Misreading And Misapplication

This thesis focuses on the spread and variation of Derrida’s Deconstruction inChina, trying to apply the approach of the knowledge genealogy to restore the originalidea of Deconstruction. In the carding process, It attempts to sketch out the generalcontext of the spread and misreading of Derrida’s Deconstruction and clarify the basicclues of how to misread. On this basis, it investigates the relationship betweenDeconstruction and Chinese contemporary Pioneer Literature, discussing whyDerrida’s deconstruction was misread and misused.In addition to the introduction, this thesis is divided into four chapters.The first chapter is to restore the Original idea of Deconstruction, and to refutesomeone’s idea that the externality of Derrida’s identity led to the externality of hisDeconstruction. It points out that the externality of his identity and language isessential elements of his success rather than the reason why he was boycotted.Derrida’s Deconstruction is not mean to destroy the tradition of Western philosophyand culture. In fact, The Deconstruction is just a new way of thinking which is used tocompensate for the limitations of the traditional way of thinking.The second chapter sketches out systematically the historical process and tworoutes of the spread and variation of Derrida’s Deconstruction in China. First, somescholars,such as Murray、Brockman and Gadamer think that Derrida’s Deconstructionwas an idea of “Destruction” in philosophy and culture. Second, some westernMarxist scholars,such as Eagleton consider that Derrida’s Deconstruction breaksstructuralism’s language structure in orde to achieve their political intentions. The twopaths have caused the wrong idea about Derrida’s Deconstruction in China.The third chapter examines the relationship between Deconstruction and Chinesecontemporary pioneer literature. Pioneer Writers have Conscious awareness of "FormRevolution" when they create literature. They attempt to resist the domination of rigidform of “Cultural Revolution”in a new way of narrative. The Misinterpretation ahoutDeconstruction can not endure in the long run and show weaknesses in the face ofnew Literature. So deconstructionist criticism can not go on.The fourth chapter analyzes the reasons why Derrida’s Deconstruction wasmisread so seriously. It points out that the idea of “historical coincidence” is amisunderstood about Marx’s theory of art and can not effectively explain Chinese post-modernism cultural characteristics in the New Era. There are two reasons forDerrida Deconstruction misunderstood. On one hand, Chinese scholars have no abilityto understand Deconstruction and Blindly believe Western scholars view. On the otherhand, misunderstood Deconstruction meet the needs of the prevailing social trends.More importantly, Chinese scholars often think Western theories in value and lack ofawareness about S Genealogical.Conclusion: We must change our existing manner of creation of Literary Theory,restore the original idea of Western literary theory in order to reduce unnecessarymisunderstanding and misuse,building a theoretical and scientific Chinese contem-porary literary theory.