Deconstruction Quotes

“I always dream of a pen that would be a syringe.”
― Jacques Derrida, Jacques Derrida

“Man may feel like a feeble and powerless pawn, at some moment in his life. This apprehension can come out of the blue, in the middle of the day, at the center of a public place, like a cerebral attack. Check mated by 'daily routine', he may feel trapped in a smothering set of circumstances and only a deconstruction of all impeding barriers can bring about a vital mental deliverance. ( "Check and mate" )”
― Erik Pevernagie

“An insipid voice message or an incongruent emergence from the “other” world may disrupt our whole thinking system. If we are not able to deal with the fragmentation of our self and assess the deconstruction of our identity, a corny incident could easily capsize our being. A misinterpretation of facts and expectations may perturb our awareness and unsettle our perception. When “I” and “me” don’t get along very well, the road to oneness may be very often bumpy. (“Alors, tout a basculé”)”
― Erik Pevernagie

“Happiness is a flow between a playful construction and a painful deconstruction, undulating from a hampering past into a liberating 'now,' escorting a meandering flood of twists and turns, caressing the velvet sand of dreamy beaches or smashing sometimes into the rocks of reality. ("New York at arm's length of desire")”
― Erik Pevernagie, Words of Wisdom: Selected and illustrated by his readers

“Love is a stage door to happiness. Happiness is a delicate dance between opposites: construction and deconstruction, peace and struggle, permanence and fleeting moments. (Love, Happiness, and Insight)”
― Erik Pevernagie

“A text is not a text unless it hides from the first comer, from the first glance, the law of its composition and the rules of its game. A text remains, moreover, forever imperceptible. Its laws and rules are not, however, harbored in the inaccessibility of a secret; it is simply that they can never be booked, in the present, into anything that could rigorously be called a perception.”
― Jacques Derrida, Dissemination

“I would see
one man fallen off me
shambling down the street.”
― Suman Pokhrel

“Every sign, linguistic or nonlinguistic, spoken or written (in the usual sense of this opposition), as a small or large unity, can be cited, put between quotation marks; thereby it can break with every given context, and engender infinitely new contexts in an absolutely nonsaturable fashion. This does not suppose that the mark is valid outside its context, but on the contrary that there are only contexts without any center of absolute anchoring. This citationality, duplication, or duplicity, this iterability of the mark is not an accident or anomaly, but is that (normal/abnormal) without which a mark could no longer even have a so-called “normal” functioning. What would a mark be that one could not cite? And whose origin could not be lost on the way?”
― Jacques Derrida, Margins of Philosophy

“Therefore we will not listen to the source itself in order to learn what it is or what it means, but rather to the turns of speech, the allegories, figures, metaphors, as you will, into which the source has deviated, in order to lose it or rediscover it—which always amounts to the same.”
― Jacques Derrida

“But because me and myself, as you no doubt are well aware, we are going to die, my relation—and yours too—to the event of this text, which otherwise never quite makes it, our relation is that of a structurally posthumous necessity.
Suppose, in that case, that I am not alone in my claim to know the idiomatic code (whose notion itself is already contradictory) of this event. What if somewhere, here or there, there are shares in this non-secret’s secret? Even so the scene would not be changed. The accomplices, as you are once again well aware, are also bound to die.”
― Jacques Derrida, Spurs: Nietzsche's Styles/Éperons: Les Styles de Nietzsche

“To express nostalgia for a childhood we no longer share is to deny the actual significance and humanity of children.”
― Perry Nodelman

“It goes without saying that these effects do not suffice to annul the necessity for a “change of terrain.” It also goes without saying that the choice between these two forms of deconstruction cannot be simple and unique. A new writing must weave and interlace these two motifs of deconstruction. Which amounts to saying that one must speak several languages and produce several texts at once. I would like to point out especially that the style of the first deconstruction is mostly that of the Heideggerian questions, and the other is mostly the one which dominates France today. I am purposely speaking in terms of a dominant style: because there are also breaks and changes of terrain in texts of the Heideggerian type; because the “change of terrain” is far from upsetting the entire French landscape to which I am referring; because what we need, perhaps, as Nietzsche said, is a change of “style”; and if there is style, Nietzsche reminded us, it must be plural.”
― Jacques Derrida, Margins of Philosophy

“Let us being again. To take some examples: why should “literature” still designate that which already breaks away from literature—away from what has always been conceived and signified under that name—or that which, not merely escaping literature, implacably destroys it? (Posed in these terms, the question would already be caught in the assurance of a certain fore-knowledge: can “what has always been conceived and signified under that name” be considered fundamentally homogeneous, univocal, or nonconflictual?) To take other examples: what historical and strategic function should henceforth be assigned to the quotation marks, whether visible or invisible, which transform this into a “book,” or which still make the deconstruction of philosophy into a “philosophical discourse”?”
― Jacques Derrida, Dissemination

“For the same reason there is nowhere to begin to trace the sheaf or the graphics of differance. For what is put into question is precisely the quest for a rightful beginning, an absolute point of departure, a principal responsibility. The problematic of writing is opened by putting into question the value of the arkhe. What I will propose here will not be elaborated simply as a philosophical discourse, operating according to principles, postulates, axioms, or definitions, and proceeding along the discursive lines of a linear order of reasons. In the delineation of differance everything is strategic and adventurous. Strategic because no transcendent truth present outside the field of writing can govern theologically the totality of the field. Adventurous because this strategy is a not simple strategy in the sense that strategy orients tactics according to a final goal, a telos or theme of domination, a mastery and ultimate reappropriation of the development of the field. Finally, a strategy without finality, what might be called blind tactics, or empirical wandering if the value of empiricism did not itself acquire its entire meaning in opposition to philosophical responsibility. If there is a certain wandering in the tracing of differance, it no more follows the lines of philosophical-logical discourse than that of its symmetrical and integral inverse, empirical-logical discourse. The concept of play keeps itself beyond this opposition, announcing, on the eve of philosophy and beyond it, the unity of chance and necessity in calculations without end.”
― Jacques Derrida, Margins of Philosophy

“Still less, despite appearances, will it have been a collection of three “essays” whose itinerary it would be time, after the fact, to recognize; whose continuity and underlying laws could now be pointed out; indeed, whose overall concept or meaning could at last, with all the insistence required on such occasions, be squarely set forth. I will not feign, according to the code, either premeditation or improvisation. These texts are assembled otherwise; it is not my intention here to present them.”
― Jacques Derrida, Dissemination

“And still the text will remain, if it is really cryptic and parodying (and I tell you that it is so through and through. I might as well tell you since it won’t be of any help to you. Even my admission can very well be a lie because there is dissimulation only if one tells the truth, only if one tells that one is telling the truth), still the text will remain indefinitely open, cryptic and parodying.”
― Jacques Derrida, Spurs: Nietzsche's Styles/Éperons: Les Styles de Nietzsche

“In the life of many churches, the habits of anti-intellectualism are planted early. Children are encouraged to open themselves up to the influence of God, and once they do so, they are told with great specificity what God's will is. When they are young, they often don't realize that what is represented as God's will is really just the views and preferences of those in charge. Adherents may be encouraged to surrender not just their will, but also their independence of thought. They may use their intellect, but only within the narrow structures set up by the rules and teachings of the leaders.”
― Jon Ward, Testimony: Inside the Evangelical Movement That Failed a Generation

“I feel that pinch of guilt. I wish I could belong. And if things were always like they are right now, I think I would. I could be a part of this kind, chili-night family of friendly words and gentle smiles. I love my parents and my brother. Sometimes I even like them.

But this is only a piece of them. A bright, glowing corner. The rest of them is cold and piercing. A set of spikes in the shape of a cross. We've been taught that Christ is to be all. That Jesus Christ is to consume us, be every aspect of us; that we are to seek and burn and refine every speck of sin and discontent. The parts of my family that I love, that I feel closest to—most warmly recieved and tenderly nurtured by—are the non-Jesus parts. And if they strive to make Christ the whole, is there any love left, any space left, for me?”
― Natalie Naudus, Gay the Pray Away

“How can Christianity accommodate itself to such appalling anti-Christian conduct? And, once you get to a point where you can say anybody's conduct can be excused because God has a larger plan and uses flawed vessels, then what is left of an actual Christianity at that point?”
― Tim Alberta, The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism

“Christians venerate the crucifixion; the evidence hangs around their necks and in their churches. Revering another person's torture and murder is disturbing.”
― Andrew L Seidel

“I'd been unable to make friends with anyone at school or church. Sunday school made it worse because the whole time, they were talking about love and God and how great the youth group was for life-long friendships, while I sat there feeling ugly and alone.”
― Tia Levings, A Well-Trained Wife: My Escape from Christian Patriarchy

“Focus on the Family addressed followers of the organization whose grown children had become distant or estranged. 'They won't return your calls,' the message begins. 'They ignore your texts and emails. Either you have little to no idea of what they're actually doing, or their only communication is to rub in your faith the sinful lifestyle they've embraced. It wasn't supposed to turn out this way.' The email goes on to describe the hypothetical perspective of a parent who believes they'd raised their children to follow Christ, who as adults 'would accomplish amazing things and would reach out often with all the updates, and with sincere gratitude for all you sacrificed to help them succeed. Instead, your child has grown into an adult who rejects you and everything you believe in.'

...Mayfield, a millennial who grew up evangelical, continued with an imagined response to these frustrated baby-boomers who'd raised their children by the tenets of Dr. Dobson and Focus on the Family, only to see them walk away from it all. In a thread, Mayfield writes, 'Listen, your kids don't want to talk to you because your love is conditional, and it is very painful to not be loved for who you are by the people who are supposed to love you unconditionally.”
― Sarah McCammon, The Exvangelicals: Loving, Living, and Leaving the White Evangelical Church

“There's a lot my parents and I don't talk about, that we can't talk about. When we've tried over the years, the conversations inevitably end in misunderstandings, tears, and an ever-widening distance. They spent years building a world for me that was intended to protect my spiritual safety and warning me not to leave it, only for me to feel anything but safe inside.”
― Sarah McCammon, The Exvangelicals: Loving, Living, and Leaving the White Evangelical Church

“But the evangelical impulse, the idea that people need the Lord, that we have been given a unique understanding of the truth about the most complex questions about reality, and which we must impose through persuasion or coercion, has never made much sense to me when I survey the complexities of the world and the diversity of experiences and points of view. Even worse, that way of thinking seems to be at the root of so many evils that have been perpetuated throughout human history by religious fundamentalists and other extremist ideologues. I fear that the same impulse is currently laying the groundwork for irreparable harm in our country and the world, and I fear that some of the people I have known and loved, and who have loved me, are being persuaded to aid and abet that evil... To subscribe to such a project, even out of a desire to maintain family and community ties, would be a betrayal of one's own integrity.”
― Sarah McCammon, The Exvangelicals: Loving, Living, and Leaving the White Evangelical Church

“Too often, we are told that anger has no place in the hearts of Christians. As a consequence, we don't know what we're allowed to feel in regard to the wolves that have infiltrated our flocks. EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN CULTURE HAS A WAY OF TRAINING US INTO TIMIDITY to protect the opinions & abuses of others.”
― Robert G. Callahan II, Fire in the Whole: Embracing Our Righteous Anger with White Christianity and Reclaiming Our Wholeness

“The goal is not to tear down the church, but to free you from an imitation of it.”
― Robert G. Callahan II, Fire in the Whole: Embracing Our Righteous Anger with White Christianity and Reclaiming Our Wholeness

“There are two ways suffering can change you. The first is by breaking you down, leaving you afraid, paranoid, and void of hope. The other is by breaking you open, leaving you with a wider heart, and expanding your capacity for love. Jesus, in his suffering, was broken open for us. When we share in Christ’s sufferings, we too are broken open and able to love others more than we could before.

Because of the suffering you have endured in the past, you are able to persevere and endure even more suffering in the future. Each season of suffering prepares you for the next one. As you persevere in suffering, you become more resilient in the face of trials.”
― Ian Harber, Walking Through Deconstruction: How to Be a Companion in a Crisis of Faith

“In submitting to suffering, Jesus absorbs and transforms it into our salvation. Hanging on the cross, the sky went black, and Jesus absorbed the darkness of the world into his body and spirit. Overtaken by it, he lay in the grave for three days. On Easter morning, he was raised in victory over death, defeating the darkness that overtook him on the cross with the light of life.

This is what it means to persevere. While suffering is the result of the evil and brokenness of the world, we, like Christ, absorb the darkness of suffering into our bodies, transform it, and release it back into the world as light. We absorb hate and release it back into the world as love. We absorb lies and release them back into the world as truth. We absorb death and release it back into the world as life. We don’t see ourselves as simply victims of suffering but as agents of transformation who mock death and scorn shame, knowing that God’s victorious rule and reign over all evil will be made manifest through our perseverance.”
― Ian Harber, Walking Through Deconstruction: How to Be a Companion in a Crisis of Faith

“Anyone who wants to be born must first destroy the world.”
― Hesse, Demian: Die Geschichte von Emil Sinclairs Jugend

“A timely and necessary guide for anyone caught between religion and non-belief.

There is a third path -- guided by reason, grounded in nature, and open to discovery.”
― S.D. Hagen, An Alternative to Believing in Nothing: Deism for the 21st Century