“Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida: A Critique

Introduction: “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

“Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida is an influential essay in deconstruction, challenging traditional notions of communication, writing, and context. Derrida critiques the privileging of speech over writing, arguing that writing is not merely a secondary representation of speech but possesses its own unique characteristics and possibilities. He deconstructs the concept of context, showing how it is always unstable and open to interpretation. Derrida also analyzes the act of signing, highlighting the paradoxical nature of a signature as both a mark of presence and an iterability that can function in the absence of the signer. The essay is characterized by its dense prose and complex theoretical arguments, but it remains a significant contribution to literary theory and philosophy, provoking ongoing debates about the nature of language, meaning, and communication

Summary of “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

• Questioning Communication: Derrida opens by challenging the straightforwardness of communication through the signifier “communication,” questioning whether it truly transmits a determinate content or value. He highlights the inherent multiplicity of meanings within the term “communication,” which goes beyond semantic or semiotic boundaries.
• “Is it certain that to the word communication corresponds a concept that is unique, univocal, rigorously controllable, and transmittable: in a word, communicable?”
• The Problem of Context: Derrida emphasizes that context, which supposedly anchors meaning, is itself unstable and not fully determinable. This instability affects how communication and meaning are conceived, as context cannot be completely controlled or known.
• “Is there a rigorous and scientific concept of context? Or does the notion of context not conceal, behind a certain confusion, philosophical presuppositions of a very determinate nature?”
• Writing vs. Speech: He discusses the traditional opposition between writing and speech, where writing is often considered a mere representation of speech. However, Derrida argues that writing exceeds these boundaries, affecting the very concept of communication and the transmission of meaning.
• “Writing is read; it is not the site, ‘in the last instance,’ of a hermeneutic deciphering, the decoding of a meaning or truth.”
• Iterability and Signature: Central to Derrida’s argument is the concept of iterability—writing must be repeatable and iterable outside the original context of its production. This concept extends to the act of signing, where a signature must be both repeatable and unique to function as a signature.
• “In order to function, that is, to be readable, a signature must have a repeatable, iterable, imitable form; it must be able to be detached from the present and singular intention of its production.”
• Performative Utterances: Derrida examines J.L. Austin’s theory of performative utterances (statements that perform an action by the act of being spoken, like vows) and argues that even these are subject to the complexities introduced by iterability and the instability of context.
• “A successful performative is necessarily an ‘impure’ performative… a performative utterance be possible if a citational doubling did not come to split and dissociate from itself the pure singularity of the event?”
• The Inevitability of Failure: He asserts that the possibility of failure is intrinsic to all acts of communication, suggesting that what Austin dismisses as ‘infelicities’ (errors) in performative utterances are not mere accidents but fundamental to understanding language’s function.
• “What is a success when the possibility of infelicity [failure] continues to constitute its structure?”
• Reevaluation of Writing and Speech: Ultimately, Derrida calls for a reevaluation of the hierarchy between writing and speech, proposing a new understanding that recognizes the foundational role of writing in shaping our concepts of meaning, presence, and identity.
• “The semantic horizon that habitually governs the notion of communication is exceeded or split by the intervention of writing, that is, by a dissemination irreducible to polysemy.”

Literary Terms in “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

Term/Concept	Definition	Explanation
Différance	A coined term that combines the ideas of “difference” and “deferment.”	Différance refers to how meaning in language is always deferred through a play of differences, indicating that words or signs only gain meaning through their distinction from and relation to other words or signs, and not through any inherent essence.
Iterability	The quality of a sign that allows it to be repeated or iterated in new contexts.	Derrida uses this concept to explain that the meaning of a sign (such as a written word) can change depending on its context, demonstrating the instability and context-dependency of textual meaning.
Dissemination	The concept that meaning in language spreads out in many directions without a single, fixed point of origin.	Dissemination challenges the idea of a single, authoritative meaning in texts, suggesting instead that texts generate multiple interpretations that cannot be fully controlled by the author.
Textual play	The dynamic interplay of meanings within a text due to the structure of language.	This concept emphasizes the fluidity and openness of texts to various interpretations, highlighting how readers interact with texts and create meaning rather than discovering a pre-existing meaning.
Deconstruction	A method of critical analysis that reveals internal contradictions in texts or concepts.	Deconstruction involves questioning the established distinctions in texts (like those between form and content, or speech and writing) to show how they are constructed and to reveal the inherent instability of these constructs.

Contribution of “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida To Literary Theory

• Deconstruction of Writing:
  • Derrida challenged the traditional view of writing as secondary to speech.
  • He emphasized the iterability of writing, its ability to function independently of the author and original context.
  • Quotation: “A written sign… can give rise to an iteration in the absence and beyond the presence of the empirically determined subject who… has emitted or produced it.”  
  • Impact: This deconstruction of writing led to a reevaluation of authorship and textual authority in literary theory.
• Destabilization of Meaning and Context:
  • Derrida questioned the stability of meaning and the determinacy of context.
  • He argued that the meaning of a text is not fixed but can shift with each new reading or context due to the iterability of writing.
  • Impact: This challenged traditional hermeneutic approaches and paved the way for reader-response theories and post-structuralist interpretations.
• Emphasis on the Reader’s Role:
  • By highlighting the iterability of writing and the instability of meaning, Derrida emphasized the active role of the reader in constructing meaning.
  • Texts are not seen as containers of pre-existing meanings but as sites for the production of meaning through the act of reading.
  • Impact: This contributed to the development of reader-response criticism and post-structuralist theories that focus on the plurality of interpretations.
• Influence on Post-Structuralism and Deconstruction:
  • “Signature Event Context” became a foundational text for post-structuralism and deconstruction.
  • Its ideas about the instability of meaning, the deconstruction of binary oppositions (like speech/writing), and the role of the reader were central to these theoretical movements.
  • Impact: This essay profoundly influenced subsequent literary theory and criticism, shaping how scholars approach and interpret texts.

Examples of Critiques: “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

Literary Work	Author	Derridian Concept Applied	Critique
“Hamlet”	William Shakespeare	Iterability	In “Hamlet,” the phrase “to be or not to be” can be deconstructed to show how its meaning shifts across different contexts within the play and in its various adaptations and performances. This demonstrates iterability, as the phrase resonates with new meanings each time it is uttered or considered.
“Pride and Prejudice”	Jane Austen	Dissemination	Derrida’s concept of dissemination can be applied to explore how themes of marriage and social class spread out in various directions in “Pride and Prejudice,” creating a multiplicity of meanings that resist being fixed to a singular, authoritative interpretation.
“Beloved”	Toni Morrison	Textual play	“Beloved” features a narrative structure and language that plays with linear time and reality. This textual play allows for a Derridian analysis, where the text challenges traditional narratives about slavery, memory, and identity, opening up to multiple interpretations.
“The Waste Land”	T.S. Eliot	Différance	“The Waste Land” exemplifies différance, as the poem delays and defers the arrival of a cohesive meaning through its fragmented form and the intertextual references that pull meanings apart, pushing the reader to navigate through a maze of cultural, historical, and literary allusions.

Criticism Against “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

• Obscurity and Impenetrability:
  • Derrida’s writing style is often criticized for its density, jargon, and lack of clarity, making it difficult for readers to grasp his arguments.
• Relativism and Nihilism:
  • Some critics accuse Derrida of promoting relativism by undermining the notion of objective truth and stable meaning. They argue that his deconstruction leads to nihilism, where all interpretations are equally valid and meaning becomes meaningless.
• Lack of Practical Application:
  • Critics argue that Derrida’s deconstructive approach offers little practical guidance for interpreting texts or engaging with literature in a meaningful way. They see it as an overly abstract and theoretical exercise with limited real-world applicability.
• Ignoring Authorial Intent:
  • By emphasizing the iterability of writing and the reader’s role in constructing meaning, Derrida is seen by some as neglecting the importance of authorial intent. Critics argue that ignoring the author’s intentions can lead to misinterpretations and a disregard for the historical and cultural context in which a text was created.
• Overemphasis on Language:
  • Some critics argue that Derrida’s focus on language and the written word neglects other important aspects of literature, such as its emotional impact, aesthetic qualities, and social significance. They believe his approach reduces literature to a mere linguistic game, ignoring its broader cultural and human dimensions.

Suggested Readings: “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

1. Bennington, Geoffrey. Jacques Derrida. University of Chicago Press, 1993.
2. Caputo, John D. Deconstruction in a Nutshell: A Conversation with Jacques Derrida. Fordham University Press, 1997.
3. Derrida, Jacques. Limited Inc. Northwestern University Press, 1988.
4. Derrida, Jacques. Margins of Philosophy. Translated by Alan Bass, University of Chicago Press, 1982.
5. Johnson, Christopher. System and Writing in the Philosophy of Jacques Derrida. Cambridge University Press, 1993.
6. Norris, Christopher. Derrida. Harvard University Press, 1987.
7. Royle, Nicholas. Jacques Derrida. Routledge, 2003.

Quotations with Explanation from “Signature Event Context” by Jacques Derrida

Quotation	Explanation
“A written signature implies the actual or empirical nonpresence of the signer.”	This highlights the paradox of signatures: they must authenticate identity yet function without the signer’s physical presence, illustrating Derrida’s concept of iterability—the signature must remain valid across different contexts, challenging the notion of a fixed authorial presence.
“Iterability alters, contaminating parasitically what it identifies and enables to repeat ‘itself’; it leaves impurity or the threat of impurity in its wake.”	Derrida discusses how repetition (iterability) of any sign introduces change and potential alteration of its meaning, thus no sign can have a pure, stable, or original meaning, emphasizing the dynamic nature of language and interpretation.
“What is put into question is precisely the quest for a reassuring certitude, in which the mind, hoping for the security of presence, could relate to itself.”	Derrida critiques the philosophical search for absolute certainty and stable meaning as an attempt to secure meaning in definitive presence, which is impossible due to language’s inherent structure defined by differences and deferrals (différance).
“The concept of writing exceeds and comprehends that of language.”	Here, Derrida asserts that writing is not merely a derivative of spoken language but encompasses it, challenging traditional linguistic hierarchies and suggesting that all forms of communication are instances of ‘writing’ in a broader sense.
“The absence of the referent is also the absence of the signified.”	This statement underscores the instability of signs, where the lack of a tangible referent (something directly referred to) also leads to the absence of a fixed conceptual meaning (the signified), emphasizing the fluidity and deferred nature of meaning.
“Is not what we call ‘context’ merely a coded, more or less stabilized network of possible iterabilities?”	Derrida deconstructs the notion of context as a fixed frame that secures meaning, suggesting instead that context itself is fluid, made up of repeatable signs (iterabilities) whose meanings shift, thus challenging the idea that context can ever fully stabilize interpretation.