NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... es itself to be superior to other cultures or religions in the name of post-modern thinking that theorise's Islam as just another Master Narrative (Appignanesi and Garrett 1995: 157). I am in danger here of over-simplifying a political situation that has a complex history and digresses from my focus on Derrida but it seems relevant to this discussion of de centring, Derrida and hypertext. The relevance is connected to doubt about the centre, about absolute truth and boundaries between fiction (Rushdies book and Derrida's autobiographical writing) and history (apostasy against Islam and Derrida's account of his lived-experience).
De centring and repenting are notable features of a hyper textual reading experience; the ideal of a unitary text is atomized because there is no fixed ending, which explodes the authoritative myth of the text as the embodiment of truth. Ted Nelson, who first applied the term hypertext in the 1960 s, suggests that: There is no final word. There can be no final version, no last thought. There is always a new view, a new idea, a reinterpretation (cited in Delaney and Landow 1994: 58). This highlights an appealing aspect of hypertext; in its potential to link all texts it could be argued that the reader assumes a more democratic position. The understanding of a work shifts into a new and ever-changing paradigm.
Arguably the same principles apply to the printed text but there is a distinct difference. Assembling any number of bound texts for referral and cross-reference, the reader never loses sight of what is inside the main text and what is outside. Hypertext creates meta texts, a form of hypertextuality where the boundaries of what is inside or outside, no longer apply (Landow 1993: 42). It is this area that forms a convergence with elements of Derrida's work and arguably, makes the presence of Christian and Judaic references in Circumfession, less surprising and less seemingly incongruent.
If there is no final word (which problematises a beginning) then God with reference to Christianity, Judaism or Rushdies gloss on the Islamic faith, loses the centre that gives it authority within the notion of a primary text. God can no longer be upheld (in the bible, the Torah or the Quran) as the first and last words spoken by the highest authority because there is always a reinterpretation and there is never a signified that refers only to itself (Bennington 1993: 78 - 79). This still leaves unanswered questions, which would be impossible to explore fully in this paper. If there is always a reinterpretation then it seems necessary to ask who is doing the reinterpreting, what is being reinterpreted and what motives drive this need to deconstruct someone elses faith? George Landow discusses the many parallels between hypertext and critical theory and the possibilities that hypertext offers as a system that might theorise or concretely exemplify the abstracts of critical theory (ibid. : 3).
Feminism, in any shape or form, is absent in Landow's writing on hypertext, which is curious because I find it difficult to contemplate Derrida and hypertext without recourse to feminism. This statement is predicated on my understanding of the Derridean term difference. This term highlights the possibilities for play in the written word, which are more difficult to discern with speech. Derrida traces a circular movement in his analysis of difference (1982: 12), which discourages an active / passive metaphorisation. He uses the word sheaf (ibid. : 3) to refer to threads or weaving of different meanings, which does not seem dissimilar to the idea of a hyper textual experience or primitively, the WWW.
This describes the ability to make connections with others (ibid. ) or move out in a new direction. Writing is privileged in this Derridean construct by its superior ability to convey difference in the graphical act of writing (ibid. : 5). The e and a that differentiate the French terms difference and difference can only be viewed and remain indistinguishable audibly. Difference is neither a word nor a concept (1982: 3); it refers to to defer (postpone) and to differ (dissimilar). The difference between difference and difference is not a difference that can be conceived either intelligibly or through the senses (ibid. : 5 n. 3). The difference of the a in difference cannot be exposed (ibid. : 5) because the term refers to the trace of difference that takes a circular route and brings us back to a point that has been deferred a place that still poses the impossibility of establishing a secure foundation or starting point for the origin of presence and meaning.
The trace (of the trace of the trace) refers to absence but it also refers to presence because for something to be known or understood, it requires the presence and absence of other elements in order to provide differentiation and thus signify within a system of difference (Bennington 1993: 74 - 75). Derrida emphasises the significance of play in discourse and the way in which play can destabilize presence; he suggests that play can be conceived radically as prior to absence and presence (1997: 292). I would like to play with the radical notion of play in Derrida's text and relate the discourse that I have constructed thus far to sexual difference and Circumfession. In order to begin this play, I will suggest that the work undertaken so far is a deconstructive exercise. The work that I am about to commence should be viewed as a form of reconstruction.
Reconstruction in this paper is offered as a methodology that I will call reconstruct-ion and is fabricated from the verb reconstruct, implying action and hyphenated with ion to form a noun. By semantic definition, reconstruct-ion embodies the dynamics of reconstruct defined as to construct again; to rebuild; to remodel; to restore in imagination or theory with the naming noun reconstruction defined as reorganisation; a theoretical representation or view of something unknown (Chambers Dictionary CD-ROM: 1997). Computer language, which enables hypertext to exist, is essentially sexed in terms of reconstruct-ion. Let me explain this statement.
The binary codes of 0 and 1 that form computer language is paradigmatic ally simple (a unit of two) but enable an infinite number of syntaxes (O Sullivan et al. 1994: 44). These syntaxes are not readily discernible in binary form but require an interpretative operation that positions readable marks (signs, script and numbers) on the screen. These binary codes provide a system of difference that is interpreted and subsequently functions as the foundation for everything that follows in my computer system. The binary codes, however, are not the beginning or origin because the computer cannot be operated without an energy source. This source could be described as a trace because the trace of the trace originates from a national source which in turn has an origin in fossil fuels or some other means to produce the power that has enabled me to boot-up my computer. The trace of the trace of the trace will bring us back to the question of what is and where did it come from?
The relevance of this reconstruct-ion to sexual difference relates to a subversion of the binary opposition between men and women where phallogocentrism privileges the masculine over the feminine (Bennington 1993: 206). In computer binary codes, 0 cannot signify without 1 and vice-versa they are not hierarchically differentiated because they both have no meaning without the other. They exist equally within the same paradigm and without the binary opposition of culture / nature that might try to secure the position of man / woman by privileging the first term over the second. One of the main components that enables my computer to function and run its numerous programs rests on the health of the motherboard. Without this essential component I would be unable to activate and drive my system.
The motherboard is the bottom or foundation of my interaction with high and low technology (assuming that there are no power cuts). It is this point which returns this paper to Derrida and the primary text that preoccupies my exploration. Derrida...
Free research essays on topics related to: trace, final word, critical theory, computer language, binary opposition
Research essay sample on Binary Opposition Critical Theory
