One of the first things that has always caught my attention with the concepts of Deconstruction has to do with the representation of reality and truth through language. Since we learned via Saussere's structuralist linguistics that the word as we know it is arbitrary and dependent on signification for meaning, how can we be assured that the signification and contexts we are using are the right ones to convey reality? The readings this week of Jacques Derrida, Jonathan Culler, and others shed light upon how the process of deconstruction works to identify the structural assumptions we make when deriving meaning, and how those can be exposed through the deconstructive process to critically examine what represents experience and reality. One of the more interesting concepts is the "Chain of signifiers", in which the signifier itself points not to the signified, or concept, but rather points to another set of signifiers, which each point to another set of signifiers, ad infinitum. It is this idea that "the word...never reaches the point when it refers to a signified" (Tyson 252) that positions language as nonreferential, with no end-game where a signified is met and all the supplements provided by the signifiers are resolves. There is no point at which language "refer[s] to things in the world" (252) instead relying on how we, through our own structures of signification, view concepts. Each chain of signifiers is dependent upon the structure that acts upon the creation of meaning and experience, and no longer dependent on the signified itself. For instance, a text never reaches the point where it relays the disparate ideas that formulated the text in the mind of the author - it instead is formulated of supplements that point to poten... ... middle of paper ... ...tor's needs as his father did. In this case, we can see not only did the creator fail to provide support, but the entire immersive environment which brought Victor to where he stood at the end of the novel, driven by revenge and hatred of his creation, which really is a representation of his own neglect at the hands of his creators. Works Cited Bressler, Charles E. Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. 5th ed. New York: Longman, 2011. Print. Culler, Jonathan. Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. Print. Johnson, Barbara. "My Monster/My Self" Frankenstein. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. 1st ed. New York: Norton, 1996. Print. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ed. Paul Hunter. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 2011. Print. Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User Friendly Guide. New York: Routledge, 2006. Print.
Heberle, Mark. "Contemporary Literary Criticism." O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried. Vol. 74. New York, 2001. 312.
Guerin, Wilfred L., et al., eds. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Toronto: Oxford UP, 1992.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 1996.
Small, Christopher “The Monster Modeled on Milton’s Adam.” Readings on Frankenstein. Ed. Don Nardo. San Diego, CA: David L. Bender, 2000. 47-52. Print.
Deconstruction or poststructuralist is a type of literary criticism that took its roots in the 1960’s. Jacques Derrida gave birth to the theory when he set out to demonstrate that all language is associated with mental images that we produce due to previous experiences. This system of literary scrutiny interprets meaning as effects from variances between words rather than their indication to the things they represent. This philosophical theory strives to reveal subconscious inconsistencies in a composition by examining deeply beneath its apparent meaning. Derrida’s theory teaches that texts are unstable and queries about the beliefs of words to embody reality.
Draper, James P., ed., et al. Contemporary Literary Criticism, Vol. 77. Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1993.
His ambitions are what isolate him and bring to life a creature whose suffering was unfairly conveyed into his life. The creature is isolated from everyone, including his creator. He had no choice, unlike Victor. Finally, as the story starts to change, the creature begins to take control of the situation. It is now Victor being isolated by the creature as a form of revenge.
- (Guerin, Wilfered; Labor, Earle; Morgan, Lee; Reesman, Jeanne; Willingham, John, A Handbook of Critical Appraches to Literature, New York, Oxford University Press, 1999.)
Guerin, Wilfred L., et.al. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: A Norton Critical Edition. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York: W. W.
Bressler, Charles E. Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. 5th ed. New York: Longman, 2011. Print.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: A Norton Critical Edition. ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York: W. W. Norton, 1996.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ed. D.L. Macdonald and Kathleen Scherf. Orchard Park, NY: Broadview Press, 1999.
The first theory used to analyze this magazine is the semiotic theory, developed by C.S. Peirce. This theory is used to find the meaning of signs and claims it is all in the meaning of the signs used. “A sign refers to something other than itself – the object, and is understood by somebody.
Groden, Michael and Martin Kreiswirth. The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory & Criticism. Johns Hopkins UP: Baltimore, 1994.