HOLLA! Derrida

Difference or differance…does it really matter? As I read Derrida, a very intellectual thinker at that, I honestly was confused as to the focus he had on the true relation between differance and difference. It got me thinking about De Saussure and how meaning is given to an arbitrary sign. In this case a different meaning is given to differance because of the arbitrary “a” in its context, whereas difference is given a different meaning because of the second arbitrary “e” in its context. Derrida considers in his text that differance can be seen as the “strategic note or connection—relatively or provisionally privileges—which indicates the closure of presence, together with the closure of the conceptual order and denomination, a closure that is effected in the functioning of traces” (121). I am not sure of the exact meaning of his quotation but I believe it to mean that differance is the denominator or connection of an object to its closure. Or it can mean that in language or words there are only difference or different meanings. As a whole I think Derrida is trying to explain that we are the individuals who give words meanings and in some cases different words mean different things to different individuals. Maybe this idea is what Derrida is trying to say what differance truly means. As I examine this reading more in depth it begins to confuse me more, I almost just want to skim the surface versus digging in. From going as in depth as I could, like I said above, I feel Derrida’s main point is to say that “every concept is necessarily and essentially inscribe in a chain or a system, within which it refers to another and to other concepts, by systematic play of difference” (127). I think this means, arbitrary words all being different give meaning to other arbitrary words, difference is what make these words their own giving us language as a whole. My idea or opinion or conclusion of this reading could be completely misunderstood, but these ideas and concepts are what I took away from Derrida’s text.