Déconcert:
a post-Derridian theory
by Manas Roy
Excerpt from Abstract:
The notion of Edmund Husserl’s ‘epoche’, as an exploration of new degrees of freedom in experience, is a very rich one. Husserl says, my ‘Epoche’ is nothing but a ‘sedimented’ or, ‘reflected’ part/portion of a ‘Phenomenological Reduction’. And it (epoche) to me is - “The reflected soul (Photo) of the external world through human consciousness”. After reflection from ‘epoche’, there results ‘photo consciousness’, which in turn outcomes as an “humanized essence of the external presence”, through a series of ‘photo- reflections’. As in the case of ‘Photosynthesis’ the tree leaves receive sunlight from the sun and then it is synthesized, in this way in ‘Photosyntagmatics’, the ‘Tabula rasa’ (Lock’s concept), receives conscious light from ‘Epoche’ or ‘Photo’, and then it (‘Photosyntagmatics’) results as a meaningful literal structure, as it is according to me. The theory of the syntagm casts a new light upon the role of ‘epoche’ towards concert-ment of photo-reflections. ‘Photosyntagm’ is the theoretical or literal presentation of ‘photoconscious ideas’ of ‘photoconscious image(s)’ in human mind which results after reflection from ‘Epoche’ or ‘Photo’; and ‘Photosyntagmatics’ is the method of translating the photoconscious ideas into meaningful literal structures with the help of respective syntagm, as are according to me. Syntagmatic analysis can be applied not only to verbal texts but also to audio-visual ones. In film and television, a syntagmatic analysis would involve an analysis of how each frame, shot, scene or sequence related to the others (these are the standard levels of analysis in film theory). At the lowest level is the individual frame. Since films are projected at a rate of 24 frames a second, the viewer is never conscious of individual frames, but significant frames can be isolated by the analyst. Beyond the fourfold distinction between frames, shots, scenes and sequences, the interpretative frameworks of film theorists differ considerably. In this sense at least, there is no cinematic 'language' but may have a newly approached ‘Photo-syntagmatics’. And Derrida’s effort towards deconstructing the formation of Language in respect to Pheno or Photosyntagm may lead towards deconcert-ing its Linguistic formation, as it appears to me. Thus ‘Déconcert’ to me, may be explained as: a Philosophical Method for evaluating pheno-reflective-concerts, resulting from ‘Concert’-ment of two (2) or more photo-syntagms, all at a time. And “Concert-ing Déconstruction” is only an effort towards exploration of the resultant-metaphysics of presence of Derrida’s Déconstructive Philosophy or the Philosophy of Déconstruction in the present era.
To access the pdf file for Déconcert: a post-Derridian theory, please click below: