Deconstruction and Derrida- Thinking activity

Jacques Derrida was a French philosopher, born in Algeria (Click here to view the image source)

Derrida and 

Deconstruction

                                    Jacques Derrida was the most controversial philosopher and an Algerian-born French intellectual who is known as the Father of deconstruction. So, what is this ‘deconstruction’? What does it really mean? Is it even possible to define deconstruction? Well, here is a video in which Jacques Derrida himself tries to explain his theory. 

                          Let us try to understand this with one simple example. Have you watched one of the Disney’s fantasy films, a Computer Generated Imagery (CGI), which is an adaptation of the classic fairy tale ‘Sleeping Beauty’- ‘MALEFICENT’ (2014)? Well, if you have than were you able to notice certain aspects clearly? 

                         Let me check, how far can I read that film from a totally new dimension that is viewing what is absent! Like really, It would be a sort of more mental fun to see what is not shown directly. So, here is what I had explored turning the film upside down-

• -        Is the film normalizing homosexual love by the characters of Aurora and Maleficent?

According to the curse, it is only a true love's kiss that could awake Aurora from the life long sleep 

• -        Is the Film trying to show the perfection of the ‘Matriarchy of Moors’ rather than the glorification of the Patriarchal structure?

• -     Is the film trying to convey the role of an independent mother like what she should do or how a single mother should act?

• -        Is it trying to break the stereotype of ‘performing one’s gender’? For example, here in the below-mentioned scene neither the three fairies nor Maleficent is concerned for the infant. Can it be said that domesticity is not only limited to women and men can also perform the basic duties!

In this scene, it's Daniel (a crow whom Maleficent can transform into a man) who is consoling the baby and then making her sleep by moving the cradle slightly so that the baby can have a sound sleep. So, it can be interpreted that none of the members are interested in childcare or households.

• -        Can it be read that the film has guts to show the fairy godmother who struggles for her home in the sexist society or patriarchal kingdom? 

                       So this is what we call in Jacques Derrida’s language “Deconstruction”. Referring to an example of Derrida’s analysis of Husserl, Jonathan Culler describes-

“Deconstruction thus undertakes a double reading, describing the ways in which lines of argument in the texts it is analyzing, call their premises into question, and using the system of concepts within which a texts works to produce a constructs, such as difference and supplement, which challenge the consistency of that system.”

                                 Hence, it can be assumed that one cannot know something clearly as a whole unless the differentiation. Even deconstructionists believe that because the identity arises between the differentiation of things, the principle of difference is rather a principle of generative identity. 

                                           Derrida’s monumental discovery is that no sign is fully adequate. It is written “under erasure”, which expresses “the inadequacy of the sign”. This is not only limited to words but also to visual images. And therefore, films as a part of narrative can also be viewed from the deconstructionist’s point of view.

"Films are carefully constructed visual objects, and each element of that construction can function to generate meaning. The primary elements of meaning in film are composition (the arrangement of objects within the visual frame), editing, and art direction, which encompass everything from color and sound to set and location."

(An Introduction to Criticism Literature / Film / Culture by Michael Ryan)

                                     Michael Ryan believes that narrative filmmakers tell stories with meaning, much as novel writers do. But filmmaking is different because it is a visual medium that requires very different tools and techniques for creating meaning. By composing images and editing those images, they convey meaning. To see how far am I able to apply this, I have tried to interpret some frames of the ‘Beauty and the Beast’ from the deconstructive angle. 

                              The story of 'Beauty and the Beast' is told innumerable times. In these stories, the portrayal of the Beast is not as pleasing as the new narrative. 

Perhaps, it’s an anonymous story handed down from the distant past. But this was weaved in a literary composition that was created by the French writer Madame Gabrielle–Suzanne de Villeneuve in 1740.

De Villeneuve was part of the "second wave" of French fairy tale writers (Madame D'Aulnoy, Charles Perrault, and other salon fairy tale writers comprising the "first wave" fifty years earlier). When she sat down to create Beauty and the Beast (a novella–length tale first published in La jeune Americaine, et les contes marins), she was influenced by the work of "first wave" writers, by the story of "Cupid and Psyche" in Apuleius' Golden Ass, and by the various Animal Bridegroom legends of folklore.

The old narrative describes the beast as an ugly looking creature. The new film is very much progressive in terms of the making of a creature that is Beast. The Beast looks very much beautiful as compared to the old narratives.  

 The appearance of the Beast
From an ugly looking creature to a rather good to look at the creature!

This film is a progressive film where it shows the female protagonist as an inventor which perhaps the larger narratives of the same story have not yet shown or in some ways failed to show a woman in a progressive direction. Belle is the feminist heroine with conviction. While we like this feisty protagonist, her slightly modified character lacks a certain amount of compassion, making her seem a tad conceited more than confident. 

The film also shows the female protagonist is not subdued like other narratives. Belle's choice to be a prisoner instead of her father reveals her headstrong decision that she is going to handle the situation and will escape soon. Her concern for humanity is worth appreciating. 

Here, the rose is in the hand of Belle so would it be because from ancient times a rose, particularly a red rose is associated with love of a man for a woman or indirectly concerning it with the expression of love or admiration? Or would it be because women are meant to prove their admiration for their respective partners like Sita did from Rama in 'Ramayana'!

Click here to view it from a structuralist point of view. 

                             It is a matter of concern that how generally a rose is connected to women, how always to concern women a rose is shown as a love object or for purity and so on. Can it be assumed that people consider women as fragile as rose, as sensitive as rose, as beautiful as a rose? Perhaps, this is why they are “looked at”. Rose is a flower people love to stare, people love to smell and always wanted to keep within themselves, similarly, a woman has always been a victim of “male gaze”, people use her for different purposes, for example, for households and homemaking, etc. In fact, in a patriarchal society, women are meant to be a housemaid. They should remain at home and should perform their gender, isn’t it? 

This is how women are kept at home in the name of protection from evils!

                   The Beast, perhaps, represents men always wishes to prison women, like a misogynist, the Beast had always been cruel to Belle. He wishes to use her to regain his beauty. The way the male perfume advertisements take beautiful females to portray the handsomeness of men, similarly, it can be assumed that this bison-human hybrid uses Belle to regain his beauty.  Perhaps, this is why a woman is always privileged. The above-mentioned poster describes Belle inside the Beast as if a woman can only realize her beauty when praised by man or as if a woman can only realize her potential when she loses a man. 

            This seems like there is no existence of a woman if there is no man. The poster can be also be interpreted in the way like does it mean if there would be no man, we won't be able to identify the existence of woman. (Reference- black and white poster)

 This two-frame reveals the greatness of a woman, perhaps. The point to ponder here is-

Why there is always a concern for the beauty of woman and not man?

Had there been a spell on Bella and had she turned hideous, would the same man accept her in that look?

People love to look at a woman who is performing her gender, isn't it?

                            The first frame of a dance pose seems to be problematic from its very origin. It's a matter of great concern that why and how these types of conventional ball dance indirectly reveal patriarchy. This step of the dance seems to reveal how man is the controller and how a woman lets herself completely and freely in the arms of a man without any worries of her fall. Her complete reliance on the Beast directly can be connected with today's culture. Still, there exist women who are completely dependent on a man for a living.  They reveal how inefficient they are in the patriarchal structure. This conventional dance symbol of the ball room can be repeatedly observed in Disney movies. 

                                           The very second frame says how women are trapped in a stereotypical role as a caretaker of the family. 

The above-mentioned frame can be read in a way that informs the deep fears of society for a woman. These external factors always remain barrier for women to lift their carrier. Apart from this, the gothic elements also play a significant role in the development of women. 

Thus by reading these kinds of minute fractures, we can surely analyze a text from a deconstructive angle. 

Thank you.