Nearly two decades ago, a writer-friend introduced me to Jacquez Derrida, the Algerian-French philosopher and the proponent of deconstruction (of course not the man, but his work). I remember, deconstruction was the centre of post modern intellectual discourse those days and soiled photocopies of Derrida made the rounds in the smoke-filled coffee houses and university campuses in India.
Ragged youth who betted on a new linguistic, literary and art culture, as well as polished urban fringe intellectuals dropped Derrida, post-modernism and deconstruction at the drop of a hat. Curiosity and the need to stay contemporary compelled me to read a bit of post modernism as well. I read a bit of Derrida, Roland Barthes and semiotics and tried to apply them in some things I was doing. I also read post-modern literary pieces including some from my native language, Malayalam. My reading led to a lot confusion and lot of clarity as well. I was overwhelmed by the intellecutal intensity of some of these Western philosophers and was excited about a new way of analytical reading of just about everything - written words, art, cinema, paintings and anything that has meaning.
As Harvard scholar Barbara Johnson (1981), wrote, deconstruction is a specific kind of analytical "reading": “Deconstruction is in fact much closer to the original meaning of the word 'analysis' itself, which etymologically means "to undo" — a virtual synonym for "to de-construct." ... If anything is destroyed in a deconstructive reading, it is not the text, but the claim to unequivocal domination of one mode of signifying over another. A deconstructive reading is a reading which analyzes the specificity of a text's critical difference from itself. (verbatim from Wikepedia)
During the last 17 years of my professional life, I have heard this term used mostly out of context and without meaning, particularly by the urban gender and development specialists. Deconstruction as an english world. Not too sure if they really knew that there was an extremely thought-provoking discourse behind the word. Anyway that is not the main issue here.
Why do I write about deconstruction now? Because, it is the most relevant concept to describe the present world. A world, where success comes from how best one does what I described above: rip, mix and play. By being non-linear.
It's a non-linear world. Here logic does not travel in a straight line and the meaning does not belong to the creator, but the reader. Here vertical does not meet only the horizontal, but the vertical itself or, the vertical becomes the horizontal. During the post-modern, deconstruction discourse days I did understand that one could read a book in several different ways conjuring up a dozen different perceptions and meanings. My abstract painter friend, Achutan Kudallur told me that one does not explain an abstract painting to one's audience. It is up to you. You create your meaning. You rip, mix and play. In the current world, it is the order. If one does not follow that order, one is out of sync with the present world.
The first line of citizens in the world seem to belong to that world - both in terms of creation and consumption. A periodical like the "Wired", hugely succesful business models such as "Google" and "iTunes", public content behemoths such as "wikipedia", Internet TV streamers such as Joost and film-makers such as Alejandro González Iñárritu. Extremely high quality intellect and absolute intolerance to mediocrity seems to be the underlying principle of this new world order.
Reading things in context, reading different meanings in different situations, creating one's own out of somebody else's creation, packing a million light years in a three minute music video, leaving broadcast-freedom to a million private homes, creating movies that can be read in multiple layers, installing art in several dimensions and different media - the world is in a deconstruction mode. And I call this rip, mix and play world.
Of course, there were people who heralded this world order ahead of their times: Derrida perhaps saw this coming; Merce Cunningham perhaps was bored of linear style of dancing and noted Malayalam writer Anand perhaps thought of applying principles of engineering to his work.
And what do we do with the fossilised, incompetent old minds? The will cut and paste before they are edged out by sheer intellectual enterprises.
Ragged youth who betted on a new linguistic, literary and art culture, as well as polished urban fringe intellectuals dropped Derrida, post-modernism and deconstruction at the drop of a hat. Curiosity and the need to stay contemporary compelled me to read a bit of post modernism as well. I read a bit of Derrida, Roland Barthes and semiotics and tried to apply them in some things I was doing. I also read post-modern literary pieces including some from my native language, Malayalam. My reading led to a lot confusion and lot of clarity as well. I was overwhelmed by the intellecutal intensity of some of these Western philosophers and was excited about a new way of analytical reading of just about everything - written words, art, cinema, paintings and anything that has meaning.
As Harvard scholar Barbara Johnson (1981), wrote, deconstruction is a specific kind of analytical "reading": “Deconstruction is in fact much closer to the original meaning of the word 'analysis' itself, which etymologically means "to undo" — a virtual synonym for "to de-construct." ... If anything is destroyed in a deconstructive reading, it is not the text, but the claim to unequivocal domination of one mode of signifying over another. A deconstructive reading is a reading which analyzes the specificity of a text's critical difference from itself. (verbatim from Wikepedia)
During the last 17 years of my professional life, I have heard this term used mostly out of context and without meaning, particularly by the urban gender and development specialists. Deconstruction as an english world. Not too sure if they really knew that there was an extremely thought-provoking discourse behind the word. Anyway that is not the main issue here.
Why do I write about deconstruction now? Because, it is the most relevant concept to describe the present world. A world, where success comes from how best one does what I described above: rip, mix and play. By being non-linear.
It's a non-linear world. Here logic does not travel in a straight line and the meaning does not belong to the creator, but the reader. Here vertical does not meet only the horizontal, but the vertical itself or, the vertical becomes the horizontal. During the post-modern, deconstruction discourse days I did understand that one could read a book in several different ways conjuring up a dozen different perceptions and meanings. My abstract painter friend, Achutan Kudallur told me that one does not explain an abstract painting to one's audience. It is up to you. You create your meaning. You rip, mix and play. In the current world, it is the order. If one does not follow that order, one is out of sync with the present world.
The first line of citizens in the world seem to belong to that world - both in terms of creation and consumption. A periodical like the "Wired", hugely succesful business models such as "Google" and "iTunes", public content behemoths such as "wikipedia", Internet TV streamers such as Joost and film-makers such as Alejandro González Iñárritu. Extremely high quality intellect and absolute intolerance to mediocrity seems to be the underlying principle of this new world order.
Reading things in context, reading different meanings in different situations, creating one's own out of somebody else's creation, packing a million light years in a three minute music video, leaving broadcast-freedom to a million private homes, creating movies that can be read in multiple layers, installing art in several dimensions and different media - the world is in a deconstruction mode. And I call this rip, mix and play world.
Of course, there were people who heralded this world order ahead of their times: Derrida perhaps saw this coming; Merce Cunningham perhaps was bored of linear style of dancing and noted Malayalam writer Anand perhaps thought of applying principles of engineering to his work.
And what do we do with the fossilised, incompetent old minds? The will cut and paste before they are edged out by sheer intellectual enterprises.
1 comment:
Whew! That is an intense construction of a philosophy that is all about breaking down something into parts that may be bigger than the original.
Glad to see that you have resumed your intense exploration of mind and matter. In a sense you want to rip and mix the sum of your experiences and play life again and again. Sadly, we are creatures not just of nurture, but also of nature and our selfish genes will simply refuse to rip, mix and play.
Post a Comment