Postmodern Rhetorical Theory: Vehicles of Challenge to Foundationalism
Stacy A. Roberts September 23, 2004 Dr. Marston COMS 633
In the realm of postmodern theory, there are two individuals whose concepts emerge as extremely influential and imperative to fully understanding the discipline. The first individual, Jacques Derrida, explores the concept of deconstruction, and how language and text is used to manipulate people into believing what has traditionally been accepted as truth. When in fact, challenging those notions of truth in philosophy helps to unravel concepts which have been assumed for years, without a keen sense of what is truly being portrayed. The second individual, Jean Baudrillard, uses the concept of simulation as a tool used to re-think day-to-day occurrences which are most often taken for granted. An idea as simple as kissing your wife goodbye in the morning could be considered a simulation of “love” by enacting something that is prescribed by society to be the ritual of the relationship of love between a husband and wife. Baudrillard goes on to explain how our society actually prefers the simulation to the real; as children would rather watch T.V. where friends play outside, as opposed to actually going outside and playing with his or her friends. This paper will present deconstruction and simulation as vehicles which are effectively used to combat traditionalism, and create new facets of reality and meaning. Each postmodern theory goes against the grain, but if taken seriously, they are both extremely revolutionary and can bring about challenge and change within our society. Vehicle # 1: Deconstruction There are many foundational issues in life that most individuals take for granted, such as, philosophy of thought, literature, loved ones; the list can go on and on. There are certain individuals over time that have never quite adapted to the acceptance of all
things that are said, discussed, or written. Jacques Derrida is one of those individuals who has purposefully dedicated his career to deconstructing notions of foundationalism, and has been extremely successful in creating a different perspective on what is normally considered to be historically true in philosophical thought. Derrida’s texts represent ideas unlike anything else in modern philosophy, and strongly challenge the tradition and self-understanding of the discipline. The argument that Derrida presents is the refusal to grant philosophy the kind of privilege and status it has always demanded as the sole distributor of knowledge, logic, and reason. He confronts this assumed claim by confronting philosophers on their own turf and claiming that they continually impose their various systems of thought only by ignoring, or suppressing, the disruptive effects of language. Derrida’s goal with this challenge is to draw out the problematic issues with various philosophers by a utilizing critical reading which focuses on, and unpacks the elements of metaphor and other figural devises at work in the texts of philosophy. This deconstructive tool which Derrida uses so effectively, acts as a constant reminder of the ways in which language deflects or complicates a philosopher’s project. For example, Saussure, Hawkes, and Barthes, all represent the structuralist view of thought and philosophy; focusing on language as a differential network of meaning. They believe that there is no self evident or one-to-one link between the signifier and signified; the word as (spoken or written) the vehicle, and the concept it serves to evoke (Norris, 1982). In other words, language is constantly dependent on a structured basis of differences which allows for a small range of linguistic elements to represent a vast variety of meanings.
Saussure in particular, went on to develop a system aimed at fully explaining the concept of linguistics, which argued that “language could be placed on a scientific basis only by adopting a synchronic approach, one that treated language as a network of structural relations existing at a given point in time” (Norris, 1982, p. 25). Suassure’s mode of thinking created the structuralist perspective for future philosophers such as Barthes and Hawkes. Derrida took this opportunity to step in, and challenge the notion of structuralism by indicating that it had an unnatural attachment to the Western metaphysics of meaning and presence, which concentrates on the spoken word as opposed to written language. In particular he questioned the role of linguistics in dictating the methodological priorities of structuralist thought. Derrida asked the simple question, “What are we to make of this privileged status for speech in a theory which is otherwise so heavily committed to the prior significance of language-as-system” (Norris, 1982, p. 25)? Derrida answers his own question by stating that language and speech, are in fact dialectical, thus being connected and disconnected at any given time. He
continues to argue that Saussure was incorrect by choosing not to acknowledge the loopholes and problematic issues within his original reasoning for structuralism. Derrida claims that Saussure chose to suppress the idea of language as a signifying system which inherently exceeds all bounds of individual presence and speech. Derrida clearly takes a deconstructivist approach by looking at what Saussure’s theory of structuralism is NOT stating or addressing. According to Derrida, the
structuralist perspective does not give priority to the written word; rather it gives complete truth and authenticity to the voice, which creates an obvious imbalance. This
imbalance, or tension between designation and inclusion, creates the meaning of text, and thus meaning is indeterminate. Derrida continues this argument by stating that writing should be considered the precursor to language and that it must be originated prior to speech development. Writing must act as the governing body for language and speech, thus creating an endless display of meanings and interpretations. It is evident that Derrida focuses on contesting traditional notions of philosophical thought, as he continuously questions the logic behind major theories such as structuralism. He aims to critically dissect what is not being acknowledged or stated in any given theory, which clearly undermines traditionalism and its aim to put forth concepts to be digested and accepted without further thought. Vehicle # 2: Simulation Jean Baudrillard presents the notion of simulation as a clear challenge to foundationalism, and the society that we operate and live in. The basis behind simulation implies that “the very definition of the real has become that of which it is possible to give an equivalent reproduction, or in other words, the real is not only what can be reproduced, but that which is always already reproduced” (Baudrillard, 1983, p. 21). For example, Baudrillard discusses Disneyland and Watergate as vehicles of simulation, whereas society is fooled into believing that Disneyland is an imaginary world where caricatures live and play, and that Watergate was an actual scandal. Baudrillard presents an interesting perspective on Disneyland, which is considered to most of the world, “The Happiest Place on Earth,” yet when placed in a simulation model, Disneyland is quite the opposite. Anyone who attends Disneyland for the day, parks their car outside of the massive establishment in an enormous bleak
parking lot, while people are continuously herded into the park. Once inside the gates of Disneyland, there is an overwhelming experience of affection and warmth, where there are various “lands” and amusement rides for the crowd to experience. But, if one were to use a postmodern perspective to analyze the concept of Disneyland, they would find that it is a massive blanket of “third-order simulation”. In this case, Disneyland is presented as “imaginary in order to make us (society) believe that the rest is real, when in fact all of Los Angeles and the America surrounding it are not longer real, but of the order of the hyperreal and of pure simulation” (Baudrillard, 1983, p. 25). There are different areas of Disneyland that represent different eras of our history and time; Frontier Land, Fantasy Land, Tomorrow Land, all of which are based on a child-like atmosphere. It could be that Disneyland is designed this way to make adults feel like they are children again, or that they are far removed from the child-like sense of their lives. Either way, Disneyland is set up to circulate the notion of reality, within an amusement park that is nothing more than a web of endless, unreal places, people and things. Baudrillard also exposes Watergate as nothing more than a ploy designed to create scandal, when there was no scandal at all; a very radical perspective on a monumental “scandal” in American history. Instead of dissecting the “scandal”
involving Nixon, Baudrillard places blame on capitalism and its “instantaneous cruelty, its incomprehensible ferocity, its fundamental immorality; for this is what is truly scandalous” (Baudrillard, 1983, p. 29). Hence Watergate could be conceived as only a trap set by the system to catch its opponent, accompanied by a simulation model of
scandal. The scandal acts as the vehicle to create confusion, and manipulation from both sides of the spectrum, with the ultimate goal of removing Nixon from office. Both sides play a contributing role in the ultimate demise of Nixon, although neither party would acknowledge that fact. To help further clarify the concept of simulation, Baudrillard uses “phases of the image”, which define meaning as the constant reproduction of a simulation model. There are four different stages; sacrament, malefice, sorcery, and pure simulation. The first stage is sacrament, which presents meaning with a clear representation. For
example, the statement, Stacy Roberts is a graduate student at California State Northridge University, is an example of a sacrament, because it can be stated with truth; there is no denying that I am a graduate student. The second stage, malefice, is a reproduction of the model in an evil representation, or an untruthful statement. For example, an info-mercial which claims that ingesting a certain diet pill, will cause you to loose 20 pounds overnight is a statement which can not be stated with any truth. In fact, the statement is created to be untruthful, and deceitful to consumers, thus creating an evil representation of the actual product. The third stage is sorcery, which is a reproduction of the model in a masked reality. An example of this stage is made clear with the various brands of water which are marketed to consumers. All bottled water has the same effect for a human, but each brand is marketed as extremely different and unique brands of quality for the purpose of selling a product. The fact that all water companies mask the actual truth behind their
original product only reinforces the notion that if they were to actually sell their product as it is, it would not present itself as different and unique to any other brand. The last stage is pure simulation, which is when reality is completely eliminated, and only the model remains. For example, a commercial that does not give any Cigarette
information what-so-ever about the product, and only sells an image.
commercials are good examples of pure simulation because they attempt to sell what is cool about cigarettes; Marlboro’s are for rugged cowboys, Camel Lights are for teenagers, and Virginia Slims are for elegant ladies. There is no reality in each of those
advertisements, rather a simulation of what the experience is supposed to be like to smoke a particular brand of cigarettes. Baudrillard clearly presents the concept of simulation as being a vehicle which should be used to challenge everything in society, from commercial advertising, to Disneyland. There is not one aspect of our day-to-day involvements that can not be evaluated under the simulation scope, as people increasingly prefer the simulated model to reality. Both deconstruction and simulation are postmodern rhetorical theories which are presented as radial concepts designed to challenge traditional notions held in society. Taking the “path less traveled” is a difficult task for conceptual theorists, but in order to embody post-modernism, one must take the alternative route. Derrida and Baudrillard take a challenging stance against all that is known to be true in our society, and present various outlets to provoke thought and doubt in the current system.
References Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. (P. Foss, P. Patton & P. Beitchman, Trans.). United States: Semiotext. Derrida, J. (1997). Of grammatology. (G. Chakravorty Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Derrida, J. (1982). Deconstruction, theory and practice. (C. Norris, Trans.). New York: Methuen.