Post-Structuralism: An Indian Preview - Igcollege.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings of National Seminar on <strong>Post</strong>modern Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded A Reading of John Milton’s On His Blindness in the light of Deconstruction. -- Phutke S.N P.A.Holkar College, Ranisawargaon. Recently numbers of scholars have devoted themselves to the task of practicising literary theory in the classroom. This is becoming essential in demand with the contemporary trends in literary criticism. The present effort through the paper is to show how a familiar poem ‘On His Blindness’ leads the reader to an indeterminate position in the light of Deconstruction. The pioneer of this theory was Jacques Derrida. He was a prominent French philosopher. He put forth his views in his three well known books entitled Of Grammatology, Writing and Difference, and Speech and Phenomena. He is not the first person to use the term deconstruction, although it has become synonymous with him. The oxford English Dictionary (Vol 3,106) records that one McCarthy used this word in1882 in his Nineteenth Century: “A reform the beginning of which must be a work deconstruction.” It is derived from the French verb ‘deconstuire’ means to undo the construction of, to take to pieces. Perhaps this sense of ‘taking to pieces’ may have led the general perception of Derrida’s deconstruction with destruction alone. When we examined carefully the quotation from Oxford English Dictionary, it has become obvious that the work of deconstruction is not simply and solely for the sake of destruction. Whereas it is only a means to reform. Even though Derrida and his followers do not explicitly state such a ‘reformation.’ It is implicit that they are aiming towards a radical change in our way of thinking. De……..con……..struct…….. ion Diagram. The analysis of the word ‘deconstruction’ may be useful here to clarify the meaning of the term and show the relation between destruction and construction in deconstruction. The diagram shows that deconstruction comprises both destruction and construction, giving room for the explanation that there is no destruction without construction and vice-versa .This suggest the simultaneous co-existence. Also “De-” has three semantic functions i) relating, ii) reversing, and iii) intensifying. The relating “de-” refers to “down”, “away”, “apart”, “aside”, in such words as destruction, decrease etc. The reversing “de-” indicates a reversal of process as in demote, denationalize, denaturalize etc. and the intensifying “de-” adds emphasis to the root as in delimit, depict, deprave. All these three functions are involved in deconstruction. To limit the function of “de-” to one or the other would amount to going against the very spirit of “free play” that is main characteristic of deconstruction. It is supposed that deconstruction is very difficult to define, but it is not totally beyond the category of definition. Barbara Johnson have identified and discussed deconstructive reading strategies in a very simple manner in her essay Teaching Deconstructively (P.140-48). Her chief aim is to show how these strategies are useful in classroom situation to discuss on any work. She has given seven points, although these are not exhaustive in any way. These are ambiguous words, undecidable syntax, incompatibilities between what a text says and what it does, incompatibilities between the literal and the figurative, incompatibilities between explicitly fore grounded assertions and illustrative examples or less explicitly asserted supported supporting material, obscurity, and fictional selfinterpretations. For Milton’s ‘On His Blindness’ the first two strategies are employed. Firstly ambiguous words – means multiplicity of meaning and secondly an undecidable syntax 118 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
Proceedings of National Seminar on <strong>Post</strong>modern Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded allows itself to be indeterminate. There are different opinion about the exact date of composition and the time when he becomes blind. As ordinary mortal human being he raises questions about God’s justice but as a pious puritan he accepts his lot. When we see this poem in the light of deconstruction reveals its undecidability. There are number of variations of this poem. For instance Davis and Davis, Hughes, Palgrave. These variations are not only concerned with the title ‘On His Blindness’ by which it is popularly known, although not given by Milton himself, but also with punctuation, capitalization and spelling. Most of the edition like Palgrave has chosen to retain ‘On His Blindness’. Bernard and Elizabeth Davis have preferred to change the capital “H” to small “h”. Some of them have not given any title, but they identify the sonnet by the Roman numeral xix. All these changes in the title evoke the usually irrelevant question. Whose blindness is talked about in the poem? It may appear obvious that the poem is about Milton’s blindness. However, the suspicion is strengthened by the capital “H” in “His” which conventionally refers to the God. It is important to note that both “His” and “his” are used in the poem frequently. Now it should be observed that editorial use of small “h” may be an attempt to fix the blindness once and for all with John Milton. The dubious nature of “His” or “his”, divine and human is further complicated by what Barbara Johnson calls the undecidable syntax. It is sentence structure that allows an ambiguity. The undecidable syntax in “On His Blindness” is the rhetorical question “Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?”(Ramachandran & Achar,48) Generally, it is supposed to contain a negative response and the “patience” also prevents the “murmur” by a reconciliatory tone which in any way is in opposition to Milton’s sincere wish to serve his master. When we paid close attention to the use of adverb “fondly” the problem deepens. Usually “fondly” is substituted by foolishly and said that Milton shows his humility. To proceed from a deconstructive angle, the fool in foolishly is a jester. The fool like the one in King Lear is a professional fool in the royal court who makes the mad king understand life by his intelligent and meaningful discourse. The foolish poet Milton, who asks an intelligent question about Gods justice, is in fact, throwing the questions of blindness to explosively ambiguous meanings, including the blindness of the poet, God, Justice, the world, the poem, the language, the reader and so on. The problem gains additional force through the very first line “When I consider how my light is spent?”( Ramachandran & Achar,48 ) Why Milton does used the active voice in the subordinate clause and passive voice in the object. Through “how my light is spent?” does he suggest that somebody else spent his light, that is eyesight? Could that somebody be God? If so, what kind of God is He/he? Perhaps the last question may lead the reader to correct notion of “God” that functions as an authoritative source of fixed meaning. In this way from above it is clear that the conflicting forces within text leads to indeterminate position. It is apt to conclude with Derrida’s opinion, “language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique” (Lodge & Wood,112) Reference: 1) Palgrave, Francis. The Golden Treasury. Third ed., supplemented by Lawrence Bunyan. London:Macmillan, 1977. 2) Ramachandran, C.N. & Radha Achar,ed., Five Centuries of Poetry. Macmillan,1991. 3) Lodge, David & Nigel Wood, ed., Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. New Delhi:Pearson Education,2007. 4) Johnson, Barbara. Teaching Deconstructively, Atkins & Johnson,1985. 5) Davis, Bernard & Elizabeth Devis, ed., Poets of Early Seventeenth Century. London:Routledge & Kegan Paul,1967. 119 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
Page 1 and 2: Proceedings of National Seminar on
Page 41: Proceedings of National Seminar on

Post-Structuralism: An Indian Preview - Igcollege.org

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?