Customer Reviews

The Ear of the Other: Otobiography, Transference, Translation

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

In the book's central essay, Derrida deftly reads a short piece by Nietzsche on the way to reading the subject in the context of autobiography, of words one says about oneself. Those words, of course, return only by way of the ear so that one can locate oneself as the hearing other--hence his essay's title, "Otobiographies." The essay raises again the questions of speech and the voice and of the individual in language--questions that run through all of Derrida's work--as it paves the way for his later writings on the name. This is a must-read for anyone interested in the question of subjectivity that has so engrossed twentieth century philosophy as Derrida's account of the subject and of the way the subject knows about and can speak about itself is original, insightful, and provocative. The volume also includes the transcripts of two roundtable discussions: one on autobiography and one on translation, where Derrida with unusual clarity articulates an accessible version of his thinking on language. Finally there is an interview entitled "Choreographies" in which the editor forces Derrida to consider again the issue of gender and the status of woman. This volume is an often-overlooked but fascinating part of Derrida's corpus that will intrigue both the specialist and someone coming to Derrida's writings for the first time.

Don't be fooled by those claiming Derrida is the "other" of reason, 'Niemals noch hängte sich die Wahrheit an den Arm eines unbedingeten'. Coloured perspective and prejudice are also quite old 'cons'.
Double bind: Derrida defies metaphysics, yet of course inherently fails this attempt (we are all metaphysical beings). This is where conservative thinkers and bigots claim Derrida to be a con... I think not: Derrida tries to do, to think, to operate something different... indeed an "other" reason. Either you try to follow him, or you don't.

A criticism on this book is that Derrida focuses too much on 'microphilosophy'; indeed from a rigourous point of view autobiography is impossible... Différance, dissemination, archi-écriture, griffe, trace, etc...
Yet what Derrida (willfully?) forgets is that numerous autobiographies HAVE BEEN written. Of course he can reply that his point is exactly that those are not autiobiographies, but that is a superficial retort. In my opinion this doubleness, i daresay duality renders Derrida himself a metaphysicist (to continue in the terminology).
By (no doubt partly polemically) ruling out autobiography as such, and a priori (death of the author, etc.), Derrida implicitly contradicts a reality, instead of unveiling that reality.

Though this remains, together with 'Éperons' an excellent introduction into Derrida's unusually nuanced thought.

It's a collection of transcriptions of conversations/debates on various subjects between Derrida and other scholars. Sometimes I laughed out loud at the ridiculous statements and non-sequiturs.

Jacques Derrida is the "other" of reason. Actually, he's an inverted Kantian, nothing more. This is the sort of text his alterity-stricken fan club gets excited about. Its conversational style gives the impression that deep insights are waved at because they just never show up. The reader is made to feel that he missed something. And then the game is lost. Intangibility becomes intrinscially virtuous, and so the reader forgives the great Derrida's omissions, who is relieved of the responsibility of answering his own questions. Don't be fooled. He can't answer those questions because the special discourse he reserves for himself prohibits him from doing so in principle. That's the oldest con in the book. Derrida is the "other" of reason.