Deconstruction for Beginners

For Beginners

by James N. Powell, Joe Lee (Illustrator)

Deconstruction is so labyrinthine that it has become the monster that murdered philosophy. When Jacques Derrida, the father of deconstruction, uses buzzwords such as “phallogocentrism” and “transcendental signified,” humanities students and aspiring philosophers may get weak in the knees.
Following the success of his For Beginners title Derrida, Jim Powell’s Deconstruction is an irreverent romp through deconstructive domains. Though Powell offers lucid explanations of the most important deconstructive ideas and texts, he also dives into lesser-known works. One of these, The Right to Look, finds Derrida offering his thoughts on a photo-novella consisting of images of women making love with each other. Powell then goes on to explore how deconstruction has escaped Derrida, especially in the realm of architecture. Then, based on Derrida’s assertion that deconstruction happens differently in different cultures, Powell examines how – through Buddhism and Taoism – deconstruction took place in ancient India, Japan, and China.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Criticism, Graphic Novels

168 pages, Paperback

First published July 28, 2005

About the author

~ New York Times

Most people think they use language to communicate. But language is insidious; it determines the way we think. Modern philosophers say we live in a universe limited by our language. Ludwig Wittgenstein even said we were ''bewitched.'' James Powell goes a little further. He examines the symbols of language the way a biologist examines cells. By inquiring into the nature of symbols themselves, he hopes to show the transcendental capacity of language not for mere communication but for ''communion.'' He assures us that the universe is a silent partner in a dialogue that goes on all the time and that throughout history certain images and techniques of meditation have led consciousness to break through the limitations of language.

Mr. Powell argues that we tend to underestimate the volatility of symbols. In world politics, we can easily see the danger of a breakdown in communication. When one world of meaning has no reality for the other, dialogue stops, sometimes violently. If the breakdown is taken as a failure in communication, in which each side sees the other as willfully irrational, the result is explosive. If, however, the failure is seen as a collision of symbol systems, each of which has absolute internal reality, then dialogue may be pursued with a different understanding. 'The Tao of Symbols is Mr. Powell's attempt to bring occupants of different worlds together (Buddhist and Moslem, scientist and sage) and to suggest the basis for a new kind of dialogue.

Some Suggestions for Interreligious Dialog



In addition to his published works, Jim Powell collaborated with Imogen Cunningham on a photographically illustrated translation of the verse of St. John of the Cross. James Powell: As a boy, James’s chores included keeping coyotes out of the chickens, riding fence, branding, milking, and harvesting. Since then, his jobs have changed quite a bit. He cut line for Smokey on many western wildfires–working winters surveying and building trails, while gradually awakening to Chumash and Vedic wisdom of fire ecology.

James has also taught meditation around the world, including to Michael Jackson's Neverland staff, Beach Boy Mike Love’s family, and Lithuanian-born archeologist Marija Gimbutas. The California meditation center he chaired for ten years provided ongoing instruction for over ten thousand Santa Barbarans. What’s more, he was Ayurvedic consultant to Deepak Chopra and Arianna Huffington at the Center for Perfect Health–which he co-founded–with Deepak's lectures drawing audiences of over 1,000. He collaborated with Group f/64 photographer Imogen Cunningham on a photographically interpreted book of his translations of the verse of Spanish mystic San Juan de la Cruz. The project was under consideration at various publishing houses when Imogen passed away.


Prologues to What Is Possible

1.

There was an ease of mind that was like being alone in a boat at sea,

A boat carried forward by waves resembling the bright backs of rowers,

Gripping their oars, as if they were sure of the way to their destination,

Bending over and pulling themselves erect on the wooden handles,

Wet with water and sparkling in the one-ness of their motion.



The boat was built of stones that had lost their weight and being

no longer heavy

Had left in them only a brilliance, of unaccustomed origin,

So that he that stood up in the boat leaning and looking before him

Did not pass like someone voyaging out of and beyond the familiar.

He belonged to the far-foreign departure of his vessel and was part of it,

Part of the speculum of fire on its

Reviews

[Benoit Lelièvre · Rating 3 out of 5]

Slightly disappointed. The book gets its point across, but this is very much a skippable book if you've read Derrida for Beginners (which I did). It explains deconstruction in similar terms in there and does it better. In "Derrida", Powell goes over every basic term of deconstruction and how they go interact together and goes over hypothetical questions a reader would have as he goes along. "Deconstruction" is illustrated as a discussion between a coyote, Mark Twain, a Derrida reader, Derrida a sex-crazed Buddhist icon and many others. It goes over many of the same concept, yet it doesn't have the satisfying methodology of its predecessor. Too bad, I was expecting a lot out of this one, but it didn't add much to what I've learned from the enlightening Derrida for Beginners. A little, but not much.

[Joe · Rating 3 out of 5]

When did we stop agreeing on definitions as a society? Why can't we agree on what we're even arguing about any more? Why aren't there any 'facts' anymore? To that I say (with tongue only slightly in cheek) you can blame "Deconstruction."

Here's what I got from this: According to Deconstruction, there isn't much that means anything. An example: If you hear the person delivering your mail say 'I'm a mail man' do they mean they are a letter carrier or a very, very male person? But Joe, I would just use context to decide. Ah yes, Deconstruction would say, but then you must deconstruct that context. Down and down we go into the rabbit hole until everything is gibberish and nonsense and no one can agree on anything.

It seems to me that the best us of Deconstruction is as a sword, not a shield. It allows the aggressor to say "your argument means nothing because you're relying on sexist/racist/marxist/etc. language so that invalidates everything that comes after it."

One of my biggest frustrations in this modern era is refusing to believe that there is "objective good." The purpose of many philosophical movements is to discover this objective good, i.e. Is murder wrong? Which religion is correct? Is Cilantro delicious or gross? Deconstruction seems to exist to tear these "truths" down.

To an extent, Deconstruction is necessary and refreshing. So much of our learning and history is build upon presumptions that favor the historian. If Germany had won WWII, let's just say the books would be a little different these days. I don't necessarily think Deconstruction says objective good doesn't exist, I think it just makes it very difficult to define what that is.

I enjoy Deconstruction because it forces the person who is presenting an idea to go back to basic principles. I could see this being a particularly useful tool between two people arguing about pro life/pro choice. That's one of those arguments that definitions matter and both sides play pretty fast and loose with them.

All in all, I'm glad I read this book, although I don't see myself becoming a "Deconstruction Disciple" any time soon.

[Dawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very descriptive book on this subject that someone can start to study Derrida's foremost rigorous theory on Deconstruction.

where deconstruction become something affordable in its literal form is this allegorical comic nature is very rarely we find in this manner to get some clear idea of key concepts of Derrida's work.


i would highly recommend this book for anyone who is keen and curious about deconstruction study.

[Sandy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Too general even for a comic type book dialogue moved at a snail's pace.
Maybe good for freshman in high school.

[Nicholas · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very entertaining overview of Derrida's deconstructivism and its relation to Buddhism and Zen.

[Cedjap · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wala pa rin akong alam.

[Lucas]

xxxxx

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Would have been 4/5, but I can't get past how ridiculously chauvinistic all the examples are.

[Ray Zimmerman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kingfisher splashes
The pond a serene mirror
silver fish flies away