Post-Structuralism
(Deconstruction)
As we
have seen in the previous topic on Structuralism… 'Things cannot be understood
in isolation…they should be understood as the part of the larger
structure they belong'…and also seen the examples…if we want to understand what
a chair is, we must know what a Table, sofa-set, bed, show-case etc is. It
means simply that the meaning is 'relational'…one object's meaning is dependent
upon the others. But have you noticed that the meaning is jumping from one
object to another…from Chair>Table>Bed>Sofa>Show-case>Furniture
and many more? Yes…it is transferring to other objects. If you want to
understand Chair…you must know Table. The Chair is a chair because it is not a
table. Black is black because it is not white, green or orange. So, the meaning
is transferring, jumping, and passing to the other objects. It's a kind of
'binary opposition'…one is one because it is not two. Till it is okay. But
here, the post-structuralist tries to find out the fault…and it leads to the
theory of 'Deconstruction.' How? Let's see.
As per
'the theory of relativity' by Einstein…the whole universe is moving. The Earth
is moving around the sun, the sun is moving with galaxies, millions of galaxies
are moving, and so is the universe. What we understand about 'time' and
'space' is 'relative.' Time – we count it with seconds, minutes, hours,
days, weeks, months, years, and ages and so on…but it is in relation. Space –
from millimeter to light years…again in relation. Why in relation…because not a
single thing in the universe is stable…everything is in motion…moving and
moving and moving. There is no 'fixed pole' in the universe to measure
the development…only to count in relation. The same thing is true of
Structuralism - the meaning is jumping and jumping and jumping. There is no fixed
pole to determine the true meaning of the objects. The Chair is a chair because
we understand it is not a Table, a Table is a table because it is not a bed
etc. etc. This is how we watch things. It makes a kind of structure in our
minds. But if we start to analyze minutely…this structure starts to
vanish…because we have no fixed pole that tells us the true meaning. We always
have to depend on something else. Now, move to language…Sign (word) and
Signifier (sound) and the object (Signified) are not the same. The word 'tree'
(t, r, e, e) doesn't mean the same…we have associated the meaning externally.
In different languages, the 'tree' is called with different pronunciations
('Ped' in Hindi, 'Zad' in Marathi and many more).
Pronunciations
or utterances or signifiers do not represent the objects (signified)…So,
there is no fixed pole to determine the meaning…and here the genuine problem
begins. The meaning started to soar or, say, float aimlessly…and pointing it or
fixing it in a particular structure becomes impossible. It is called
post-structuralism. Post-structuralism is a theory, while Deconstruction is
practice. When you start to find of the relation between Sign, Signifier and
Signified…it is not one-to-one…and still, we try our best to fix everything in
a structure…without a stable center or, say, a fixed pole. The result is
inevitable – D E C O N S T R U C T I ON…!
Now,
see the example (or mis-example) of Deconstruction. Take the famous quotes… 'My
luv is like a red rose that has sprung in June.' A structuralist finds it
as a love poem and starts to structuralize it. But post-structuralist
deconstructs the poem. How?
My Luv
is like a red rose. Take any word/phrase/idea from it. Okay.. we take 'rose.'
Rose is a flower…so the sunflower, lily, lotus, and many more. Flower plants
are different in their structure than the other plants. What are other
plants…description starts..???????? Okay. It is the red rose. There may be
yellow, white, blue and lavender-colored roses. Now, color and their
description start…???????? Then, the word 'red' is used two times. Why? Poetic
device…reinforcement of the objects…what are the other poetic
devices…description starts…?????? So it is a poem…love poem. There are also
other genres like novels, drama etc. description starts. Love poem…. poem of
war/person/incident….description starts. Now the grammatical structure of the
line….description starts…???????
Now
move to pronunciation…sign, Signifier and signified…it is different in
different languages…in Hindi, gualb, roza in Tamil…, the description
starts…???? Again, the word, its meaning and etymology (origin)…????
How can
you analyze a poem? How can you structuralize the poem? The meaning is jumping
and jumping and jumping, and there is no fixed center or pole to determine the
development. It's just like a Nuclear Chain Reaction. So, reading the
poem becomes chaos…it has been deconstructed. It is a kind of 'reading the text
against itself.'
You
lose the charm of the poem. None on Earth has read a single piece of literature
using the deconstruction method. Keep in mind that although Deconstruction is a
practice, it also has a philosophical base – in the writing of Foucault,
Derrida, Barthes, and many more post-structuralists.
No comments: