“Differance” by Jacques Derrida: A Critique

Introduction: “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

“Differance” by Jacques Derrida, a neologism, first appeared in an oral presentation at the Société française de philosophie in 1968. It was subsequently published in the Bulletin de la Société française de philosophie that same year. The essay was later included in Derrida’s influential collection of essays, “Margins of Philosophy,” translated by Alan Bass in 1982. “Différance” is characterized by Derrida’s signature deconstructive style, challenging traditional notions of language, meaning, and presence. The essay introduces the concept of “différance,” a term that embodies both difference and deferral, highlighting the instability and infinite play of meaning in language. Derrida’s essay is a seminal work in post-structuralist thought, questioning the foundations of Western philosophy and opening up new avenues for critical inquiry.

Summary of “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

• Conceptual Introduction of Differance: Derrida introduces differance as a concept that challenges traditional categories of identity and equivalence, highlighting inherent distinctions within seemingly identical elements. He states, “We provisionally give the name differance to this sameness which is not identical.” This concept serves to disrupt conventional understandings of sameness, suggesting a foundational complexity that underlies apparent similarities.
• Temporal and Spatial Dynamics: Differance operates across both temporal and spatial dimensions, affecting the manifestation of phenomena through processes of delay and distancing. Derrida explains, “Differance…both as spacing/temporalizing and as the movement that structures every dissociation.” This dual influence challenges linear and static interpretations of time and space, reshaping our perception and understanding of reality.
• Beyond Words and Concepts: The concept of differance eludes traditional linguistic and conceptual classifications, highlighting its role in active differentiation processes that conventional language cannot fully capture. “Differance is neither a word nor a concept…the silent writing of its a, it has the desired advantage of referring to differing,” Derrida notes, emphasizing how differance transcends the limitations of philosophical and linguistic frameworks.
• Challenging Ontological Norms: By introducing continuous differentiation and deferral, differance questions and subverts established ontological categories, particularly those centered on being and presence. “Differance…is even the subversion of every realm,” Derrida remarks, suggesting that differance brings a fluid and dynamic aspect to ontology, challenging the dominance of static metaphysical concepts.
• Historical and Epochal Impact: Derrida posits that traditional narratives of being and the history of philosophy are just specific manifestations within a broader differantial process. He states, “The history of Being…is only one epoch of the diapherein.” This redefinition expands the scope of historical and philosophical inquiry, framing it as one phase in a larger process of ongoing differentiation.
• The Concept of the Trace: The trace is a concept that introduces ambiguity, challenging clear distinctions between presence and absence, and between phenomenology and ontology. “It is a trace that lies beyond what profoundly ties fundamental ontology to phenomenology,” Derrida explains. The trace disrupts traditional philosophical boundaries, offering a complex, nuanced structure that resists simple categorization.
• Resisting Representation and Definition: Differance inherently resists definitive categorization or representation, undermining the stability of knowledge and the processes of naming and defining within language. Derrida argues, “There is no essence of differance; not only can it not allow itself to be taken up into the as such of its name or its appearing, but it threatens the authority of the as such in general.” This resistance challenges the authority and effectiveness of traditional linguistic or philosophical definitions, suggesting a more dynamic and fluid understanding of concepts.

Literary Terms/Devices and Perspectives Introduced in “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

Theoretical Concept	Definition/Explanation
Différance	A neologism combining the French words for “to differ” and “to defer.” It embodies the dual nature of language, where meaning is derived from both the differences between words and the deferral of ultimate meaning. It is neither a word nor a concept, but rather a juncture that highlights the instability of language and the infinite play of meaning.
Trace	The mark left behind by the absence of a presence. It is not a presence itself, but rather a simulacrum that dislocates and refers beyond itself. The trace has no fixed place and is always subject to erasure, yet it is also the condition of possibility for meaning and representation.
Play	The endless movement of signification in language, where meanings are constantly shifting and deferred. It challenges the idea of a fixed or stable meaning and emphasizes the dynamic and open-ended nature of interpretation.
Spacing	The temporal and spatial intervals that separate and relate elements of language. It is through spacing that differences and deferrals become possible, and it is through spacing that meaning is produced.
Erasure	The process of effacing or erasing a trace, which is inherent to the very structure of the trace. Erasure is not simply a negation but also a condition of possibility for the trace to appear and function.

Contribution of “Differance” by Jacques Derrida to Literary Theory

• Deconstruction: Derrida’s concept of différance became the cornerstone of deconstruction, a critical approach that exposes the inherent contradictions and instabilities within texts. This led to a shift away from searching for fixed meanings and towards recognizing the multiple interpretations that a text can yield.
• The Death of the Author: By emphasizing the endless play of meaning in language, Derrida questioned the authority of the author in determining a text’s definitive meaning. This opened up space for readers to actively participate in the creation of meaning, rather than passively consuming the author’s intended message.
• Intertextuality: The concept of the trace highlighted the interconnectedness of texts, suggesting that no text exists in isolation. This encouraged literary critics to explore the ways in which texts reference, echo, and subvert each other, leading to a richer understanding of literary works.
• Post-Structuralism: Derrida’s ideas challenged the structuralist notion of language as a stable system with fixed meanings. This paved the way for post-structuralist theories that embraced the fluidity of language and the role of the reader in constructing meaning.
• The Role of Language: By exposing the limitations of language to fully represent reality, Derrida’s work prompted literary theorists to examine the ways in which language constructs and shapes our understanding of the world. This led to a greater awareness of the power of language to both reveal and conceal truths.

Examples of Critiques of Literary Works Through “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

Literary Work	Critique Through “Différance”
Hamlet (Shakespeare)	The play’s central question of “to be or not to be” can be seen as a manifestation of différance. The meaning of “being” is constantly deferred and differed throughout the play, never reaching a stable conclusion. The ghost of Hamlet’s father, a figure who is both present and absent, further emphasizes the play of difference and deferral.
The Purloined Letter (Edgar Allan Poe)	The letter itself becomes a symbol of différance. Its meaning is not inherent in the letter’s content but is rather determined by its circulation and the changing contexts in which it is read and interpreted. The detective Dupin’s ability to solve the case hinges on his understanding of the letter’s shifting significance within the power dynamics of the story.
The Metamorphosis (Franz Kafka)	Gregor Samsa’s transformation into an insect can be interpreted as a radical disruption of identity and meaning. His new form defies categorization and challenges the binary oppositions that structure human understanding. Gregor’s existence as a trace, neither fully human nor fully insect, embodies the instability and ambiguity that Derrida associates with différance.
A Rose for Emily (William Faulkner)	The story’s non-linear narrative and fragmented timeline disrupt the traditional flow of time and meaning. Emily Grierson herself becomes a trace, a figure who is both present and absent, alive and dead. The ending, with the discovery of Homer Barron’s corpse, reveals the hidden and deferred meanings that have been woven throughout the story.
One Hundred Years of Solitude (Gabriel Garcia Marquez)	The novel’s cyclical structure and repetition of names and events suggest the endless play of difference and deferral. The characters’ identities blur and merge, and the line between reality and fantasy becomes increasingly unstable. The novel’s magical realism can be seen as a manifestation of Derrida’s concept of the trace, where meaning is always deferred and ultimately elusive.

Criticism Against “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

• Lack of Clarity and Precision: Critics argue that Derrida’s concept of differance is deliberately obscure and lacks the clarity and precision typically expected in philosophical discourse. This obscurity can make it difficult for readers and scholars to understand and engage with his ideas effectively.
• Challenges to Traditional Logic: Derrida’s approach, which often undermines traditional logical structures like identity and non-contradiction, has been critiqued for potentially leading to relativism or nihilism. Critics question whether this approach is sustainable or meaningful within a coherent philosophical framework.
• Practical Relevance and Application: There is a concern about the practical relevance of differance. Critics ask how Derrida’s theoretical framework can be applied in concrete situations, especially in fields that require clear definitions and categories, such as law and natural sciences.
• Accusations of Semantic Play: Some critics view Derrida’s use of terms like differance (with its intentional misspelling) as mere semantic play rather than serious philosophical inquiry. They argue that this undermines the seriousness and utility of his philosophical contributions.
• Engagement with the History of Philosophy: Derrida’s interpretations and re-readings of other philosophers, essential to his development of differance, have been criticized for being selective or misrepresentative. Critics contend that he often bends historical texts to fit his theoretical model.
• Impact on the Discipline of Philosophy: Critics from more traditional philosophical camps argue that Derrida’s style and method contribute to the erosion of disciplinary boundaries in philosophy, potentially diluting rigorous analytical methods and clear argumentative structures.
• Epistemological Consequences: Derrida’s assertion that meaning is always deferred and can never be fully present or accessible invites criticism regarding the possibility of knowledge. Critics argue this stance leads to a form of epistemological skepticism that challenges the possibility of any certain or actionable knowledge.

Suggested Readings: “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

1. Bennington, Geoffrey. Derrida. University of Chicago Press, 1993.
2. Culler, Jonathan. On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism. Cornell University Press, 1982.
3. Derrida, Jacques. Margins of Philosophy. Translated by Alan Bass, University of Chicago Press, 1982.
4. Gasché, Rodolphe. The Tain of the Mirror: Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection. Harvard University Press, 1986.
5. Johnson, Barbara. The Critical Difference: Essays in the Contemporary Rhetoric of Reading. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980.
6. Norris, Christopher. Deconstruction: Theory and Practice. Routledge, 1982.
7. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Translator’s Preface.” Of Grammatology, by Jacques Derrida, translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976, pp. ix-lxxxvii.
8. Wolfreys, Julian. Derrida: A Guide for the Perplexed. Continuum, 2007.
9. Wood, David. Derrida: A Critical Reader. Blackwell, 1992.

Quotations with Explanation from “Differance” by Jacques Derrida

Quotation from “Différance”	Explanation
“Différance is neither a word nor a concept.”	Différance is not a static entity but a dynamic force that operates within language, challenging traditional notions of fixed meaning.
“In it, however, we shall see the juncture—rather than the summation—of what has been most decisively inscribed in the thought of what is conveniently called our ‘epoch’.”	Différance is a key to understanding the fundamental ideas and concerns of modern thought, particularly the emphasis on difference, deferral, and the instability of meaning.
“What is questioned by the thought of différance, therefore, is the determination of being in presence, or in beingness.”	Différance challenges the traditional philosophical focus on presence and being, arguing that meaning is constantly deferred and differed through the play of signs.
“Différance is not. It is not a being-present, however excellent, unique, principal, or transcendent one makes it.”	Différance is not a fixed entity or ultimate origin but rather a disruptive force that destabilizes traditional philosophical categories.
“There is no realm of différance, but différance is even the subversion of every realm.”	Différance undermines the idea of fixed realms or domains of knowledge, challenging the boundaries that define traditional systems of thought.
“The trace is not a presence but is rather the simulacrum of a presence that dislocates, displaces, and refers beyond itself.”	The trace is not a direct representation of an original presence but rather a mark or vestige that points to the absence of what it represents, highlighting the instability of meaning.
“The trace has, properly speaking, no place, for effacement belongs to the very structure of the trace.”	The trace is always subject to erasure and disappearance, yet its effacement is also the condition of its possibility, as it is through the absence of presence that the trace comes into being.
“The ‘matinal trace’ of difference is lost in an irretrievable invisibility, and yet even its loss is covered, preserved, regarded, and retarded.”	The original trace of difference is lost in the history of metaphysics, but its disappearance is not absolute. It remains as a trace within the text of metaphysics, a reminder of what has been forgotten and concealed.
“The metaphysical text is understood; it is still readable, and remains to be read.”	The metaphysical tradition, while built on the forgetting of différance, can still be read and interpreted in a way that reveals the traces of what it has concealed.
“There will be no unique name, not even the name of Being.”	Derrida rejects the idea of a single, all-encompassing name or concept that can capture the entirety of being or existence, emphasizing the ongoing play of différance and the impossibility of fixing meaning.