Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.807817
Title: La rhétorique du commentaire dans les textes doubles de Jacques Derrida
Author: Thevenet, Charlotte
Awarding Body: UCL (University College London)
Current Institution: University College London (University of London)
Date of Award: 2020
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
That Jacques Derrida is an abstruse philosopher has long been a widespread opinion among philosophers and social scientists alike. Surprisingly, none of the researchers actually working on Derrida has ever tried to account for this stylistic obscurity. Focusing on texts putting forward an apparent illegibility through a divided page—“La double séance” (1972), “Tympan” (1972), Glas (1974)—, this thesis takes Derrida’s famous unreadability as its starting point to question the philosopher’s rhetorics. These texts’ difficulty, I argue, is not something to be sorry for not to celebrate, but rather an effect built by the text’s rhetorics itself, and as such, we should try to account for its mechanisms. This thesis both describes how these apparently illegible texts actually function and offers an answer regarding how to read them. Drawing on from poetics, rhetorics and discourse analysis, this thesis addresses the rhetorics of illegibility in Jacques Derrida’s work in three chapters, each examining one specific aspect of the texts. The first chapter tries to answer the question: “who speaks?” and proposes to answer it through the notion of ethos. Through a close reading of Derrida’s commentary of Hegel’s Spirit of Christianity in Glas, this chapter shows how the Derridean enunciator assumes a Jewish ethos in response to Hegel’s antijudaism. The second chapter tackles the question of genre, understood both as genre and as gender as it intends to demonstrate the relationship between the texts’ genre and the function assumed by the “woman”. Finally, the third chapter turns to the reader of these supposedly illegible texts: to whom these texts are written? Leaving aside their ‘real’ readers to examine the readers explicitly invoked in the texts, this chapter shows that under their textualistic looks, these texts actually equally put forward reading and hearing; following this thread, this last chapter tries to elaborate what it could mean to lend an ear to Derrida’s double-columned texts.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.807817  DOI: Not available
Share: