A Glance at the Impact of Derrida's Deconstruction on Criticism of the Death of the Author

Document Type : Original/Research/Regular Article

Author

Assistant Professor,Damghan University of Art

Abstract

The mysterious nature of mirrors has always been and attractive for artists to choose as their subject matter for the creation of the artwork. This is not just due to their reflective quality of their surroundings but also because of their capability to change such reflections. Today, mirrors and knowledge about them are being used beyond their reflecting feature more than any time before. Mirrors have coexisted mysteriously with the art and have found their special meanings in different cultures in the same way that art has enveloped other sciences, like psychology, politics, and technology. The complexity of mirrors and their ability to reflect things in a unique way is contrary to their simplicity. Therefore, their impression on their audiences varies from person to another. In other words, this method of “deconstructive reflection” (as Derrida has named it), can be explained as: the hidden meanings of signifiers that are constantly suspending and floating; the subject finds its meaning only through its division, multiplication, and expansion in space and floating in time.
Using mirrors in the field of interactive arts can represent the relationship between the artist and his inner and outside world. The involvement of mirrors in artworks can be a way of representing the audience by the artist, in a way that the presence of the artist/author is unavoidable in some of the new artworks. This form of indirect interaction within the symbols, signs, and/or archetypes in the art work can create a multi-layered relationship with the audience. Moreover, such interaction between the audience and artwork makes the role of artist even more effective and also creates a new form of perception and understanding for the audience.
In this essay, attempt has been made to study and analyze the roles and functions of mirrors in the new interactive arts. Therefore, the author has proposed a method to examine the potentials of the poststructuralist ideas, such as Roland Barthes and Derrida’s, and if they are employable on Post-modern art. Furthermore, the paper seeks to respond to the literary idea of “The Death of the Author” and if we can perceive new meanings from artworks through this Barthesian debate.
To this purpose, the research studies the roles of mirrors in the post-structuralist framework and Barthes’ theory of “The Death of the Author”. Hence, on one hand, this essay challenges this Bathesian theory in the interpretation of contemporary artworks, and on the other, analyzes mirror’s functions through Derrida’s post-structuralist theory. Finally, this essay concludes new responses to the author’s transformational role in the relationship with the audience and artwork.
Through this relationship, the paper presumes that not only the author is not dead or absent in the art work-audience relationship but also exists in a more effective way through his indirect interaction with his audience. Interactive arts, including those that involve functional mirrors, are appropriate candidates for this research elaborating upon the thoughts and ideas of post-modern theorists like Barthes and Derrida. The data required to conduct this research has been gathered through the desk study of library resources taking descriptive-comparative method. The statistical population includes six examples of interactive arts created during the past decades. The works selected are sufficient to support the paper’s hypothesis and also extend it to the aforementioned theories. 

Keywords


  • Ahmadian, M. (2002).The Influence of Jacques Derrida's Thoughts on Postmodern Art. In Amirali Nojoumian (Ed.). Proceedings of the Conference on Barthes & Derrida’s Thoughts. Tehran: Academy of Arts.
  • Archer, M. (2013). Art since 1960. (Katayoun Yousefi, Trans.). Tehran: Herfeh Honarmand.
  • Barthes, R. (1994). From Work to Text. (Morad Farhadpour, Trans.). Arghanoon, 4, 57-66.
  • Barthes, R. (2012). The Pleasure of the Text. (Payam Yazdanjoo, Trans.). Tehran: Markaz.
  • Bolkhari Ghahi, H. (2005). Mystical Principles and Islamic Architecture. Tehran: Sooreh Mehr.
  • Bishop, C. (2010).The Art of Arranging Art Installation. (Visheh Khatami Moghadam, Trans.). Tehran: Mehrnorouz.
  • Dashti, M. (2010). Constructivism, Post-Constructivism and Literary Studies in Iran. Selected Bibliography of Constructivist and Post-Constructivist Literary Criticism in Persian from 1990 to 2009. Book of the Month: Literature, 157, 54-121.
  • Dehghani, A. (2008). New Art, Interactive Art, Text and Typography of Interaction Tools. Tandis,128,18.
  • Ghaderi, E. (2014). A Study on How to define and Draw Distinctions between Various Types of Participation/Interactive-based Arts. Global Media Journal, 9(1), 88-112.
  • Hafez, S. M. (1983). Divan of Hafez. (Compiled by Mohammad Reza Jalali Naeeni and Nazir Ahamd). Tehran: Amir Kabir.
  • Hooshmand, Z. (2008). Selection of the Works of Monir Shahroudi Farmanfarmayian. Tehran: Nazar.
  • Kepes, G. (2013). The Language of Vision. Tehran: Soroush.
  • Lucie-Smith, E. (2009). Globalization and New Art. (Alireza Sami Azar, Trans.). Tehran: Nazar.
  • Lucie-Smith, E. (2001). Movements in Art since 1945: Issues and Concepts. (Alireza Sami Azar, Trans.). Tehran: Nazar.
  • Meghdadi, B. (2008). Encyclopedia of Literary Theory: from Plato To the Present. Tehran: Fekr-e Rooz.
  • Moshref, M. (2004). Mirror and Harp in the Language of Rumi. Journal of the Faculty of Literature and Humanities, 12(45), 81-106.
  • Mosta'li, Gh. (2010). Rhetorical use of Mirrors in Saeb’s Divan. Bahar-i Adab (Quarterly Journal of Stylistics of Persian Poem & Prose), 3(2), 45-58.
  • Rafizadeh, R. (2015). Analysis of the Role of the Audience's Body in The Perception of Traditional Portrait Artwork and Digital Interactive Portraits Using the Ideas of Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Shebak, 39, 19-28.
  • Rahbarnia, Z. & Masdari, F. (2015). The Impact of New Media on Interactivity of Modern Art: Using the Theory of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Journal of Social Sciences of University of Tehran, 10(2), 221-235.
  • Rush, M. (2010). New Media in the Twentieth Century. (Bita Roshani, Trans.). Tehran: Nazar.
  • Semsar, M. H. & Zaka, Y. (1991). The Great Islamic Encyclopedia of the Islamic Era. Tehran: Soroush.
  • Sojudi, F. (2002). Author's Death or Author's Marking. Kelk, 136, 23-26.
  • Shamisa, S. (2014). Literary Criticism. Tehran: Ferdowsi.
  • Safian, M.J. (2018). Interactive Arts Analysis according to Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology. Honar-Haye Ziba Honar-Haye Tajassomi. 23(4), 5-12.
  • Tabriznia M. (2008). Opinions of Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida in Literature, Semiotics, Art and Philosophy. In Amir Ali Nojoumian (Ed.) The Collection of Essays on Barthes and Derrida, Book of the Month: Literature, 20, 51-56.
  • Turkman, A. (2016). Using Mirrorwork to Improve the Architectural Space considering the Islamic Architectural Space. Journal of Arts and Humanities Studies, 2(10), 43-49.
  • Ward, G. (2005). Postmodernism. (Ali Morshedizad, Trans.). Tehran: Ghasideh Sara.
  • Zamiran, M. (2013). Jacques Derrida and the Metaphysics of Presence. Tehran: Hermes.
  •  
  • URLs:
  • URL1. https://www.artpractical.com/event/monir-farmanfarmaian-convertibles1/
  • URL2. https://www.artsalonholland.nl/surrealisme/rene-magritte-la-reproduction-interdite
  • URL3.https://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Gumpp
  • URL4.https://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Are_Not_Yourself
  • URL5. https://www.fa.wikipedia.org/wiki
  • URL6.http://www.inhalemag.com/random-international-experimental-artworks/
  • URL7. https://www.mymodernmet.com/diego-velazquez-las-meninas/
  • URL8.https://www.remixtheory.net/?p=319
  • URL9.http://www.smoothware.com/danny/woodenmirror.html
  • URL10.http://www.spicycandydc.com/yayoi-kusama/
  • URL11.https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/sep/20/anish-kapoor-sculpture- royal-academy