From: ajit sinha (sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM)
Date: Fri Nov 12 2004 - 02:56:04 EST
I think he is referring to an Interview with Michael Sprinker, which was published in a book edited by him. I don't remember the title of the book now. Actually, if I remember it correctly, in that interview Derrida had said that Althusser and the Althusserians were the only Marxists he could have a conversation with, rest of the Marxists he characterised as "retards"! Cheers, ajit sinha --- glevy@PRATT.EDU wrote: > Does anyone know where and when the interview with > Derrida in > which, according to Callincos, he said that "he was > intimidated by > the dogmatism of Althusser and his pupils" was > published? > > In solidarity, Jerry > > > >Socialist Review > >November 2004 > > > >Obituary: The Infinite Search > > > >Feature Article by Alex Callinicos, November 2004 > > > >There is much to celebrate in the work of the > French philosopher Jacques > Derrida, says Alex Callinicos. > >The death last month of Jacques Derrida at the age > of 74 removed the last > of that succession of great French intellectuals > whose writings > decisively shaped avant-garde thinking in the west > during the second > half of the 20th century. Derrida first burst onto > the philosophical > scene in 1967, with the publication of no less than > three books. > >Like other French thinkers of his generation he was > strongly influenced > by the theory of language developed by the Swiss > linguist Ferdinand de > Saussure. Saussure argued that language is composed > of signs and that > each sign is a combination of signifier (a sound or > mark) and signified > (the meaning of the sign). But he also claimed that > signs gain their > meanings through the differences between > signifiers. Thus the sound > shift from 'mat' to 'cat' produces a fundamental > difference of meaning. > 'In language there are only differences,' Saussure > wrote. > >One implication was that it is best to think of > language as a > >self-enclosed system in which the important > relationships are not those > between words and the real objects to which they > refer, but rather those > internal to language and consisting in the > interrelations of signifiers. > In France in the 1960s this led to what came to be > known as > structuralism. As practised by Claude Lévi-Strauss > or Roland Barthes, > for example, this involved treating a 'primitive' > society or Paris > fashions as a coherent system whose meaning could > be decoded as if it > were a language. > >Subversion > >Derrida sought to subvert structuralism. He pointed > out that if > signifiers acquire meaning through their > differences from one another, > there is no reason why this process shouldn't go on > for ever. Each > signifier points to a signified, its meaning, that > is itself another > signifier, and so on ad infinitum. There is no > stable halting point in > language, but only what Derrida called 'infinite > play', the endless > slippages through which meaning is sought but never > found. > >The only way to stop this play of difference would > be if there were what > Derrida called a 'transcendental signified' - a > meaning that exists > outside language and that therefore isn't liable to > this constant process > of subversion inherent in signification. But the > transcendental > signified is nothing but an illusion, sustained by > the 'metaphysics of > presence', the belief at the heart of the western > philosophical > tradition that we can gain direct access to the > world independently of > the different ways in which we talk about and act > on it. With this > argument what came to be known as > post-structuralism first took shape. > >Derrida's most famous saying must be understood in > this context. It was > translated into English (rather misleadingly) as, > 'There is nothing > outside the text.' In fact, Derrida wasn't, like > some ultra-idealist, > reducing everything to language (in the French > original he actually wrote > 'Il n'y a pas de hors-texte' - 'There is no > outside-text'). Rather he > was saying that once you see language as a constant > movement of > differences in which there is no stable resting > point, you can no longer > appeal to reality as a refuge independent of > language. Everything > acquires the instability and ambiguity that Derrida > claimed to be > inherent in language. This applied also to what had > been the foundation > of European philosophy since the 17th century - the > individual human > subject. One variation, according to Derrida, of > the metaphysics of > presence was René Descartes' idea that the > individual subject is > 'self-present', having direct access to the > contents of his > consciousness. Like his French contemporaries, > Derrida was profoundly > influenced by Freud's discovery of the unconscious, > and by the > implication that the subject isn't even in control > of his own mind. > Derrida's intervention took place in the lead-up to > the great explosion > of 1968, a moment of growing politicisation. Louis > Althusser's attempt > to reinterpret Marx along 'anti-humanist' lines > that denied the > importance of individual or collective subjects was > then nearing the > height of its influence. Derrida was friendly with > Althusser, with whom > for many years he taught philosophy at the Ecole > Normale Supérieure in > Paris. > > > >But he remained silent about Marx and Marxism till > the 1990s. In a later > interview he explained that he was intimidated by > the dogmatism of > Althusser and his pupils. Moreover, as an > anti-Stalinist he was afraid > that if he openly criticised the Soviet Union and > the French Communist > Party, which then dominated the left, he would be > identified with the > right. This doesn't mean that Derrida's philosophy > was purely apolitical. > Of Jewish origin, he was born in Algeria in 1930. > Brought up under > French colonial rule and expelled from school under > the Vichy regime, he > always felt himself to be an outsider. > >He saw his critique of some of the central concepts > of the western > philosophical tradition as subverting the > Eurocentric view of the world > that a few years later Edward Said, another intruder > into the > metropolitan academy from the Arab world, was to > denounce in his famous > book > >Orientalism. By decentring language and the > subject, Derrida hoped to > open a space in which the marginalised and excluded > - women, blacks, the > colonised - could speak for themselves. > >Like Said, Derrida didn't advocate simply rejecting > the western > tradition. He believed that it was impossible to > escape the metaphysics > of presence. Meaning in the shape of the > 'transcendental signified' may > be an illusion, but it is a necessary illusion. > Derrida summed this > tension up by inventing the word 'differance', > which combines the > meanings of 'differ' and 'defer'. Language is a > play of differences in > which meaning is endlessly deferred, but constantly > posed. > >Full: > http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9101 > > --------------------------------- Socialist Review November 2004 Obituary: The Infinite Search Feature Article by Alex Callinicos, November 2004 There is much to celebrate in the work of the French philosopherJacques Derrida, says Alex Callinicos. The death last month of Jacques Derrida at the age of 74 removed the lastof that succession of great French intellectuals whose writingsdecisively shaped avant-garde thinking in the west during the second halfof the 20th century. Derrida first burst onto the philosophical scene in1967, with the publication of no less than three books. Like other French thinkers of his generation he was strongly influencedby the theory of language developed by the Swiss linguist Ferdinand deSaussure. Saussure argued that language is composed of signs and thateach sign is a combination of signifier (a sound or mark) and signified(the meaning of the sign). But he also claimed that signs gain theirmeanings through the differences between signifiers. Thus the sound shiftfrom 'mat' to 'cat' produces a fundamental difference of meaning. 'Inlanguage there are only differences,' Saussure wrote. One implication was that it is best to think of language as aself-enclosed system in which the important relationships are not thosebetween words and the real objects to which they refer, but rather thoseinternal to language and consisting in the interrelations of signifiers.In France in the 1960s this led to what came to be known asstructuralism. As practised by Claude Lévi-Strauss or Roland Barthes, forexample, this involved treating a 'primitive' society or Paris fashionsas a coherent system whose meaning could be decoded as if it were alanguage. Subversion Derrida sought to subvert structuralism. He pointed out that ifsignifiers acquire meaning through their differences from one another,there is no reason why this process shouldn't go on for ever. Eachsignifier points to a signified, its meaning, that is itself anothersignifier, and so on ad infinitum. There is no stable halting point inlanguage, but only what Derrida called 'infinite play', the endlessslippages through which meaning is sought but never found. The only way to stop this play of difference would be if there were whatDerrida called a 'transcendental signified' - a meaning that existsoutside language and that therefore isn't liable to this constant processof subversion inherent in signification. But the transcendental signifiedis nothing but an illusion, sustained by the 'metaphysics of presence',the belief at the heart of the western philosophical tradition that wecan gain direct access to the world independently of the different waysin which we talk about and act on it. With this argument what came to beknown as post-structuralism first took shape. Derrida's most famous saying must be understood in this context. It wastranslated into English (rather misleadingly) as, 'There is nothingoutside the text.' In fact, Derrida wasn't, like some ultra-idealist,reducing everything to language (in the French original he actually wrote'Il n'y a pas de hors-texte' - 'There is no outside-text'). Rather he wassaying that once you see language as a constant movement of differencesin which there is no stable resting point, you can no longer appeal toreality as a refuge independent of language. Everything acquires theinstability and ambiguity that Derrida claimed to be inherent inlanguage. This applied also to what had been the foundation of European philosophysince the 17th century - the individual human subject. One variation,according to Derrida, of the metaphysics of presence was René Descartes'idea that the individual subject is 'self-present', having direct accessto the contents of his consciousness. Like his French contemporaries,Derrida was profoundly influenced by Freud's discovery of theunconscious, and by the implication that the subject isn't even incontrol of his own mind. Derrida's intervention took place in the lead-up to the great explosionof 1968, a moment of growing politicisation. Louis Althusser's attempt toreinterpret Marx along 'anti-humanist' lines that denied the importanceof individual or collective subjects was then nearing the height of itsinfluence. Derrida was friendly with Althusser, with whom for many yearshe taught philosophy at the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris. But he remained silent about Marx and Marxism till the 1990s. In a laterinterview he explained that he was intimidated by the dogmatism ofAlthusser and his pupils. Moreover, as an anti-Stalinist he was afraidthat if he openly criticised the Soviet Union and the French CommunistParty, which then dominated the left, he would be identified with theright. This doesn't mean that Derrida's philosophy was purely apolitical. OfJewish origin, he was born in Algeria in 1930. Brought up under Frenchcolonial rule and expelled from school under the Vichy regime, he alwaysfelt himself to be an outsider. He saw his critique of some of the central concepts of the westernphilosophical tradition as subverting the Eurocentric view of the worldthat a few years later Edward Said, another intruder into themetropolitan academy from the Arab world, was to denounce in his famousbook Orientalism. By decentring language and the subject, Derridahoped to open a space in which the marginalised and excluded - women,blacks, the colonised - could speak for themselves. Like Said, Derrida didn't advocate simply rejecting the westerntradition. He believed that it was impossible to escape the metaphysicsof presence. Meaning in the shape of the 'transcendental signified' maybe an illusion, but it is a necessary illusion. Derrida summed thistension up by inventing the word 'differance', which combines themeanings of 'differ' and 'defer'. Language is a play of differences inwhich meaning is endlessly deferred, but constantly posed. Full:http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9101 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 13 2004 - 00:00:01 EST