The D-Bomb

"Deconstruction is for those who find today’s pervasive (intellectual, philosophical, religious and commercial hype) inadequate, limiting and unbearable. The D-bomb is for those who would rather sense every leaf and every grain of sand rather than be mentally blocked into just seeing a predetermined tree or desert. Obviously there are those who prefer and even seek power by limiting your thought processes."*

*Ah, the D-Bomb. The real question here is why, on a Sunday afternoon, I feel compelled to respond to a comment lost somewhere in the trail of waste oozing off the bottom of a fairly convincing article on French Theory by Stanley Fish (http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/french-theory-in-america-part-two/#comment-27729).
He contends that deconstruction does not and could not influence any kind of political stance. The first following comment is a pretentious howler. I skimmed over the rest, but when my eyes landed on some indignant and mystifying scrap, I couldn't help but feel like I was watching a kind of highbrow Jerry Springer show. Fish is praised, questioned, and scorned in varying tones. One commentator accuses his text of being "highly constructed." This vapid invective brought to mind one of the more striking contradictions that appeared to me in my very brief encounter with "the D-Bomb," namely, the trace of a (non[how I loath flagrant misuse of parenthesis])implication that constructivity (Christ, constructedness, constructiveness - how about construction?) might be avoided, when the cultural construction of all "truths" seems so decisively settled. I generally fall in with those that think that politically charged incomprehensibility is not an acceptable end or start point to any kind of discourse.

Anyway, this is a cautionary post for any Derrida virgins (though I didn't get any farther than a little awkward fingerplay) who, on reading the above post, might think that a heavy dose of the "D-bomb" will induce sudden and comprehensive awareness of the Buddha-nature. If you want to feel like you're aware of every grain of sand, I'd recommend LSD and a prolonged camping trip. While the epiphany that all of one's thoughts, preferences and favorite books are mere cultural constructions does have a kind of Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure "woah" value, it won't last nearly as long, for the following logical question, "so what do I do," remains stubbornly unanswered. For me, pointing fingers at constructions does not de-do anything to them.

I chose this selection for another reason, (besides the fact that I like deserts, and find the image of a solitary tree breaking a horizon compelling, be it predetermined or not) - it's final attack, echoing through university halls all across the country since this revolution got started. To those who would accuse someone of limiting their thought by not blindly accepting an academic trend- shame on you. Disliking the D-Bomb does not make one a power-hungry reactionary.