sort of nihilistic approach to almost everything. Thus, I have to agree with Poster because of its "failure to provide a politically useful contribution." I do agree that while Landow and Bolter may not provide the ultimate characterization, it provides a commentary with some truthful observation about the nature of technology. In our post-modernist age, what can anything be but a commentary?
Comments
Posted by: Steven Streight aka Vaspers the Grate
Posted on: February 20, 2007 11:43 AM
Derrida and deconstruction are the very opposite of "nihilistic", in my view. Derrida is affirming the supremacy of writing over speech. Speech depends on the physical presence of the speaker and audience, generally.
Derrida asserts that writing has been marginalized, persecuted, and demoted by most of Western metaphysics.
Now science speaks of DNA being code that is "written" into life forms, and of "code" being "written" in cosmic phenomena, etc.
I wish someone would compile all Derrida's writings on technlogy, email, internet, etc. so we could really peer into this topic.
Thank you for addressing these issues here!
;^)