(no subject)
Einstein said he wanted the explanation as simple and possible but no simpler. I want it as complicated as possible, and then to complicate it a little more. I'm sorry Albert, but I just have to disagree.
Simple explanations are not simple. Lay persons aren't 'lay'. Simple people aren't really simple. A natural reaction isn't natural. Immediate feelings aren't immediate. The feeling of horror after seeing a plane crash on TV: natural? The feeling of guilt after doing the wrong thing: natural? The feeling of accomplishment after a juridical figure pats on you the back and says you did a great job: natural?
Deconstruction doesn't intervene to complicate an otherwise simple and idyllic state of affairs. Critics of it will say: give high-theory a break, relax, be natural for a while. Alas, there's no such thing. This isn't some 'optional' 'high theory' that needlessly complicates things. No, the project here is to de-naturalize that which isn't natural, but produced by an ungraspably complex apparatus of discourse. But how can I deconstruct 'man' if the most basic vocabulary at my disposal includes concepts like 'man'? This is why simple language is not an option.
It is the simplicity which is oppressive, abstract, subservient to strategic relations, a highly constructed state of affairs. There is no primordial, innocent, 'simple' state we can revert to. Deconstruction is not fancy, it is not a snooty academic luxury. You can keep 'high theory' away from some people and all the more convince them it is natural to get beaten the shit out of by their husbands every day. Inject a value or two, and they're yours. But there's some of us you can't pull that shit on.
Simple explanations are not simple. Lay persons aren't 'lay'. Simple people aren't really simple. A natural reaction isn't natural. Immediate feelings aren't immediate. The feeling of horror after seeing a plane crash on TV: natural? The feeling of guilt after doing the wrong thing: natural? The feeling of accomplishment after a juridical figure pats on you the back and says you did a great job: natural?
Deconstruction doesn't intervene to complicate an otherwise simple and idyllic state of affairs. Critics of it will say: give high-theory a break, relax, be natural for a while. Alas, there's no such thing. This isn't some 'optional' 'high theory' that needlessly complicates things. No, the project here is to de-naturalize that which isn't natural, but produced by an ungraspably complex apparatus of discourse. But how can I deconstruct 'man' if the most basic vocabulary at my disposal includes concepts like 'man'? This is why simple language is not an option.
It is the simplicity which is oppressive, abstract, subservient to strategic relations, a highly constructed state of affairs. There is no primordial, innocent, 'simple' state we can revert to. Deconstruction is not fancy, it is not a snooty academic luxury. You can keep 'high theory' away from some people and all the more convince them it is natural to get beaten the shit out of by their husbands every day. Inject a value or two, and they're yours. But there's some of us you can't pull that shit on.