Of Grammatology

Much of modern European philosophy is built on a foundation that was established in the mid-20th century in France. The philosophical boom was cultivated by the Sorbonne and a culture of defiant intellectualism. Jacques Derrida was one name among many that emerged during his period; his philosophical innovations appeared alongside the works of Emmanuel Levinas, Roland Barthes, Frantz Fanon, Michel Foucault, Julia Kristeva, Simone de Beauvoir, Jean-Paul Sartre, Jacques Lacan, and many others. The French playwright Hélène Cixous referred to the generation of philosophers during this period as “The Incorruptibles.” Derrida later explained that the term referred to the drive of his contemporaries to pursue writing and thinking independent from mainstream influence or accepted ideals. He was greatly influenced by his contemporaries and the philosophers who preceded him, and their names punctuate his work. As he outlines his arguments in On Grammatology, Derrida weaves in and challenges the theories of his peers and predecessors.

When Derrida was only 24, he visited a collection of Husserl’s works that was compiled after Husserl’s death. Derrida came across a short essay, only 30 pages, called “The Origin of Geometry.” In the essay, Husserl questions the idea that a number is something that exists in the external world. He sets aside the question of the external world entirely and, instead, focuses on metaphysics, or consciousness. For Husserl, the most important question was not whether something exists but how people are affected by their experiences. This essay was the birth of phenomenology. Although Derrida was critical of Husserl’s work, he acknowledged that Husserl’s emphasis on phenomenology influenced his own philosophical theories.

Husserl’s phenomenology stood out in a period in Western philosophy that emphasized concrete truth and scientific methods. Phenomenology challenged rationalism, the view perpetuated by the Age of Enlightenment and philosophers like Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Similarly, it challenged structuralism; first introduced by Ferdinand de Saussure, structuralism emphasized simple relationships between signifiers and the signified. Both structuralism and rationalism are predicated on a belief in fundamental truths. However, Derrida and his contemporaries rejected the notion of fundamental truth, arguing that it is too closely associated with interpretation and personal experience. Derrida praised Nietzsche for moving beyond metaphysics and challenging the restrictive binary oppositions that formed the basis of rationalism.

Derrida was troubled by the distinction between speech and writing that had been drawn by philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Hegel, and Saussure. He believed that these philosophers were stuck in a trap of their own making, which he called the “metaphysics of presence.” He argued that their adherence to truth and their eager pursuit of meaning made them ignorant of the limitations of their theories and the roles of negation and absence in language and concepts. His methodology of deconstruction allowed him to dismantle arguments from within, exposing the dependence and fragility of binaries.

While Derrida’s contemporaries joined him in pushing back against structuralism and modernism and challenging traditional ideas, Derrida’s work was distinct, and he often engaged in debates with his peers. Michel Foucault was also interested in dismantling structuralism, but his work focused on power dynamics and a genealogical understanding of concepts. Derrida contributed to Tel Quel, an avant-garde literary magazine that placed Derrida in social circles with other philosophers and thinkers. However, his ideas were unique when compared to the ideologies perpetuated by others in Tel Quel.

Derrida’s philosophical life was one marked by standing out and challenging absolutes. His work is reactionary—both to the philosophers who preceded him and to his peers, who also viewed themselves as decoding the mysteries of life at Café de Flore in France.