Of Grammatology

HATED, DESPISED, TOLERATED; MASTERPIECE BY DERRIDA:This manuscript shares a place in history with Hegel's "Phenomenology", as one of the most despised manuscripts of philosophy. And they are both despised for similar reasons; their inaccessibility.Hegel assumed his readers were already familiar with his entire system, prior to even approaching his "Phenomenology". Derrida does the same. They both wrote for their colleagues. In Derrida's case; he assumes the reader has passed through the following presuppositions: 1. they already understand the structure of phenomenology. 2. They have an understanding of Hegel through the eyes of Heidegger. 3. They already have an understanding of his mentor Paul Ricoeur and even Jean Luc Nancy, who also offered him the "singular-plural". He assumes too much.Therefore, I strongly recommend reading a prefatory commentary on Derrida first; but then, of course, attacking this original work. My current recommendation is to offer Dr. Christina Howells' book on Derrida. It is extremely well done.Having said his; I can tell you that the reviews of this manuscript of "Grammatology" will probably reflect "5-stars" or "1-star"; with very few in the middle. This is the writer who gathers the love-hate relationships unto himself. He does gather in 5-star ratings because, as Ricoeur once said, "This is a seminal work" of great importance. No individual can go around Hegel today in the field of philosophy (even if only to disagree); and the same will hold true for "Grammatology" in a few years. No individual will be able to go around this presentation of post-modern "deconstruction & re-elaboration".This a review and not a commentary, but I will give you the "10" moments of Derrida's deconstruction process. But please consider Howells' book. The "10" moments are:1. Phonological voice. 2. Deconstruction. 3. Psychic-turn-inward. 4. Auto-affection. 5. Dokounta threshold of "refinery". 6. Transcendental "arche". 7. Hinge pivot-point of true subjectivity. 8. Ecriture. 9. Logos- redefined. 10. Composition threshold and return to mystic body-state.It took "9 "years for this manuscript to make to America. It will be a few years before Derrida becomes essential reading for American philosophy; but it will happen. I am one of those who "loved" the work done by Derrida, and I give it 5-stars, with a recommendation to enjoin the reading with the help of Howells. Good luck on your research.

To say this book was enjoyable is an understatement. Indeed, it has been often said that Derrida's style is beyond comprehension, but I must say that, the faster one wishes to attain a concise meaning of what Derrida wishes to say, the faster you'll want to burn the book. The obscurity is intermittent; lucid moments become the coherence that everyone wished was alive in the first chapter. Derrida's avoidance of the "formula" of writing is what, for the most part, kept me interested. As for "unintelligibility," I must confess that, contrary to the normal Derridean defenses, just *read* it. Do NOT try to understand it immediately; that is to say, his goal is vague, indeed, but by simply reading it, you are planting a seed in your mind that'll grow by the time you finish it.

This is one of the great books of western philosophy of the twentieth century. Deconstruction used to get a bad rap for being "elitist" and impossible to understand or read. Then, a bit later, it was bad because it was apolitical. Neither was ever true.Derrida's writing, in this crucial translation, is always playful, imaginative, fearless, and also very basic. He is always more interested in asking questions than in answering them. If more people would think that way, and just stay with that for awhile before moving on to hold any theoretical, political, or religious position (if ever), we as a contentious pressure cooker of cultures might be doing a lot better.Read it for pleasure.

One of the famous three books of 1968 that put Derrida on the map. (And Prof. Spivak, as well.) Please ignore her introduction until you've spent some time with the text: Derrida's version of philosophy is performative, not descriptive, and as such cannot easily be encapsulated, if indeed it can be summarized at all.

again tough read

if you're into deconstruction philosophy, this is a cannon text. If not, it's a struggle, and one would find Habermas more fruitful.

Just what I ordered- THX

One of my favorite books on language.

This is not written for use as textbook but shows in a dense and convoluted way how writings may be interpreted in absence of actual speech or speech situatons.For this it is worth having. Also for the long and somewhat tangential prefix which is a classic in its own right .

La condizione del libro è ottimo ma il libro si è arrivato sei giorni dopo come previsto.

good book. thank you for quick delivering service.

Wonderful insights from the master of ambiguity!

Good