What is Derrida’s contribution to understanding postmodernism?
Thinking Sociologically
You may not use theory to understand your reality, but theory certainly uses you. Whether you are a teacher, principle, lecturer, student or simply curious, in this short EDDi section Dr Stephen Whitehead will answer common questions related to sociological theory.
All of his answers were originally published on Quora*. We offer these answers on EDDi in the hope you acquire some sociological insights into the 21st century.
Treat these articles as a healthy, and heavier, counter-point to all the lighter fluff which gets posted on social media.
Although Derrida didn’t lay claim to this intellectual label when he was writing and publishing his major works in the mid 1960’s, he can now be considered a strategic postmodernist (distinct, that is, from a radical postmodernist such as Baudrillard or a feminist postmodernist such as Nicholson).
The most famous strategic postmodernists are Derrida, Foucault and Lacan.
In common with all postmodernist theories, strategic postmodernism offers a critique of modernism. It directly attacks the totalising ideologies/discourses which arose under modernism and which were (physically and psychologically) forced upon the masses through ideologies such as Fascism and Communism.
Strategic postmodernism is also closely linked with poststructuralism in that it too denies the possibility of a grounded subject (core identity) and replaces that ‘identity’ with the Foucauldian discursive subject.
The key elements of strategic postmodernism are;
A conviction that language, or discourse, is fundamental to any understanding of humanity and the human.
A rejection of a universal centre to language, social thought, being.
Opposition to any ‘isms’ or ideological (modernist) thinking
Apolitical in the conventional sense of seeking to change the world ‘for the better’ as they see this as slipping back into modernism and totalitarian thinking
A rejection of modernism’s essentialist (and binary) thinking and being.
Derrida’s major contribution to strategic postmodernism was in the concept of ‘deconstruction’. By this is meant the elusive meanings which are contained in the spoken word and language.
For example, if I say a person is ‘gay’, what do I mean in truth?
Am I referring to their happy disposition or their sexual orientation? You cannot easily know unless you know the context for the speech. However, if I write about a person who is gay then no confusion arises because you’ve already read the context and it is therefore clear to you what I am referring to.
Derrida notes that modernity privileged speech over the written word to the point that we now prioritise what is said over what is written.
This has become a big problem for global society in the age of social media as our attention span has been reduced to a few seconds and we increasingly lack the patience to delve deeply into written communication. This leaves us open to over-simplifying that which is inevitably complex and multiple.
An example of this is the covid-19 pandemic.
How is it that politicians (e.g. Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro) could get away with rejecting all the science behind the pandemic and dismissing it via terms such as ‘fake news’, and ‘lies’. Many people chose to believe the spoken words of these modernist politicians rather than take the time to read the scientific (or even more informed) evidence.
The same problem has beset humanity’s attempt to address climate change.
Derrida would have had a great time deconstructing the language of Donald Trump especially, and would not been unduly surprised at the hypnotic effect it had on certain parts of the American population.
Just imagine, following Derridean theory, which politician would succeed in todays’ America if the Presidential contest were between Abraham Lincoln and Trump? Trump would rubbish the short Gettysburg Address very quickly, not by writing something as compelling, but by words spoken via mass media to an audience of millions, words which said nothing profound but which simply spoke to people’s innate prejudices and fears.
And then when questioned on his inflammatory words he’d say ‘sorry, you got me wrong, I didn’t mean that’.
When was the last time you read anything profound written by Trump?
No, you never have.
Partly because if he wrote anything he’d have to more fully explain himself. He would have to more clearly expose himself and his true intent.
For Derrida, Trump would the archetypal modernist politician, albeit one who utilises postmodern media to powerful effect.
Language, as discourse, gives meaning to the individual, informs identity, but language is also a temporal process (as is the individual). Meaning is never assured, never stable, never fixed, and always in a state of reinvention.
Derrida warns us not to be seduced by oratory and rhetoric; not to assume that what is spoken is meant as you interpret it; and not to build a world on the constantly shifting sands of human speech.
Everything spoken is subject to multiple interpretation.
When I speak you may like what you hear but you still have no idea who that speaking ‘I ‘really is or what they really are thinking.
Since 2017, Dr Stephen Whitehead has answered over 10,500 Quora questions, mostly on relationships, education, sociology, life and living, and philosophy. To date, his answers have received approximately 3.2 million views increasing at the rate 60,000 views a month. He has nearly 1,000 followers.
Stephen’s latest book (International Schooling: The Teacher’s Guide) is available via: teachabroad.ac.