Lecture 5: Derrida Differance and Cut-up, Kieren Boddy

Original Text

It will be objected, for the same reasons, that graphic difference itself vanishes into the night, can never be sensed as a full term, but rather extends an invisible relationship, the mark of an inapparent relationship between two spectacles. Doubtless. But, from this point of view, that the difference marked in the "differ( )nce" between the e and the a eludes both vision and hearing perhaps happily suggests that here we must be permitted to refer to an order which no longer belongs to sensibility. But neither can it belog to intelligibility, to the ideality which is not fortuitously affiliated with the objectivity of theorein or understanding. Here, therefore, we must let ourselves refer to an order that resists the opposition, one of the founding oppositions of philosophy, between the sensible and the intelligible. The order which resists this opposition, and resists it because it transports it, is announced in a movement of différance (with an a) between two differences or two letters, a différance which belongs neither to the voice nor to writing in the usual sense, and which is located, as the strange space that will keep us together here for an hour, between speech and writing, and beyond the tranquil familarity which links us to one and the other, occasionally reassuring us in our illusion that they are two.

Cut-up

eludes both vision same reasons, that happily suggests that the ideality which the other, occasionally be permitted to here we must sensibility. But neither between speech and order which no or understanding. Here, between speech and this opposition, and an invisible relationship, refer to an differences or two order which no of philosophy, between that resists the the sensible and opposition, one of the founding oppositions here we must longer belongs to vanishes into the therefore, we must and hearing perhaps an invisible relationship, Doubtless. But, from view, that the a) between two therefore, we must to one and is announced in the mark of objected, for the the mark of the sensible and the "differ( )nce" affiliated with the and hearing perhaps between two spectacles. for an hour, this point of the "differ( )nce" a full term, affiliated with the the strange space in the usual reassuring us in and the a is not fortuitously an inapparent relationship between two spectacles. difference marked in Doubtless. But, from and the a this point of the "differ( )nce" to an order the ideality which can it belog affiliated with the objected, for the letters, a différance be sensed as in the usual therefore, we must us together here us together here the mark of the tranquil familarity but rather extends vanishes into the resists it because to the voice can it belog resists it because which links us to one and to one and or understanding. Here, eludes both vision between speech and our illusion that nor to writing view, that the an invisible relationship, is located, as order which resists opposition, one of to one and a movement of or understanding. Here, the "differ( )nce" objected, for the to intelligibility, to sensibility. But neither It will be graphic difference itself différance (with an that will keep night, can never they are two.eludes both vision order which resists it transports it, to the voice that resists the the sensible and to intelligibility, to a full term, is announced in is announced in and the a us together here the intelligible. The between the e night, can never of philosophy, between writing, and beyond let ourselves refer to an order a) between two and hearing perhaps sense, and which graphic difference itself refer to an can it belog sense, and which the strange space between the e which belongs neither they are two.between speech and that will keep happily suggests that a movement of the other, occasionally the strange space same reasons, that graphic difference itself the intelligible. The to an order objectivity of theorein the tranquil familarity

Three sentences

The cut-up technique, when left to a computer algorithm is a bit hit an miss when it comes down to deriving a coherent and/or deeper meaning within the random sentences that are generated from Derrida's source text. Whilst trying to interpret and understand the cut-up paragraph, I asked myself, when reading intelligible sentences (interpreting the whole was difficult, so I just interpreted the few sentences that I could decode to read correctly), "what does this mean", "does it mean anything", and "If X really means something, does it change my opinion on Y and Z". The amount of 'flowery' text Derrida used means that there is more chance of the text being understandable (in comparison) than a more dryer and succinct text being cut-up and ending up as total gibberish. 

Lecture 5: Derrida, Difference and Cut-Up, Maxine Armstrong

Original Text
Thereby the text of metaphysics is comprehended. Still legible; and to be read. It is not surrounded but rather traversed by its limit, marked in its interior by the multiple furrow of its margin. Proposing all at once the monument and the mirage of the trace, the trace simultaneously traced and erased, simultaneously living and dead, and, as always, living in its simulation of life's preserved inscription. A pyramid. Not a stone fence to be jumped over but itself stonelike, on a wall, to be deciphered otherwise, a text without voice.

Cut-Up Text
not surrounded but erased, simultaneously living by the multiple in its interior and to be its limit, marked a text without fence to be be deciphered otherwise, and dead, and, Thereby the text of metaphysics is voice.furrow of its monument and the simultaneously traced and rather traversed by trace, the trace read. It is of life's preserved Not a stone in its simulation as always, living comprehended. Still legible; inscription. A pyramid. mirage of the margin. Proposing all jumped over but a wall, to itself stonelike, on at once the

My response
The cut-up text does not add any insight to me of the original, just creates more questions. The original “text of metaphysics is comprehended” and “a text without voice” becomes “Thereby the text of metaphysics is voice”. So what was the origin, the spoken word or written text?

Lecture 5 : Derrida, Differance and Cut up: Paul D. Found

This translates roughly as: “Hobby-horse (Dada) does not mean anything. One finds it futile and a waste of (his) time for a word which does not mean anything”.

Original Text Paragraph One

I would say, first off, that différance, which is neither a word nor a concept, strategically seemed to me the most proper one to think, if not to master - thought, here, being that which is maintained in a certain necessary relationship with the structural limits of mastery - what is most irreducible about our "era." Therefore I am starting, strategically, from the place and the time in which "we" are, even though in the last analysis my opening is not justifiable, since it is only on the basis of différance and its "history" that we can allegedly know who and where "we" are, and what the limits of an "era" might be.

Cut-up Text Paragraph One

of an "era" neither a word nor a concept, justifiable, since it me the most I am starting, can allegedly know strategically seemed to "we" are, even most irreducible about time in which opening is not last analysis my proper one to "history" that we might be.what the limits limits of mastery first off, that différance and its think, if not though in the strategically, from the "we" are, and maintained in a our "era." Therefore who and where différance, which is I would say, place and the thought, here, being - what is is only on that which is certain necessary relationship the basis of with the structural to master -

Original Text Paragraph Two

In a language, in the system of language, there are only differences. Therefore a taxonomical operation can undertake the systematic, statistical, and classificatory inventory of a language. But, on the one hand, these differences play: in language, in speech too, and in the exchange between language and speech. On the other hand, these differences are themselves effects. They have not fallen from the sky fully formed, and are no more inscribed in a topos noetos, than they are prescribed in the gray matter of the brain. If the word "history" did not in and of itself convey the motif of a final repression of difference, one could say that only differences can be "historical" from the outset and in each ot their aspects.

Cut-up Text Paragraph Two

and of itself that only differences in the system convey the motif the exchange between from the outset can be "historical" and are no one hand, these more inscribed in gray matter of Therefore a taxonomical the brain. If fallen from the and in each repression of difference, the word "history" of a final prescribed in the They have not sky fully formed, too, and in But, on the operation can undertake than they are of a language. differences play: in a topos noetos, In a language, hand, these differences are themselves effects. language, in speech and classificatory inventory On the other of language, there of their aspects. are only differences. language and speech. did not in one could say the systematic, statistical,

Comments

The standard text makes no sense to me whatsoever (I still cannot read beyond about 5 pages of the version I printed out), so the cut-ups do not lose anything of the original - it still makes no sense. Maybe this proves Derrida was right about language not representing reality and words being arbitrarily assigned. The meaning certainly changes and has left only a "trace" of the original...