In class yesterday we discussed Derrida’s “The Animal that Therefore I Am (More to Follow) .” I’m not super familiar with Derrida’s work, but I do have a general idea of his work dealing with deconstruction and post-structuralism. Personally, I do not care for the extremely postmodern and post-structuralism works, I prefer more [structure/construction] in my literature. However, I know that Derrida’s work is obviously not something to completely wipe off my slate or ignore.
I haven’t. I’ve been pondering and attempting to understand his “The Animal that Therefore I am (More to Follow),” and I feel like I’m struggling to see how the essay as a whole all works together. I feel like I can understands bits of it, but then I lose the argument as I work through the rest of the essay. I’m definitely planning on studying it more over this weekend, but if anyone has comments/insights they would like to impart on this confused student, I’d be extremely grateful.
What I do know is that Derrida was calling for animal rights to some extent. And bringing up the question of what we owe animals. But how this connects with literary theory is a mystery to me. I hope that I can wrestle some meaning out of it this weekend. That’s my hope.
But please, help this girl out if you can. 🙂
On a happier note, my professor likes the direction one of my papers is headed…so that was basically the highlight of my day. 😀