Document Type
Article
Abstract
This article examines Derrida’s conception of logocentrism as it is discussed throughout the entirety of his seminal work Of Grammatology, as well as in his collected interviews, Points...: 1974-1994. Systematically refuting logocentrism, Derrida’s deconstruction enables exposure of the mechanisms, such as binary constructions, that exert a dominant—and domineering—influence over marginalized people, places, and concepts. Specifically, presence and the (falsehood of the) totality of the sign define logocentrism, and these terms cannot productively contribute to trauma studies because it is precisely in texts and textuality that embodied states can be studied. Texts are themselves material embodiments that display ways of thinking. At the very least, through Derrida’s deconstructive framework, the terms of logocentrism can be dismantled to discover how and why they work. The implications of the Derridian deconstruction of logocentrism is explored and detailed within the parameters of trauma studies and briefly in connection with the author’s own project on trauma and gender in order to illustrate how Derrida’s critique of logocentrism can be applied to these concerns. In particular, the significance and relevance of Derrida’s work to the work of trauma theorists such as Elaine Scarry is considered, and conclusions are proposed concerning the applicability of Derrida’s work to trauma studies as a whole and in conjunction with other trauma and poststructuralist thinkers, like Judith Butler.
Repository Citation
Goodspeed-Chadwick, Julie E.. "Derrida’s Deconstruction of Logocentrism: Implications for Trauma Studies." Reconstruction: Studies in Contemporary Culture vol. 6, no. 2, 2006, pp. 1–14. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/reconstruction/vol6/iss2/3
Included in
Discourse and Text Linguistics Commons, Philosophy of Language Commons, Rhetoric and Composition Commons