Most of us seldom realize that we carry the dead with us, most of the time. In his most interesting work of all time, Derrida has tried to address some of these obsessions most of us have with these issues. This essay will however focus on some very pointed issues by explaining how Derrida’s idea of deconstruction is related to hauntology. In doing so, this essay will also endeavor to explain the connection between deconstruction and ghosts through themes such as death, absence, the structure of the sign and melancholia.
Relation between Deconstruction and Hauntology
Derrida himself claimed that the concept of deconstruction was a radicalisation of Marx’s legacy. According to him, Hauntology is related to the ethical turn of deconstruction, and represents a new aspect of deconstruction. (Davis, 2007, p.9) So one could interpret that hauntology is the new deconstruction. The author primarily defines the relationship as stated, primarily so that readers relate to Hauntology through deconstruction. He also wants to show that the two are not very different, as also possibly dispel the notion that Hauntology is related to ghosts (which it is not). The relation between hauntology and deconstruction comes up from the link between any themes (haunting, ghosts, the supernatural), and the processes of literature and textuality in general.
We now proceed to examine the connection between deconstruction and ghosts in terms of themes such as death, absence, the structure of sign and melancholia.
Death
The whole book by Davis (2007) talks about death, and the dead coming back to haunt the living through deconstruction, and consequently through hauntology. The author says that the death of others is also a renewed death of the self and that each death is unique, with each subsequent death destroying the world completely. Further, he states that our own imminent death becomes overshadowed when we see the death of people happening around us. He further refers to Derrida’s spectre as an example of deconstruction, that hovers between life and death, presence and absence. (p.11) The author further explains the significance in terms of hauntology is that the dead do not come back to haunt the living, because the living entity is already haunted by the spectre of death. He further explains that we have to bury the dead, failing which they will come back, probably as the undead (zombies).
Davis here is clearly examining death from an analytical point of view. The author’s explanations have several implications in real life. His first contention about the need to bury the dead means that we should be able to bury the ghosts of past events in our own lives, especially the ones that trouble us most. For that we need to deconstruct our own problems, since if we do not do that, they are likely to take more grotesque form (zombies), and come back to haunt us in the present. For instance, if we have wronged someone in a big way the ghost of that event might keep coming back to us, and in a way, that keeps increasing our guilt till we do something about it. The ghost will be exorcised only when we do something about it, such as tendering an apology or the like. Deconstruction helps us arrive at a solution while hauntology helps us take the ethical road to solving the problem. Thus, both deconstruction and hauntology are related as per the definition mentioned in the earlier part of this essay.
Absence
We have all faced absence of something or someone at most times in life. We feel an absence, because at some point in time there was a presence of that person. So presence describes the original state which came first, followed later by absence. (Holbling, 2007, p.50)
The implications of these lines mean that even in our lives we often suffer from the absence of someone or something, which means that in some earlier time someone or something was present whose absence we now feel. We need to deconstruct and understand the feeling of presence, and its consequent absence of that particular object. Any memory or thought of the presence would then be like a ghost that comes into the present to convey to us the feeling of the impending absence of that object or person. This feeling of absence of the once present object constant feeling in our lives that also shows how ghosts and deconstruction are related.
The Structure of the Sign
The Structure of the Sign is one of Derrida’s earlier works. The structure of the sign was first explained by Ferdinand Saussure. He defined the signifier to be the form which the sign takes, and the signified as the concept it articulates. (Holbling, 2007, p.72) We now try to view this using the concepts of deconstruction and hauntology.
Based on Davis’s writing and Holbling above, we can interpret that the sign defined here is definitely secondary since it always refers to some other theme or thing. At times, the sign may even refer to itself, but that still does not mean that the sign becomes the primary unit, it remains secondary. The signifying aspect of the sign is the primary unit always, making the sign secondary. The principle is the replication that allows ‘the sign’ to jump back again from the past, possibly in a changed form is an important aspect of the sign.
The concept of hauntology also gets applied in this case, since it means that the sign takes the form of a ghost as defined by Davis. (p. 9) In the book, the author also talks about Levinas’ Signs of the Dead (p.127), where Levinas says that the dead usually speak in the signs that change us without our knowing, and that we can neither forsee nor anticipate these signs. In this case, the sign is used by the dead to communicate signifying aspects. According to the concept of hauntology, The sign itself takes the form of a spectre, and comes back repeatedly to inform us of the signified. As stated above, the sign may come to us in various forms, shapes and apparitions, which we then need to be deconstruct. One should not make the mistake of interpreting the sign to be the signified. Thus, the relation between hauntology and deconstruction become more evident here than in other themes.
Melancholia
In the book, Davis shows disparity in Freud’s argument that time brings an end to mourning, and Derrida’s account of mourning as interminable and “always already begun” (p. 132). According to Davis, Derrida’s mourning is closer to Freud’s melancholia. Melancholia usually occurs when the an impediment affects our regular course of mourning. In fact, Derrida himself claims to be a melancholic person. (p.131) Davis further goes on to say “First, there is the possibility that in melancholia, in some sense, the dead speak. Unable to give up its attachment to what the subject has lost, the melancholic subject makes itself the forum where living and dead converse, though there may be a devastating price to be paid for this in terms of the subject’s own stability. Second, the source of melancholia may not be what the melancholic believes or says it to be; the melancholic subject may delude itself as much as it deceives others, it may not know or understand quite what it is saying precisely at the moments it seems to be most frank”.
If we interpret the quoted lines above, we understand that as humans when someone or something dies (could be a person, thought, work), we tend to connect ourselves in some way to the dead. Abraham and Torok say that the survivor is forced to keep the dead alive, due to the belief that the dead person is privy to some precious thing, which now the survivor also stands to lose due to the death. According to hauntology, these thoughts keep the person into a state of melancholy or mourning due to the lost object. This melancholic state then encourages the haunting of ghosts (hauntology), unless and until we deconstruct the state, solve the problem of the exact loss, and come to terms with it. In such a case, the hauntings cease, and according to Davis “we have buried the dead.”
Conclusion
In conclusion, we see that the concept of hauntology (ghosts) and deconstruction are closely related in ways that one or either can explain the themes under study quite well. Thus, the relation stated by us between deconstruction and hauntology can be deemed to be true.
Works Cited
Davis, Colin. Haunted Subjects. Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. Print
Holbling, Walter. Theories and Texts: For Students, by Students. LIT Verlag, 2007. Print
