Re: PS: To Jim

J J R (jrovira@juno.com)
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 21:05:15 -0500 (EST) 

On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 19:25:01 -0500 omlor@packet.net (john v. omlor)
writes:
>Jim,
>
>I forgot one more little bit of reading.
>
>Regarding your theory about the secularization of Paul's work in 
>Derrida...
>The language you cite concerning all becoming one and the dream of 
>unity
>through the restoration of the voice of the other is of course 
>completely
>and utterly counter to Derrida's large collection of work as the
>philosopher of *differance* and hetereogeneity par excellence.  In 
>fact, if
>you wish to argue that JD's work is the secularization of any 
>religious
>tradition, it would more likely be the Hebraic tradition of the 
>Midrash
>(again, see *Glas* on the synagogue and writing here.

The distinction between Paulinism and the midrashic tradition here is
blown out of proportion--Paul himself wrote within that tradition, and
the New Testament authors were merely repeating themes already common in
the Hebrew literature they were familiar with.

A brief comparison between the book of Revelation and Ezekiel would be in
order to pick up on the most obvious similarities. 

The point is that of influence.  I quoted Paul as an example but referred
specifically to the "Judeo-Christian" tradition.  It's not that ideas are
imported wholesale and repeated.  It's that "values" are cherished and
upheld through a radically different set of ideas.  

  For more on the
>differences between moments of deconstruction and Pauline projects see 
>also
>Derrida's reading of Augustine, his mother's death, and the problems 
>of
>writing in "Circumfession").

If you thought I meant to "identify" Derrida's ideas with Paul's you're
mistaken :)  That would be ridiculous.  Citing differences is moot to my
point, then.

  Also, I think Derrida's work positions 
>itself
>repeatedly in resistance to the very sort of rhetoric of solution 
>(either
>poltical or linguistic) that your first paragraph uses in its attempt 
>to
>define a complex collection of texts.

Of course it does.  But it fails :)

  The fact that these texts seek 
>often
>to disseminate even their own trajectory suggests that the unifying 
>and
>linear metaphors of Paul might not be the most likely ones to have 
>founded
>them.
>

They were historically "previous" to Derrida, you already cited
"midrashic" influences as a possibility, and besides all that, the
Judeo-Christian tradition has so infiltrated the western
mindset--including Heidegger, Husserl, and even Nietzche with all his
blustering against it, that Derrida could easily have been influenced by
this tradition without reading a single one of its prinicple texts...

>Unless you had someone else's work or another text specifically in 
>mind.
>
>Just a thought,
>
>--John

Not at all :)

Jim

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]