Discussed in this dissertation are Jacques Derrida’s Arche-writing and Paul de Man’s materiality of language? which are concepts derived from the process of searching for what is not mentioned but buried in the tradition of metaphysics. Arche-writing? as the presupposition capable of activating cognitive function? deconstructs the centrism stemming from phonocentrism? where writing is subordinated to speech that is regarded as an inner voice? consciousness.
In the centrism that Derrida attempts to deconstruct? problems do not consist in a unique form of center but in uncritical reception. For example? voice? which is situated at the center in phonocentrism? is linked to consciousness? and consciousness? as inner sound? is connected to Reason or Logos. Reason or Logos belongs to the realm of spirit? and thus spirit occupies a higher position than matter. In short? the problem in phonocentrism is the fact that the attitude of appreciating speech linked to consciousness has brought about centrism. Consciousness refers to that of the subject(the self)? self-consciousness? and thus the consciousness emphasized is that of the subject. By deconstructing the hierarchy of speech over writing? what Derrida intends to disclose is that there are reasonable grounds for assuming that the moments regarded as being at the center have to be there.
Materiality of language is the same as arche-writing in that it is the presupposition of cognitive functioning. Materiality of language? however? deconstructs the subject? the self? and reveals that figural language is isolated from the world and that cognition is unstable. de Man’s dismantling of the subject is attempted in order to reveal the errors that inevitably intervene in judgements made by the self? and also to reveal the ficticity of the self in discourse. Those errors of judgement made by the subject are derive from the limitation that is inherent in the subject. The judgements performed by the subject about itself are not stable ones?; that is to say? the self is never capable of knowing what it is?; it can never identify itself.
Given this fact of instability of the subject? the subject in fictional literary works such as novels becomes another subject unstably stemming from the first-person? subject? “I” unstable. de Man emphasizes that critics should recognize the fact that the subject(such as protagonist or narrator) in a fictional literary work is posited virtually. From de Man’s perspective? critics’ accepting fictitious statements uncritically is ingratiating themselves with the fictitious subject? which is created by an author who is also the self unstable. de Man’s intention in undoing the subject consists in revelation of its ficticity.
There are differences between what de Man deconstructs and what Derrida does? in that one is centrism and the other is the subject?; however? both theorists concentrate on decentering. This dissertation presupposes that arche-writing and materiality of language are concepts applied to deconstruct the center in text? and aims to examine the differences between the two theories? to demonstrate the theoretical premises that the differences are supposed to bring about? and to clarify how the theoretical premises are linked to those differences.
First? I examine arche-writing that dismantles centrism deriving from phonocentrism. I begin by analyzing Derrida’s critical discourse on phonocentrism and Saussure’s linguistics. Derrida criticizes not only the relation of consciousness to voice? which is considered natural? but also that of subject to the transcendental signified. The device capable of dismantling centrism is writing. Writing has been subordinated to speech due to its visual image in the tradition of metaphysics. Derrida? however? strategizes the material and visual image of writing? and turns it into an instrument for the deconstruction of the hierarchy of speech over writing. Furthermore? Derrida expands the horizon of writing to better reflect his concept of arche-writing? which he established as the presupposition for the generation of signs that consist of the world? and? at the same time? as a tool for the disarticulation of centrism.
Second? I analyze the materiality of language that deconstructs the subject. This analysis starts by clarifying what materiality of language is. Materiality refers to the state in which the cognitive function is suspended? as in the eyes of a Kantian poet?; more specifically? materiality refers to the margin to resist reading(interpretation)? which is to say? to not be caught up in meaning. I divide the materiality of language into three aspects: materiality of inscription; materiality of the signified; materiality of grammatical system. Materiality of inscription is “neither a figure? nor a sign? nor a cognition? nor a desire”(de Man? Resistance to Theory 51) but refers to performative fact. Materiality of the signified refers to the positional power of language. Materiality of grammatical system is defined as arbitrariness or randomness behind the repeated regularity. In order to embody these three terms of materiality? I analyze three literary works? Victor Hugo’s “Written on the Pane of a Flemish Window?” Percy Bysshe Shelley’s Triumph of Life? and Heinrich von Kleist’s On the Marionette Theater.
Third? I argue that the theoretical premises for intertwining in arche-writing are rereading? trace and undecidability accompanied by the movement of diffe?rance? and the arbitrariness of the instituted trace. Rereading reveals that the margins such as footnotes or quotations contradict the theme in text and that the center and margin are interwoven. Trace and undecidability accompanied by the movement of diffe?rance clarify that they themselves take on the properties of ambiguity? which opens up all possibilities of meaning. The arbitrariness of the instituted trace demonstrates that substitution and trace of differences are not made up purposefully but rather through the play of the unmotivated? arbitrary and random powers.
On the other hand? I argue that the theoretical premises for the break in the materiality of language are rhetoric reading? the same tropological system as used in epistemology? and the definition of ideology. A rhetoric reading discloses that undecidability leads to cognitive suspension. In order to embody the relation of the break of figural language to a rhetorical reading? I analyze Charles Baudelaire’s “Correspondences.” The same tropological system as used in epistemology reveals that illusionary moments are interrupted by substitution of properties in the tropological system? and thus figural language generated from the tropological system cannot be the perfect representation of the object. Instead? it inevitably faces a divorce from the world as object. The definition of ideology demonstrates that figural language must of necessity be isolated from the world insomuch that “the confusion of linguistic with natural reality? of reference with phenomenalism” is defined as ideology. The mode of language we use takes meanings provided by the subject? even if those meanings are illusionary or ideological. In order to embody the relation of the break of figural language to the definition of ideology? I analyze Friedrich Schiller’s “On the Sublime: Toward the Further Development of Some Kantian Ideas.”
Arche-writing and materiality of language have significance in that they focus on space? which symbolizes matter? break? death and so on? as much as on time? which symbolizes spirit? flow? life? and so forth. The ruling out of writing? in the tradition of metaphysics? was also due to the material aspect. Derrida and de Man? however? demonstrate that spacity where the dead time operates is rather the presupposition of cognitive function.
Space where time suspends is the moment when the whole object is revealed outside the realm of cognition. In order to grasp the object? time and consciousness should flow. Our vision is unavoidably reduced to? focused on? one point? and thus the recognized is limited to part not whole. The unrepresented margins of the whole must always await some chances to be represented.
The power capable of positing cognitive function manifests and is accumulated at those margins that are not represented but await an opportunity for revelation. Arche-writing and the materiality of language? which are not caught up in meaning and resist interpretation? become? for matter? the power for requesting reading.