논문 : 자크 데리다(Jacques Derrida)의 할례받은 인식론과 종교없는 종교성: 할례의 상처와 피를 중심으로

김이석 ( I Saac Kim ) 서울대학교 종교문제연구소 2012 종교와 문화 Vol.0 No.23

This article seeks a religious and epistemological way to communicate between the deconstruction of Jacques Derrida and religion. Derrida declared himself an atheist, but his idea of deconstruction has often a conversation with theologians, because it strongly implies deep religiosity, especially that of apophatic theology which is Derrida` religio-philosophical prayers and tears, or religiosity without religion. He articulates them through the narrative of blood in the circumcision and circumfession (circumcised confession.) He explains his philosophy as bloodstained one. The blood comes from cuts, which are caused by the circumcision. Against the closed body, the cut and circumcision attempt to open the closed, and reveal the process of becoming. He suggests some new languages such as the idea of confession, love, and blood. which can speak beyond the boundary of closed structures. The blood is one of them. They resist the dominance of some logical programs, such as Derridaware and Derridabase, which circumscribe all idea and life of Derrida. For the arguments, he dialogues with St. Augustine in the Confession and his Circumfession. Augustine strongly affects Derrida theologically. Derrida calls Augustine ``SA,`` and himself ``sa,`` and adopts the way of confession as his epistemological way. Derrida thinks of his deconstruction not as a kind of information nor knowledge. but as that of confession. The confession as the way of apophasis epistemology allows him to speak eschatologically and deconstructively. Derrida follows Augustine, and develops the circumfession which is the confession with circumcision. The openness of the circumfession is more developed in the idea of blood and love. They stand for the endless development of him and endless desires for newness and openness, which allow a contact point between Derrida and religion.

자크 데리다의 사진론 -지연 가능성으로서의 사진-

황선영 동국대학교 동서사상연구소 2018 철학·사상·문화 Vol.0 No.27

This study attempts to make an analysis of Jacques Derrida’s work on photography and to show how photography and philosophy overlap in an indistinguishable way. Derrida's theory of photography is not a philosophical examination of photographic images, but rather a precondition for making one another possible. It contains Derrida’s important concepts and centers around questions of the representation, time, death, mourning, singularity and repetition. Through one of Derrida’s texts on photography, Demeure, Athènes, this study tries to think and to stage the relationship between philosophy and photography with a focus on the concept of time delay. A photographic image, which is a play of light and shadow, is a space that can not be explained by life and death, presence and absence, or all of the conflict structures, and is impossible to represent completely. Through Derrida’s work on photography, this study examines the photographic image as the time delay, spectral image, and remains of language, and opens the reader to a new way of thinking. 본 연구는 자크 데리다(Jacques Derrida)의 사진에 관한 텍스트 속에서 사진과 철학이 어떻게 구분 불가능한 방식으로 겹쳐있는지를 드러내고자 한다. 데리다의 사진론은 사진 이미지에 관한 철학적 고찰이 아니라 사진과 철학이 경계 지을 수 없으며, 서로가 서로를 가능하게 해주는 전제 조건이라는 것을 이야기한다. 데리다의 사진 이미지에 대한 사유는 철학 전반에 걸친 핵심 사상들을 관통하면서, 재현, 시간, 죽음, 애도, 특이성과 반복 등과 연결된다. 데리다의 사진에 관한 텍스트들 중 하나인, 『아테네라는 잔여물(Demeure, Athènes)』에서 이러한 철학과 사진에 관한 사유가 잘 나타나 있는데, 특히 지연 개념에 중점을 두고 분석하면서 사진 이미지의 존재론적 의미에 대해 고찰해 보고자 한다. 빛과 그림자의 놀이인 사진 이미지는 삶과 죽음, 현전과 부재, 모든 대립 구조로 설명할 수 없는 공간이며, 의미 체계가 완전히 재현할 수 없는 나머지이다. 데리다의 사진에 관한 텍스트를 통하여, 지연으로서의 시간, 유령적 이미지, 언어의 잉여물로서의 사진 이미지 속에서 새로운 사유의 가능성을 열 수 있게 된다.

자크 데리다와 발레리오 아다미의 미장아빔

한의정 한국미학예술학회 2022 美學·藝術學硏究 Vol.65 No.-

본 연구는 자크 데리다(Jacques Derrida)의 『회화에서의 진리』 (1978) 2장 「+R」을 중심으로 데리다와 발레리오 아다미(Valerio Adami)의 미장아빔 관계에 주목하고자 한다. 이 철학자와 화가의 협업은 예술과 문학, 텍스트와 이미지, 중심과 주변 사이의 경계선들을 해체하며 흔적들을 남기는 과정이었다. 본 연구는 첫째, 데리다의 사유와 예술론에서 아다미와의 협업이 차지하는 자리를 살핀다. 아다미의 작품 <『조종 Glas』을 따라 그린 데생 습작> 시리즈와 이에 대한 데리다의 글을 분석하며 그 안에 중첩된 에르곤/파레르곤, 텍스트/서명, 글/그림의 문제제기와 해답을 구명한다. 둘째, 데리다가 『조종』 (1974)에서 시도한 헤겔(G. W. F. Hegel)과 장 주네(Jean Genet)의 미장아빔과 거울효과를 분석한다. 가족, 성스러움, 인륜을 강조한 헤겔이 어떻게 동성애자이며 강박적 도벽이 있는 주네의 작품과 대화하며 서로를 비추는지 그 관계의 중첩을 살펴본다. 셋째, 데리다와 아다미가 글과 그림을 통해 수행한 미장아빔 대화가 단순한 자기반영적 형식이 아님을 밝혀낸다. 여기서 드러난 미장아빔은 텍스트의 고정된 의미를 확인시키는 것이 아니라, 다른 텍스트와의 관계 속에서 의미와 기능을 획득하는 방식으로 작동한다. 이러한 파레르곤(parergon)으로서 미장아빔의 형식은 재현과 현시의 틀에 갇히지 않고, 회화에서의 진리에 대해서 진술하는 예시가 된다. This study focuses on the relationship between Valerio Adami and Jacques Derrida, honing in on Chapter 2 “+R” of The Truth in Painting (1978). This collaboration was the process of deconstructing the boundaries between art and literature, text and image, and center and margin, all while leaving traces. First, this study examines the point of collaboration with Adami in Derrida’s thoughts and art theory. It analyzes Adami’s series entitled <Study for drawing after Glas>, and Derrida’s writings pertaining to it. Also examined are the problems and answers of ergon/parergon, text/signatures, and text/image. Second, we analyze mise en abyme and the mirror effects of G. W. F. Hegel and Jean Genet, which Derrida attempt in Glas (1974). We examine the reiteration of the relationship between Hegel and Genet: how Hegel, who emphasizes family, holiness, and morality, can speak to the works of Genet, who is homosexual and engages in obsessive kleptomania. This in light of how they reflect each other. Thirdly, it is revealed that the conversation between Derrida and Adami through their writings and drawings is not a simple self-reflective form. Here, the mise en abyme does not confirm the fixed meaning of the text, but rather operates in a way that acquires meaning and function in relation to other texts. The form of mise en abyme as such a parergon is not confined within the frame of representation and presentation, but becomes an example of discourse addressing the truth in painting.

자크 데리다(Jacques Derrida)의 해체주의 인식론과 선

이조원 한국선학회 2009 한국선학 Vol.23 No.-

자크 데리다(Jacques Derrida)는 서구의 형이상학과 존재론을 비판할 뿐만 아니라 형이상학을 극복하려는 시도들 역시 해체하였다. 소쉬르나 레비스트로스의 구조주의는 완전한 체계를 구상한다는 점에서, 현상학은 의식의 진리를 구한다는 점에서 모두 자신들이 공격한 전통 철학의 난점을 벗어나지 못하고 있다고 할 수 있다. 결국 데리다의 철학은 의미론적 혼란을 야기시켜 일정한 하나의 의미를 얻을 수 있다고 믿어 온 철학적 의미론을 해체시키는 것이다. 본 논문은 이러한 데리다의 해체주의를 불교와 선학의 입장에서 재구성하고 유의미성을 살펴보고자 한 것이다. 비록 이론적 구성이 다소 미흡하다고 하더라도 데리다가 구상하는 해체된 세계는 참선의 결과 득도한 주세불의 피안의 세계와 유사함을 지님을 부인키 어렵다. 이런 점에서 본 논문은 데리다의 핵심 이론을 재구성하면서 선학의 기초개념과 상호 관련성을 밝히는데 주안점을 두고 있다. 일반적으로 선(禪)은 불립문자(不立文字) 격외별전(格外別傳)으로 직지인심(直指人心), 견성성불(見凌成佛)을 목표로 한다. 굳이 문자를 필요로 하지 않으며 오직 마음에 의한, 정신을 한데 모으는 것, 즉 오도(悟適)를 목적으로 하는 것이다. 선의 방법론에 있어 문자를 사용하지 않는다는 것은 의도적으로 비의도적인 것을 사용함으로써 궁극적으로는 은연중에 그 이면에 은폐되어 있는 의미를 깨닫게 하는 데 있다. 이러한 선의 방법론은 글쓰기에 대한 데리다의 인식과 유사한 측면이 있다. 데리다는 서구 철학적 전통의 글쓰기에 대한 편견에 강한 이의를 제기하며 글쓰기의 새로운 실천을 주장한다. 음성언어의 타락된 형태로 간주되는 글쓰기는 의미를 나타내는 시니피앙으로서 단순한 기호(sign)에 지나지 않는다. 즉 기호로서 글쓰기는 文字의 형태로 의미표현을 위한 수단 이상을 뜻하지 않는다. 데리다에게서 글쓰기는 의미의 정합성과 현존을 요구하는 형이상학과는 달리 의미의 부재나 지체를 표현한다는데 그 특징이 있다. 글쓰기는 의미의 유희를 표현하는 차연의 구조에 따른다. 차연의 구조에 따르는 글쓰기에서 데리다가 강조하는 것은 의미가 계속되는 변경이나 운동 속에 있다는 것이다. 모든 인간적 표현인 기호체계는 글쓰기성을 벗어날 수 없다. 뿐만 아니라, 이러한 글쓰기성에 의해 의미의 정합성과 통일성을 요구하는 텍스트는 와해되어버리고 그 여백(margin)을 승인하지 않을 수 없게 된다. 이런 관점에서 볼 때, 데리다에게서 글을 쓴다는 것은 진리나 의미를 현존시키는 것이 아니라, 旣存하는 텍스트의 여백(margin)에 개입하는 행위이며 이들 여백을 들추어내어 註解하고 模寫하는 행위에 지나지 않는다. 이러한 글쓰기 실천에는 항상 의미의 차이와 지연이 따른다. 그러므로 인간적 표현의 어떤 행위로도 텍스트의 여백을 채울 수는 없으며, 의미로 포괄할 수 없는 여백은 늘 산출되며, 의미산출 이전에 선행하여 있는 것이다. 또한 데리다의 중심개념으로서의 해체하고자 하는 텍스트란 철학, 문학, 정치, 역사에 대한 온갖 기록물 뿐 만 아니라 생활세계에 있는 모든 이해의 지평을 포함한다. 이것이 데리다가 ‘텍스트 외부에는 아무것도 없다’라고 말하는 핵심 이유이다. 사회생활과 개인의 생활은 부분적으로 하나의 텍스트로서 구조를 가지고 있으며 해석학적 입장을 동원해도 이해하기 힘들 정도의 텍스트화 과정에 있다. 이러한 텍스트화 과정은 자기 동일화의 과정이나 변증법적 통일에 있는 것이 아니라 의미의 확산, 전이 그리고 차연에 있는 것이다. 해체는 텍스트에 있어서 의미의 놀이로부터 완전히 분리되어버린 담론을 의심하며 문제를 제기한다. 가령 헤겔의 담론이나 논리학이 左에서 右로, 또는 右에서 左로, 즉 혁명적으로 또는 반동적으로, 또는 양방향으로 동시에 읽혀질 수 있다면, 글쓰기에 지나지 않은 헤겔의 작업에 고정된 의미를 강조하는 것은 越權이며 폭력이 된다. 따라서 미리 구상된 설명 체계나 개념의 전체성은 의미작용의 책략이나 유희에 의해 풀어 헤쳐지게 된다. 모든 텍스트는 차연의 구조를 따르기 때문이다. 이 차연의 구조는 모든 것을 해체하고 집착하지 않으며, 모든 것을 버리는 선학의 구조와 유사하다고 할 수 있다. This thesis aims at finding the relationships of Jacques Derrida's epistemological basis with Seon(meditation) of traditional Buddhism. Jacques Derrida has been famous of one of the outstanding scholars whose theoretic interests were the post-modernism. The most peculiar theories of Jacques Derrida were about 'deconstruction' and 'deconstructionalism', which were based upon diffrance theory. The terms of 'diffrance' derived from that of 'to defer'. The term of 'diffrance' was made to be contained two meanings by Jacques Derrida. The one is 'to postpone' and the other is to differentiate. He combined with two meanings and made it to describe the phenomenon of sliding and mixing of the 'signified' and the 'signifiant'. The term of 'diffrance' led to that of 'deconstruction', the key concept of post-modernism. He wanted to deny all kind of text. The domain of text contained all kinds of usual customs, rules, theories and the way of life we rational human beings have regarded as a matter of course. Eventually he destroyed all kinds of 'meta theories' and principles of our world. And he wanted to get a sort of liberation from rigid rule looking through the world with the tool of rationalism. At this point, deconstructionalism has close relationship with the Seon(meditation) and Buddhism. Theory of dependent origination by Buddhism eventually wanted to waste of all sticked mind of men. This teaches us the method of view that we must not stick to rigid principles which we have regarded as granted. Methodologically that of Seon(meditation) and of deconstructionalism is very similar. Even their goals are different, the reaching regions of their accomplishment also very similar. They both wanted to achieve the liberation and peace in mind and usual life in our world.

행정윤리의 가능성의 조건에 대한 연구: Jacques Derrida의 윤리학을 중심으로

이문수 서울대학교 한국행정연구소 2013 行政論叢 Vol.51 No.3

Administrative ethics has been thought as being secured by the application of ethical codes to particular cases involving the behaviors and attitudes of governmental officials. This study calls such a view of administrative ethics into question through looking carefully into the ethical studies of Zigmunt Bauman, Emmanuel Levinas, and Jacques Derrida. In particular, this study argues that the current way of thinking about administrative ethics is more likely to debase the ethicality of administrative ethics by neglecting the origin of ethics itself in human relations. Assuming that genuine ethical behaviors come out of an impossible negotiation between infinite devotion to the radical other and communal rules, thinking ethics can be secured by adding more coded rules would deprive government officials of the potential to be ethical subjects. Based upon Derrida's ethical literature, this study argues that genuine administrative ethics are possible only when government officials keep in mind the fact that their decisions inevitably do some people damage, and that the responsibility flowing from this is wholly theirs. 현재 일반적으로 행정윤리를 사유하고 실천하는 방식은 관료들이 지켜야 할 규범질서를 먼저 명확히 한 다음 구체적인 행위들의 합법성, 정당성, 도덕성을 이 질서에 비추어 판단하는 방식을 취하고 있다. 본 연구는 포스트모던 사상가로 알려진 Zigmunt Bauman, Emmanuel Levinas, 그리고 Jacques Derrida의 윤리학에 대한 탐구를 통해서 현재의 행정윤리가 인간관계에서 고유하게 생성되는 윤리성 자체의 발현을 어렵게 하거나 더 나아가 그것을 억압하면서 행정윤리의 윤리성(ethicality) 자체를 파괴할 수 있음을 명확히 할 것이다. 진정한 윤리는 구체적 타자에 대하여 무한한 책임을 지는 것과 동시에 타자의 타자들 즉 공동체의 보편적 규범을 수호해야하는 결정 불가능한 아포리아에서 나온다고 했을 때 현재와 같이 윤리적 코드를 양산하면서 행정윤리를 확보하겠다는 시도는 행정에서 윤리의 가능성을 스스로 부인하는 것이다. Derrida의 윤리학에 기초하여 본 연구는 책임 있는 결정을 해야 하는 상황의 복잡성과 불가능성, 즉 자신의 결정이 누구에게는 커다란 피해를 줄 수 있다는 사실을 인지하고 거기에 따른 책임을 스스로 짊어지려는 자세에서 진정한 행정인의 윤리가 발생한다는 주장을 할 것이다.

신의 음성과 책임: 레비나스와 데리다의 생각 속의 키에르케고르적 윤리

윤원준 ( Won Jun Yun ) 한국조직신학회 2010 한국조직신학논총 Vol.28 No.-

Since Kierkegaard`s existential philosophy`s main target was Hegelian rationalism and the Hegelian Christianity, most of Kierkegaard`s writings were colored with religious concerns and antirational thought. Like Kierkegaard, some postmodern thinkers, such as Emmanuel Levinas and Jacques Derrida, show their interests in religious issues and challenge the modern foundationalism based on human reason. Also like Kierkegaard, Levinas and Derrida want to shake the human rational systems using the words God, transcendence, infinity, or the absolute Other, which interrupt and disturb this world. Despite those similarities, the differences among Kierkegaard, Levinas, and Derrida should not be ignored. For understanding the differences concerning religious issues among them, one should examine their interpretations and the possible interpretation about the Akedah. For Kierkegaard, Abraham showed two things in his action of binding his son Isaac: First, his duty toward God was absolute; second, his ethical responsibility toward the family and the society was relative and secondary when compared to the God`s command. Kierkegaard interprets that through the obedience of trying to kill his son, Abraham showed his faith. Levinas`s understanding of the Akedah is radically different from the Kierkegaard`s. For Levinas, Abraham was tempted to kill his son by the first God`s voice. However, Abraham could overcome that temptation through waiting patiently for the second God`s voice, and successfully came back to the real God`s ethic. Although Levinas does not say explicitly that Abraham saw or heard God`s voice "you are not to kill" on Isaac`s face, Levinas`s thought concerning human face can strongly support the interpretation that Abraham saw or heard God`s ethical command "you are not to kill" on his son`s face. Therefore, the ethics revealed through human face is prior to God`s direct command to sacrifice one`s own son. In contrast to Levinas`s interpretation, Derrida agrees Kierkegaard`s understanding that the absolute duty toward God conflicts with the responsibilities for family and society. Also like Kierkegaard, Derrida says that for the duty toward God, one should be ready for "the gift of death" that looks like a madness. However, Derrida does not want to abandon the universal ethical norms because of the religious faith. He wants to state that a responsibility for one other is always in conflict and in aporia with another responsibility for another(or other) other, using the expression "every other (one) is every (bit) other, tout autre est tout autre ." It is obvious that although Derrida does not want to ignore or to destroy any ethical system, his deconstruction does not try to construct an ethical system. Derrida correctly insists that every system seeking "the pure" or "the absolute", including Levinas`s ethical system, has the possibility of violence to the other.

이창동 영화의 문화적 의미- 『오아시스』와 롤랑 바르트의 신화론, 『밀양』과 자크 데리다의 『죽음의 선물』

이만식 한국비교문학회 2008 比較文學 Vol.0 No.44

The cultural significance of Lee Chang Dong's films, such as Oasis and Secret Sunshine, is officially recognized in world-class film festivals. The favorable appreciation of Lee Chang Dong's films by western culture is studied here in this paper especially in terms of the postmodern culture of Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida in order to suggest one of the potential directions for other Korean film directors as well as for Lee Chang Dong himself. Oasis can be meaningfully interpreted in relation with Roland Barthes' Mythologies, especially with the story of Gaston Dominici in “Dominici, ou le triomphe de la Littérature.” Dominici was 77-year-old farmer wrongly charged for the murder of Sir Jack Drumond's three family members mainly due to the lack of capacity to deal with the legal system, which is based upon the universal psychology developed within the cultural signification system of bourgeois society. Jong Du is a Dominici in Oasis presented by Lee Chang Dong. He is charged for the rape of Gong Ju in spite of their mutual consent mainly due to the lack of capacity to answer back the critical questions posed by the legal system. Gong Ju is in a little different position even though she is regarded and treated usually as another Dominici because she is paralyzed. Gong Ju reveals that she understands the cultural signification system of bourgeois society, when she says during the first serious conversation with Jong Do that she envies the working man. Lee Chang Dong suggests a way to counter-attack the cultural signification system of bourgeois society in this film entitled as Oasis, a representative 이만식 / 이창동 영화의 문화적 의미 111 image of the utopian dream of bourgeois society. He implies in the love story of Jong Du, idiot, and Gong Ju, cripple, that Oasis can be realized here in this bourgeois society even by the Dominicies. Secret Sunshine is a sensational film especially for Korean Christian society because of its inherent doubt about the validity of modern Christian faith. This film can be significantly related with Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death which has the secret intention to implode the fundamental basis of Christianity raising serious doubt about the modern Christian creed of absolute submission to God's will regardless of concerned human condition. Jong Chan became Christian with the latent desire to develop a relationship with Shin Ae. He represents a typical Christian in modern Korea. Shin Ae became Christian soon after her son was kidnapped and brutally murdered. She cannot be satisfied with usual Christian life style because she is really desperate to find out the excuses for her lonely existence resulted from the deprivation of her son, her only hope of life. Later she tries to forgive the convict, who declares surprisingly that he is already forgiven and saved by God. The killer of her son convinces that he is saved by God without prior consent of the victim, whereas Shin Ae is still asking for the peace of mind in Christianity. She is forced now to search for the real significance of Christian faith, i.e., the postmodern Christian faith not to exclude human concern even in the process of absolute submission to God's will. There is no possibility in the human side to find out the final resolution of this religious problem. The director of this film suggests in the final scene of location in Mil Yang, whose meaning of its Chinese letters is Secret Sunshine, under the secret sunshine that it is only probable now to end only with the process of compromise between Jong Chan's modern Christian faith and Shin Ae's postmodern Christian faith. I think this is the Christian interpretation, suggested in Secret Sunshine by Lee Chang Dong and acknowledged by Cannes Film Festival, of Derrida's political positions, democracy which is the place of negotiation or compromise between the present forms of democracy and ‘democracy to ... The cultural significance of Lee Chang Dong's films, such as Oasis and Secret Sunshine, is officially recognized in world-class film festivals. The favorable appreciation of Lee Chang Dong's films by western culture is studied here in this paper especially in terms of the postmodern culture of Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida in order to suggest one of the potential directions for other Korean film directors as well as for Lee Chang Dong himself. Oasis can be meaningfully interpreted in relation with Roland Barthes' Mythologies, especially with the story of Gaston Dominici in “Dominici, ou le triomphe de la Littérature.” Dominici was 77-year-old farmer wrongly charged for the murder of Sir Jack Drumond's three family members mainly due to the lack of capacity to deal with the legal system, which is based upon the universal psychology developed within the cultural signification system of bourgeois society. Jong Du is a Dominici in Oasis presented by Lee Chang Dong. He is charged for the rape of Gong Ju in spite of their mutual consent mainly due to the lack of capacity to answer back the critical questions posed by the legal system. Gong Ju is in a little different position even though she is regarded and treated usually as another Dominici because she is paralyzed. Gong Ju reveals that she understands the cultural signification system of bourgeois society, when she says during the first serious conversation with Jong Do that she envies the working man. Lee Chang Dong suggests a way to counter-attack the cultural signification system of bourgeois society in this film entitled as Oasis, a representative 이만식 / 이창동 영화의 문화적 의미 111 image of the utopian dream of bourgeois society. He implies in the love story of Jong Du, idiot, and Gong Ju, cripple, that Oasis can be realized here in this bourgeois society even by the Dominicies. Secret Sunshine is a sensational film especially for Korean Christian society because of its inherent doubt about the validity of modern Christian faith. This film can be significantly related with Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death which has the secret intention to implode the fundamental basis of Christianity raising serious doubt about the modern Christian creed of absolute submission to God's will regardless of concerned human condition. Jong Chan became Christian with the latent desire to develop a relationship with Shin Ae. He represents a typical Christian in modern Korea. Shin Ae became Christian soon after her son was kidnapped and brutally murdered. She cannot be satisfied with usual Christian life style because she is really desperate to find out the excuses for her lonely existence resulted from the deprivation of her son, her only hope of life. Later she tries to forgive the convict, who declares surprisingly that he is already forgiven and saved by God. The killer of her son convinces that he is saved by God without prior consent of the victim, whereas Shin Ae is still asking for the peace of mind in Christianity. She is forced now to search for the real significance of Christian faith, i.e., the postmodern Christian faith not to exclude human concern even in the process of absolute submission to God's will. There is no possibility in the human side to find out the final resolution of this religious problem. The director of this film suggests in the final scene of location in Mil Yang, whose meaning of its Chinese letters is Secret Sunshine, under the secret sunshine that it is only probable now to end only with the process of compromise between Jong Chan's modern Christian faith and Shin Ae's postmodern Christian faith. I think this is the Christian interpretation, suggested in Secret Sunshine by Lee Chang Dong and acknowledged by Cannes Film Festival, of Derrida's political positions, democracy which is the place of negotiation or compromise between the present forms of democracy and ‘democracy to come.’

자크 데리다의 해체론에서 메시아주의 없는 메시아성 연구

신명아 한국문학과종교학회 2016 문학과종교 Vol.21 No.3

자크 데리다의 해체론은 지금까지 포스트모던 담론으로서 G. W. F. 헤겔, I. 칸트 등 이성중심주의에 서 이성의 한계와 진리의 현존성의 부재, 즉 진리의 불 가해성에만 관심을 두면서 말의 유희에 고착된 비정치적이고 현실 사회에 유용 하지 않은 현학적인 사변적 학문으로 비판받아왔다. 그러나 데리다의 연구를 깊 게 진행한 학자들은 데리다의 해체론 이론이 얼마나 현실 사회에 직접적 관계 를 가지고 유효한 이론적 특을 제공하는지 인식하게 된다. 예를 들어, 데리다의 『불한당들』은 9․11 사건 이후 이라크를 재침공한 미국의 정치적 역사를 언급 하면서, 미국의 패권주의 형태를 불한당으로 묘사할 뿐만 아니라, 미국이 과거 에 아프가니스탄을 대상으로 러시아와의 간접적 전투에서 이기기 위해, 즉 미국 자신의 정치적 이익을 위해 길러낸 오사마 빈 라덴 같은 전사들이 어떻게 수 십 년 이후 미국을 직접 공격하는 관계를 가지게 되었는가를 자가면역의 개념으로 설명한다. 데리다는 패권주의의 정치적 행태가 자기를 보호하는 정책의 일환이 거꾸로 자기를 공격하는 결과적 구조를 가짐을 폭로하면서, 정치적 차원이나 개 인적 차원의모든 자기는 진정으로 타자를 품어주는 레비나스적 윤리의 차원을 가져야한다는 것을 주장하고 있다. Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction is misunderstood as lacking in historical and political perspectives due to its emphasis on indeterminacy of truth and its attack on presence of speech in metaphysical thoughts. This paper reveal how Derrida’s views of messianicity without messianism prove to be political and historical enough, as exemplified in his views of democracy to come and his criticism of hegemonic countries’ autoimmune policy toward the so-called rogue states such as Iraq, proving themselves to be rogue states themselves. Due to this autoimmune possibility, Derrida emphasizes ever-inclusive attitude toward the other, influenced by Emmanuel Levinas, but never essentializing the other as absolute substance. This view leads Derrida to deny apocalypse as the end of linear time and messianism as the end of theology itself. Derrida deconstructs democracy as it is and believes in our ever critical attitude toward the established system or thought, related to law itself, and awaits justice to be done, because of messianic structure of truth and justice.

쟈크 데리다의 문학이론

이만식 경원전문대학 2000 論文集 Vol.22 No.-

It is a fairly accurate statement about Jacques Derrida's literary theory, in Jonathan Culler's On Deconstruction, that "the implications of deconstruction for the study of literature are far from clear" and also that Derrida "has not dealt directly with topics such as the task of literary criticism, the methods of analyzing literary language, or the nature of meaning in literature". Derrida's logic is simple, but very powerful with its "rigour of argument". Thus, the description of the logical principles of texts can be one of the main purposes of Derrida's literary theory to be applied in the practical criticism. In this essay, eleven logical principles of texts are abstracted from Derrida's three major texts such as The Gift of Death, Positions and Of Grammatology. And also the further use of these textual principles is discussed in the case of practical criticism. Jonathan Culler gives us an example of practical criticism of deconstruction for the New Criticism's interpretation of John Donne's "The Canonization" in The Well-Wrought Urn of Cleanth Brooks: the paradoxical metaphor of the canonization of physical love. Culler makes an aporia with the unanswerable question about the well-wrought urn. Even though the concept of a well-wrought urn is accepted to be successfully made and embedded in Donne's poem, it is neither well-wrought nor perfect because the process of making it and its output cannot be in the same entity. The same logic can be applied to the critical principle of Cleanth Brooks. His book is not 'the well-wrought urn' even though it has the same title. His book itself is not a complete thing because the process is presented and included in the same place, and the output, if it is claimed to be complete, cannot be coexistent with the process of producing it, which is always incomplete. Culler's comment is accurate, but this kind of deconstructive criticism is quite narrow in its scope of application, whereas Brooks seems to make an important contribution to the deeper understanding of a poem, "The Canonization". Now, with the new textual principles of deconstruction, such as Derrida's logical principle No. 7, a corrective work can be suggested to the example of Culler's practical criticism. With the logical principle of "text is not homogeneous" and "reading is transformational", which means that another interpretation may be and must be added to Brooks and Culler, it can be argued that the canonization is not the only possible and meaningful goal suggested for the lovers in Donne's poem. The concept of canonization itself is paradoxical because it is not the goal for physical love and it is only used to emphasize the intensity of physical love. The metaphysical conceit was not created by John Donne for the harmonious completion of 'the well-wrought urn', but for the recognition of the chaotic and radical change of world-view in the 17th century.

데리다와 아감벤의 인간/동물관계에 근거한 윤리학과 정치학에 대한 연구

구자광 새한영어영문학회 2009 새한영어영문학 Vol.51 No.3

This paper aims to interpret Jacques Derrida's and Giorgio Agamben's ethical and political projects in terms of human/animal relations. They maintain that division of human/animal has been produced by operations of 'conceptual machinery'(Derrida) or 'anthropological machinery'(Agamben). In either case, the division has been established through the sacrifice of animals by the 'particular' species, humans. Conceptual and anthropological machinery has been instituted as the 'sacrificial structure.' Human/animal relations began with the 'initial violence' to animals. Derrida's acknowledgment that sacrifice is inevitable in any case leads him to thinking about institutions founded on 'the least violence.' Agamben claims the necessity to sever any 'nexus' or 'joint' that links human/animal life to institutions based on sacrifice. In Derrida, 're-founding' or 'inventing' a new 'least bad' institution starts with the coming animal others. The coming others make the machinery 'out of joint' which will drive humans to 'invent' a 'least bad law and politics.' Thus arises inevitable negotiations between the coming others and the existing machinery. Derrida will wait for the others to come and after that he can try any new political projects. The problem in Derrida seems to be that coming others can be used to serve the existing machinery just by providing opportunities to make the machinery work more effectively, less violently. Derrida would not give up the idea of improvement with all his deconstructive strategies. Agamben tries to just render any institutional divisions 'in-opera-tive.' By 'severing the nexus' in the machinery that has produced divisions, inclusion/exception, everything will return to its 'original context' in which no sacrificial exclusion was instituted. Instead of proposing any alternative institutions which will lead to the same stalemate as before, Agamben's political action of 'division of divisions' is just to return everything to its original 'free usage.' Following Benjamin, Agamben believes a possibility of 'happy life' could arise from 'free usage' of things liberated from the machinery. The 'coming community' can start with the free and liberated things. Agamben's project can open a totally revolutionary possibility.