Deconstruction for Beginners (For Beginners)

A primer on "the monster that murdered philosophy."

 

 

164 pgs., B&W; $14.95

(W: Jim Powell; A: Joe Lee)

Some call deconstruction "the monster that murdered philosophy" and others would add that it nearly took down several other fields as well, including my old haunt of literary criticism. But the verdict was premature: philosophy departments today continue to churn out students and articles, while deconstruction is not nearly as trendy today as it was ten or twenty years ago when postmodernism was all the rage and everyone seemed to want to deconstruct something or other. Of course academic fashions are always changing, but deconstruction also took a major hit in 1996 when NYU physicist Alan Sokal succeeded in getting a patently nonsensical article published in the cultural studies journal Social Text, and no one realized it was a hoax until Sokal himself blew the whistle.  At that point, many decided that the emperor had no clothes: in fact all he was wearing was buzzwords, and even people supposed to be experts in this branch of philosophy can’t tell the difference.

Deconstruction didn’t die, although it no longer can claim to rule the cultural or even the academic universe: the word remains in our vocabulary and people still claim to be doing it. If you’re on the outside looking in and want to know what this deconstruction business is all about, a reasonable place to start is Jim Powell’s Deconstruction for Beginners.

Powell draws on an old didactic tradition by casting his book as a dialogue among Coyote and Mark Twain, who soon fall asleep and dream of a further conversation which also includes Uma (a "Numibian-Tahitian-Babylonian-Bengali Beach-Bunny") and a fellow known as "The Glorious Bliss of God’s Phallus" (well, what did you expect from a book about post-modern philosophy?). They talk a lot about Jacques Derrida and the history of philosophy as well as the meaning of deconstruction, with Uma taking the principal role of instructor while the other three act as students by asking questions and seeking clarifications. The conversations do branch out a bit, touching on deconstructionist architecture, practices similar to deconstruction in Asian cultures, and political applications of deconstructionism.

The intent of Deconstruction for Beginners seems to be to give the reader a taste of philosophical discourse and allow them to draw their own conclusions, which differs from the more straightforward approach used in the other volumes in the For Beginners series I am familiar with such as Existentialism for Beginners and Foucault for Beginners. The going can get a bit thick and although I’ll be the first to acknowledge my philosophical shortcomings (no formal background and only scattered readings on the subject) this volume may not be the best introduction for anyone who wants to do deconstruction, rather than merely talk about it. On the other hand, it’s a great source if you just want to learn about deconstruction and be able to cite some of the catch-phrases and examples used by Derrida and others in expounding their philosophy. Again, this may be intentional on the author’s part (and it may reflect Derrida’s own attitude, although if I knew enough to answer that question I wouldn’t be reading a book which includes "for beginners" in the title) but it’s frustrating and has the effect of telling the reader that they’re not smart enough to get it so don’t bother. That’s an unfortunate message to deliver: it’s like saying let the people in power stay in power and don’t try to appropriate their tools for your own purposes because you won’t be able to succeed anyway.

Illustrations by Joe Lee add enlightenment and humor to the narrative, often clarifying points mentioned in the text. Further information is available from the publisher’s web site http://www.forbeginnersbooks.com/store.htm where you can also buy Deconstruction for Beginners  and other For Beginners titles at a discount. | Sarah Boslaugh