In traditional disciplinary of literary criticism, structuralism has played a crucial position in text signification. Structuralism has conquered the areas of humanities and social sciences for years; for example, it provides objective account of all social and cultural practices, in range that includes mythical narratives, literary texts, fashion, and more. The structuralism requires the rules of signs and procedures to achieve the cultural significance and to specify what significance is (Abrams, 1999: 300).
The name of structuralism is a more methodical approach to the kind of criticism that has long been accepted as a canon of academic teaching (Norris, 2004: 20). Structuralism is based on Saussure’s influential and radical insights, as follow (Habib, 2005: 634):
· Language has prominent role in shaping world because it can provide understanding of world.
· Language is a system of signs. Its signification depends on its difference from other signs and generally on its situation within the entire works of signs.
· Language has two dimensions: langue (it refers to language as a structured system grounded on certain rules) and parole (the specific acts of speech or utterance which are based on those rules).
In literary studies, structuralist criticism views literature as a second-order signifying system that uses the first-order structural system of language as its medium, and is itself to be analyzed primarily on the model of linguistic theory. There are several salient concepts which relate to the relationship between literature and structuralism, as follow (Abrams, 1999:301):
- A literary work is deemed as “text” which follows the certain pattern of literary conventions and codes. It assumes that there is no reality which can be obtained outside literary system.
- The conscious “self” is declared to be a construct that is itself the product of the workings of the linguistic system and the mind of an author is described as an attributive part within which the impersonal, existing system of literary language, conventions, codes, and rules of combination into a particular text.
- Structuralism replaces the author into the reader as the central agency in criticism; however, the traditional reader, as a conscious, purposeful, and feeling individual, is replaced by the impersonal activity of “reading” and what is read is not a work fills with meanings, but writing. The focus of structuralist criticism, hence, is on the impersonal process of reading which, by taking into the requisite conventions, codes, and expectations. Therefore, it makes literary sense of the sequence of words, phrases, and sentences as merely a text.
The structuralism has evoked the disagreement because structuralism is an outlook that lends support to traditional ideas of the text as stable meanings and the critic as a faithful seeker after truth in the text. It means that literary meanings are determined by a system of invariant conventions and codes (Norris, 2004: 3). The ideas of structuralism are confronted by the school of poststructuralism, according to Abrams, the poststructuralism is “ a broad variety of critical perspectives and procedures that in the 1970s displaced structuralism from its prominence as the radically innovative way of dealing with language and other signifying systems” (Abrams, 1999: 238). In other words, poststructuralism is a continuation and simultaneous rejection of structuralism. Therefore, the roots of poststructuralism are the concepts, procedures, findings and ideas of structuralism because the thoughts of poststructuralism cannot be invented without structuralism.
The salient features or themes that are become the characteristics of poststructuralism perspectives include the following (Abrams, 1999:238-242):
- The word theory often designates an account of the general conditions of signification that determine meaning and interpretation in all domains of human action, production, and intellection. In most cases, this account is held to apply not only to verbal language, but also to psychosexual and sociocultural signifying systems. The postructuralist theory covers the ways of thinking in all provinces of knowledge. The poststructuralist theory tries to undermine the foundational concepts in traditional modes of discourse in Western civilization (including literary criticism).
- The decentering of the subject. To decenter, in other words, is to delete what is often called the “agency” of the author as a self-coherent, purposive, and determinative human subject.
- The decentering or deletion of the author causes the reader, or interpreter, as the focal figure in poststructural accounts of signifying practices. The meanings of literary works are lain on readers’ mind to interpret texts.
- In poststructural criticism, discourse has become a very prominent term ; discourse has become the focal term particular social conditions, class-structures, and power-relationships that alter in the course of history.
- The poststructuralism views that the surface or overt meanings of a literary or other texts serve as a ‘disguise’ or ‘mask’ of its real meanings, or subtext.
The poststructuralist movements entail deconstruction; deconstruction is avowedly ‘poststructuralist’ in its refusal to accept the idea of structure as in structuralism has been provided. Derrida via Abrams (1999:60) briefly states the concept of deconstruction which is often cited from The Critical Difference:
“Deconstruction is not synonymous with destruction. The de-construction of a text does not proceed by random doubt or arbitrary subversion, but by the careful teasing out of warring forces of signification within the text itself. 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”.
Deconstruction is an intellectual movement which is considered as a breakthrough to confront the absolute truth in a single interpretation of a text, mainly, in Western Philosophy. It designates a theory and practice of reading which has a purpose to subvert or to undermine the assumption that the system of language provides grounds that are adequate to establish the boundaries, the coherence or unity, and the determinate meanings of a literary text (Habib, 2005: 649). In other words, the deconstruction has been manifold way of reading, a mode of writing, and, above all, a way of challenging interpretations of texts based upon conventional notions of the stability of the human self, the external world, and of language and meaning.
The theory had been invented by Jacques Derrida (1930–2004), an Algerian-born French philosopher. It provides procedures for deconstructing the foundations of Western metaphysics:
“Deconstruction as a mode of interpretation works by a careful and circumspect entering of each textual labyrinth.... The deconstructive critic seeks to find, by this process of retracing, the element in the system studied which is alogical, the thread in the text in question which will unravel it all, or the loose stone which will pull down the whole building. The deconstruction, rather, annihilates the ground on which the building stands by showing that the text has already annihilated the ground, knowingly or unknowingly. Deconstruction is not a dismantling of the structure of a text but a demonstration that it has already dismantled itself “(Miller via Abrams, 1999: 60).
Thus, the deconstruction has given a new perspective to dig out the meanings which build a text. This theory tries to re-interpret the text so that the hierarchy of structure which contains unbalance position of one another (one structure is positioned higher compares to other structure) can be reformulated into the new structure. The new structure can reverse the hierarchy of former structure.
The concepts of deconstruction have several focal points which have been summarized by the writer into four main concepts, as follow:
1. Deconstruction is Confronting Logocentrism
Deconstruction is a reaction toward Western philosophy which tends to focus on one single interpretation or one main truth; for example, divinity, rationality, existentialism and more. Those concepts play important role in Western philosophy. In other words, logocentrism (the metaphysic of presence) is defined as the belief which is based on one reality or the center of all truths which are deemed as basic foundation of human’s activities. Because there is one single truth, the thought has created that there is a center of everything and other thoughts are considered as marginal parts (other) which are neglected (Castle, 2007: 79-80). Hence all Western culture, are logocentric; that is, they are centered or grounded on a “logos” or, as stated in a phrase Derrida adopts from Heidegger, they rely on “the metaphysics of presence” (Abrams, 1999:56).
Derrida uses the term of logocentricm as the substitution of “metaphysic” to highlight the concept of logos. The concept of logocentrism is defined as the concept which becomes the fundamental belief. Western philosophy assumes that there is an essential truth taking important role as foundational belief. Therefore, the transcendental signifier is longed to create stability of meaning (Sarup, 2008:52-53).
The principle is created because there are accepted and rejected concepts. Thus, the binary opposition appears in signification process. Binary opposition is a classification which relates to two different things. The classification consists of differences (dichotomy) and hierarchy. Hierarchy is a sequence which brings concept of superiority to another. From its concept, a part plays a superior or center position. According to Derrida, the binary opposition entails signifier/signified, tangible/intangible, langue/parole, diachronic/ synchronic, space/time, passive/active so that the binary opposition can be deconstructed (Sarup, 2008:53).
The way of thinking which poses dichotomy point of view creates the text which has phallogocentrism perspectives. The ideas create women in inferior position so that they are alienated and distorted. Deconstruction can show the dichotomy perspectives in a text and it can contribute the deconstructive approach to reveal discrimination toward women. Derrida confronts logocentricm ideas because there is no single meaning which stands as a center of everything. Consequently, deconstruction has given opportunity to minor meaning to stand as a new center. Derrida states that it is important to destruct or to reorganize binary opposition in order to show that a meaning cannot be divided from other meanings (Sarup, 2008:53-56).
2. Deconstruction is Questioning the Relationship between Signifier and Signified
Derrida insists that the distinction between signifier and signified cannot legitimately be made; for him, the means of expression is inseparably bound with its content. Consequently, Derrida claims that, there is no fixed conceptual order amongst signifiers (Stokes, 2006: 189-190).
Derrida criticizes Course in General Linguistics which was written by Saussure. He declares that there are distinct differences between signifier and signified. Signifier and signified in structuralism is closed and restricted so that there is no opportunity to create new meanings. Derrida rejects those concepts; he states that the final signification can be achieved if there is a final meaning or a fixed meaning which has stability. If the concept is absent in the application, every signified as its turn will function as signifier in signification process (Sarup, 2008: 56). For instance, signifier (speech) C-H-A-I-R refers to signified (concept) a wooden tool to sit which has four racks. Derrida refuses the concept; he states that there are wide signification process because signification is a continuity.
3.Deconstruction is Questioning the Ultimate Position of Phonocentrism
Utterance or phonocentric is considered as higher level compares to writing. Utterance is more privileged because it is near to the presence. The utterance stands in superior position since the utterance represents spontaneity of speakers. The meaning in utterance is immanent meaning. It is also deemed as closer entity to psyche of human being than the writing which has distance of speaker. Thus, the writing derives from utterance. Derrida denies the concept; he proves that the writing has crucial position. He uses the word differance which is constructed from two different words, to differ and to defer if the word is read will be said in the same sound. Therefore, the differences in meaning just only be known through writing. As a consequence, the writing challenges the structure which has distinct concept. Derrida also uses the concept “to defer” to show the signification of a thing will be retarded in its signification process. It means that the meaning always change and it does not have stability and it is retarded because there is no subject who speaks (Sarup, 2008: 63-64).
4. The Concept of Trace and Intertextuality
A text always refers to other texts. The text has correlation with other texts and it creates unlimited link. Every part of text contains meaning even in the smallest part of text and each part brings trace from the past. It can be connected to other texts. As a result, there is no independent text because every text has relation with other texts. The trace and intertextuality can be seen from the reader who interprets the text. Hawthorn states that intertextuality is a relation between two or more texts which has an effect upon the way in which the text within which other text reside (1994:99). The interpretation of a text refers to the active role of reader to interpret the text. Deconstruction gives wide space to reader to obtain meanings from a text so that the role of the author becomes useless. All in all, the reader has crucial part to reinterpret the text (Sarup, 2008: 78-79).
The deconstructive approach can be applied in literary works. This method contributes the invention of new meaning in literary text. According to Subur Wardoyo (2004: 351), the application of deconstructive approach in a literary work covers several steps, namely:
- To locate binary opposition in a text
- To determine which member is more privileged
- To reverse and to undermine the hierarchy of the structure
No comments:
Post a Comment