/lit/ - Literature

What the FUCK was his problem /lit?

If you claim to understand this man then you have completely misunderstood him.

What works of his should I read regarding linguistics or the use of language itself?

Deconstruction came to Heidegger's attention in 1967 by way of Lucien Braun's recommendation of Jacques Derrida's work (Hans-Georg Gadamer was present at an initial discussion and indicated to Heidegger that Derrida's work came to his attention by way of an assistant). Heidegger expressed interest in meeting Derrida personally after the latter sent him some of his work. There was discussion of a meeting in 1972, but this failed to take place.

Heidegger's interest in Derrida is said by Braun to have been considerable (as is evident in two letters, of September 29, 1967 and May 16, 1972, from Heidegger to Braun).

In Derrida's view, deconstruction is a tradition inherited via Heidegger (the French term "déconstruction" is a term coined to translate Heidegger's use of the words "Destruktion"—literally "destruction"—and "Abbau"—more literally "de-building").

How do I into Derrida?

This man is your FRIEND

[Derrida]

He fights for FREEDOM

Classically trained and rigorous, Derrida has utmost respect for the established traditions of communication ('writing') and asks only that we consider -- and it is true that we should -- how these traditions are established and whether they are appropriate for their time and place.

Barthes, however, is a total anarchic madman who wants to cut out literature at the roots and salt the earth so nothing grows again. Barthes is the key to all of these problems we have with SJWs asserting their own authority instead of what deconstruction is actually about; openness to the strange life of writing.

Please leave Derrida alone.

>Derrida's writing in Spectres is marked by a preoccupation with the "death" of communism after the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, in particular after theorists such as Francis Fukuyama asserted that capitalism had conclusively triumphed over other political-economic systems and reached the "end of history." Taking inspiration from the pervasive ghost imagery in Marx's writing, Spectres has been said to concern itself with the question, "if communism was always spectral, what does it mean to say it is now dead?"


I got u senpai

stop making sense

Why is he generally disliked among contemporary philosophers or pseuds?

(Note: It's Derrida)

Hey /lit/,

I heard about this crazy motherfucker, and I got really curious about reading him. Regardless of whether or not he is bait, I want to dig into this nerd. What work of his should I start with? Also, who should I read before I read him, if any?

What is the biggest redpill in philosophy?

What the fuck exactly is arche-writing and différance?

Why has France produced such a massive number of pseuds?

How should I approach his oeuvre? which book/essay should I read first? I've been suggested to start by reading on some of the basics of Husserl and Saussure. is this legit advice?

Why are so many leftists pseuds and charlatans? Is it because Marxism is inherently a shallow ideology reliant upon obfuscation? If somebody's a posturing jackass in the academic world, 9/10 times they're also a socially progressive leftist

Why is Jacques Derrida so despised by certain groups?

>that chest hair crawling out of his shirt

What does lit think of deconstruction?

>>6146512
Here's an actual answer OP: have decent knowledge of the history of philosophy (if you know Nietzsche, Heidegger and Husserl that will help a good deal), understand the jist of Levi-Strauss and Structuralism (wikipedia will do), then read Derrida's essay "Structure, Sign & Play", then read the essay "Différance", then "Signature Event Context", then whatever you like really. And whatever secondary lit you can get your hands on.

>>5998795
Anything

How do you think Derrida would react to his concept of deconstruction becoming a buzzword?

How do I start reading Derrida? What's his best work?

/lit/, why do you hate post-structuralism?