The critical difference: Deconstruction and postmodernism
Abstract
Although deconstruction seems, at first sight, to be a variety of postmodernism, the matter is not that simple. This article attempts to show that, certain similarities notwithstanding, Derridean deconstruction and postmodernism differ in important respects. It therefore first reconstructs the emergence of deconstruction from Derrida's "critique" of Husserl's transcendental phenomenology, in the course of which the role played by the problematical status of the written sign and of temporality in Derrida's reading of Husserl is emphasized and linked to the far-reaching spatio-temporal implications of differance. In the discussion that follows, postmodernism is placed within the larger conceptual context of modernity, postmodernity, and modernism. The question of modernity's viability is shown to be appraised in divergent ways from the perspectives of philosophical modernism (Habermas) and postmodernism (Lyotard), respectively. With the aid of Johnston the affinity of deconstruction with literary/artistic postmodernism is subsequently explored in preparation for the final stage of the argument, in which deconstruction's decisive irreconcilability with postmodernism (and modernism) is demonstrated. This is done in terms of Allan Megill's notion of crisis, formulated with reference to Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault and Derrida, and centres on the latter's attack upon the idea of crisis, presupposed by postmodernism as well as modernism.
Opsomming
Al lyk dekonstruksie aanvanklik na 'n soort postmodernisme, is die saak nie so eenvoudig nie. Hierdie artikel probeer aantoon dat, in weerwif van sekere ooreenkomste tussen Derridiaanse dekonstruksie en postmodernisme, hulle in belangrike opsigte verskil. Daar word dus begin met 'n rekonstruksie van die verskyning van dekonstruksie deur te kyk na Derrida se kritiek op Husserl se transendentale fenomenologie, met die klem op die problematiese status van die skrifteken en van temporaliteit in Derrida se interpretasie van Husserl, wat dan in verband gebring word met die verreikende tydruimtelike implikasies van differance. In die daaropvolgende bespreking word postmodernisme binne die breer begripskonteks van moderniteit, postmoderniteit en modernisme geplaas. Daar word aangetoon dat die vraag na die lewensvatbaarheid van moderniteit op verskillende wyses vanuit die onderskeie perspektiewe van filosofiese modernisme (Habermas) en postmodernisme (Lyotard), benader word. Daarna word met die hulp van Johnston die affiniteit van dekonstruksie met literere/artistieke postmodernisme ondersoek ter voorbereiding van die finale stadium van die argument, waar die deurslaggewende onversoenbaarheid van dekonstruksie en postmodernisme (asook modernisme) gedemonstreer word. Dit word gedoen met behulp van Allan Megill se begrip van krisis, wat met verwysing na Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault en Derrida geformuleer word, en die resultaat is van laasgenoemde se aanval op die krisisidee as vooronderstelling van sowel postmodernisme as modernisme.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 1988 JLS/TLW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.