PowerPoint Slideshow about 'deconstruction and hamlet' - omer
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Deconstruction has a reputation for being the most complex and forbidding of contemporary critical approaches to literature, but in fact almost all of us have, at one time, either deconstructed a text or badly wanted to deconstruct one.
Deconstruction is dismantling the text. Demonstration that it has already dismantled itself. Breaking down the different areas.
The term refers to a way of reading texts practiced by critics who have been influenced by the writings of the French philosopher Jacques Derrida.
Although its ultimate aim may be to critique Western idealist and logic, deconstruction as it is practiced in literary criticism began as a response to structuralism and to formalism, another structure-oriented theory of reading.
Deconstruction calls into question assumptions made about literature by formalist, as well as structuralist, critics.
Both the formalist and the deconstructor focus on the literary text; neither is likely to interpret a poem or novel by relating it to events in the author’s life, letters, historical period, or even culture. Deconstructors find contradiction and undecidability.
Deconstructors confront the apparent limitless possibilities for the production of meaning that develop when the language of the critic enters the language of the text.
Deconstruction is easily misunderstood. It is a tendency to think that it has something to do with readers who decide the choice between two or more equally plausible, conflicting readings about the same text can’t be made.
The Law of the father, the ghost is questioned repeatedly. It cannot be internalized, not assimilated into the symbolic, and therefore blocks father than facilitates Hamlet’s own passage into the symbolic, where he will find his desire.
This father-The Ghost-isn’t dead enough. The injunction to “Remember me” suggests that he is not quite dead. Hamlet must renounce him, must internalize the Law by forgetting not by remembering. This is the only way he can be put in touch with his own desires and with the symbolic.
Doubting is a large portion of this section.
Lacan thus concerns himself with Shakespeare’s play as a remarkable example of the topology of human desire.
In current discussions of two Hegelian words for memory can show some light on the problem of the relationship between memory and revenge.
Erinnerung or recollection according to Paul de Man is the gathering and preserving of skill.
Gedachtnis or according to de Man is memory rote of names, or words considered as names, and cannot be separated from notation, inscription, or the writing down of these names. To remember these names one is required to write down what you are likely to forget.
To Hamlet, the ghost is supposed to be an all knowing figure or “sujet suppose savior.”
Hamlet may or may not believe in the ghost. The ghost’s existence is questionable.
There is a connection between the death of Freud’s father and Shakespeare’s father.
Freud and Hamlet’s stories are very similar.
Freud’s half brother is the “uncle” of the story and is “represented in Freud’s own dream associations in such a way as to suggest some real or imagined sexual relationship between Philip and his (Freud’s) mother.”