Pagei

ReadingDerrida
ReadingJoyce
TheFloridaJamesJoyceSeries

 Pageii

TheFloridaJamesJoyceSeries

EditedbyZackBowen

TheAutobiographicalNovelofCoConsciousness:Goncharov,Woolf,andJoyce,byGalyaDiment(1994)

Bloom'sOldSweetSong:EssaysonJoyceandMusic,byZackBowen(1995)

Joyce'sIritisandtheIrritatedText:TheDislexicUlysses,byRoyGottfried(1995)

Joyce,Milton,andtheTheoryofInfluence,byPatrickColmHogan(1995)

ReauthorizingJoyce,byVickiMahaffey(paperbackedition,1995)

ShawandJoyce:"TheLastWordinStolentelling,"byMarthaFodaskiBlack(1995)

Bely,Joyce,Dblin:PeripateticsintheCityNovel,byPeterI.Barta(1996)

JacoseriousJoyce:TheFateofFollyinUlysses,byRobertH.Bell(paperbackedition,1996)

JoyceandPopularCulture,editedbyR.B.Kershner(1996)

JoyceandtheJews:CultureandTexts,byIraB.Nadel(paperbackedition,1996)

NarrativeDesigninFinnegansWake:TheWakeLockPicked,byHarryBurrell(1996)

GenderinJoyce,editedbyJolantaW.WawrzyckaandMarlenaG.Corcoran(1997)

LatinandRomanCultureinJoyce,byR.J.Schork(1997)

ReadingJoycePolitically,byTrevorL.Williams(1997)

AdvertisingandCommodityCultureinJoyce,byGarryLeonard(1998)

GreekandHellenicCultureinJoyce,byR.J.Schork(1998)

Joyce,Joyceans,andtheRhetoricofCitation,byEloiseKnowlton(1998)

Joyce'sMusicandNoise:ThemeandVariationinHisWritings,byJackW.Weaver(1998)

ReadingDerridaReadingJoyce,byAlanRoughley(1999)

 Pageiii

ReadingDerrida
ReadingJoyce
AlanRoughley

 Pageiv

Copyright1999bytheBoardofRegentsoftheStateofFlorida
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmericaonacidfreepaper
Allrightsreserved

040302010099654321

LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData

Roughley,Alan.
ReadingDerridareadingJoyce/AlanRoughley.
p.cm.(TheFloridaJamesJoyceseries)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN0813016843(alk.paper)
1.Joyce,James,18821941Criticismandinterpreta
tionHistory.2.Literature,Modern20thcentury
HistoryandcriticismTheory,etc.3.Derrida,
JacquesContributionsincriticism.4.Joyce,James,
18821941Influence.I.Title.II.Series.
PR6019.09Z78651999
823'.912dc219919693

TheUniversityPressofFloridaisthescholarlypublishingagencyfortheStateUniversitySystemofFlorida,comprisingFloridaA&MUniversity,FloridaAtlantic
University,FloridaInternationalUniversity,FloridaStateUniversity,UniversityofCentralFlorida,UniversityofFlorida,UniversityofNorthFlorida,Universityof
SouthFlorida,andUniversityofWestFlorida.

UniversityPressofFlorida
15Northwest15thStreet
Gainesville,FL326112079
http://www.upf.com

 Pagev

Tothememoryof
ProfessorBernardBenstock
and
ProfessorAugustineMartin

 Pagevii

Contents

ForewordbyZackBowen 9

Preface 11

1.JoyceinDerrida'sReadingofHusserl 1

2.TheMarginalJoyceinWritingandDifference 9

3.MovementsfromtheMargins:Dissemination 20

4.PostcardstoJoyce 32

5.ExampleandCounterexample:FinnegansWakeandGlas 44

6.SpeakingofJoyce(I):TheSpecterofJoyceinDerrida'sVoice(s) 58

7.SpeakingofJoyce(II):Joyce,Deconstruction,andFeminism 76

8.Derrida's"Undecidables"(I):A"GreeterGlossary"forJoyce'sCodes 90

9.Undecidables(II):DeconstructionandtheDiffranceofJoyce 103

10.AFinalFrame(UpBeyondtheEither)orDesireBetweenJoyceandDerrida 119

Bibliography 127

Index 131

 Pageix

Foreword
AlanRoughleygivesusthefirstfulllengthstudyoftherelationshipbetweenJacquesDerrida'scriticismandtheworksofJamesJoyce.Thetenchaptersofhisstudy
fallintofoursections.ThefirstbeginswithDerrida'sdissertationonthedualismofempiricallanguageinHusserlandproceedstotheconceptofmarginalityasitisused
inDerrida'sandJoyce'sworks.HereRoughleyconsiderslinguisticallyunexpressedphenomenaastheystandunvocalized,andthentheirmanifestationsinlanguageand
asapartofahistorythatisinitselftransientandarbitrary.TheresultisasortofHusserl/DerridaantihistoricismthatDerridaassertswaspartofJoyce'sconcern,
particularlyinFinnegansWake,althoughStephenexpressestheconceptintheNestorepisodeofUlysses.IneffectbothJoyceandHusserlattempttorecapturethe
idealPlatonicform.InthesecondchapterRoughleyinterweavesJoyce'sworkwithDerrida'sconceptsofLevinas,Arnold,andHeidegger,allintheultimate
frameworkofHegel'sdialecticalopposites.

ThethreechaptersofthesecondsectiondiscussJoyce'slessmarginalizedrelationshiptoDerrida'sGlas,Dissemination,andThePostCard:FromSocratesto
FreudandBeyond.OneofthehighlightsofthesectiondealswiththelackofclosureandthecyclicalnatureoftheWake.Thechaptersofthethirdsection,"Speaking
ofJoyce,"investigateDerrida'sspokenwordsonJoycewithinthecontextoftherelationshipbetweenspokenandwritten(orprinted)languagethatissoimportantin
bothDerrida'sworkandFinnegansWake.TheyanalyzewhatDerridahassaidaboutJoyceonthreedifferentoccasions.Thefirstfullyrevealstheprofoundinfluence
of

 Pagex

JoyceonDerrida'swork,whilethesecond,onUlysses,isframedinacircularpatternreminiscentoftheWake,withitsinsistenceontheselfreflexivityofitsown
creativeprocess.ThethirdtalkonJoyceexploresthecomedicjouissancethatenablesJoycetoenjoy,evenashesatirizes,whatseriousJoyceanscholarsattemptto
deconstruct.RoughleymapsoutDerrida'sadoptionofJoyce'splayfulnessanddestabilizationofhis(Joyce's/Derrida'sown)text.InhisdiscussionRoughleyfurther
addressestheproblemofDerrida'sdescriptionoffeministappropriationofJoyce'slanguage.TheidentificationofMolly'sbeginningandendingofhermonologuewith
theaffirmativeyesisbothphallocentricandantiphallocentric,atthesametimeseeingJoyce'slanguageandtextasenclosedinametalanguage"identifiedwiththe
metaphoricfemalecycleofwater"andALPthewholeaconfirmationofthefemaleprinciple.

Inthethreechaptersofhisfinalsection,Roughley,himselfadeconstructivewriter,offersaglossaryofDerrida'sterminology,suchas"archewriting,""the
blank/hymen,""thebookasideologicalstructure,''"diffrance,""doublemarksandthedoublebind,""grafting,""thegramme,""logocentrism,phonocentrism,and
phallocentrism,"and"thetrigger."RoughleyprovidesseveralpracticalapplicationsofeachtermtothegamutofJoyce'sfiction.Eachapplicationgivesawhollynew
informativeinterpretationtoasectionofJoyce'sworkandunderscorestheeminentworthoftheentiretopicofDerridaandJoyceintheclearestdemonstration
possible.

ZACKBOWEN
SERIESEDITOR

 Pagexi

Preface
Youisfeelinglikeyouwaslostinthebush,boy?Yousays:Itisapulingsamplejungleofwoods.Youmostshoutsout:BethicketmeforastumpofabeechifIhavethepoultriest
notionswhatthefarestheallmeans.
FW112.36

Idreamofawritingthatwouldbeneitherphilosophynorliterature,norevencontaminatedbyoneortheother,whilestillkeepingIhavenodesiretoabandonthisthememory
ofliteratureandphilosophy.
Derrida1992b:73

ItmayseemstrangeatthispointinthehistoryofJoycestudiestoreturntoanexplorationofJoyce'swritingsfromthespacesopenedupbyJacquesDerridainorder
toexplorewhatgoesonbetweenthewritingsofJoyceandDerrida.Joycescholarshiphasmovedonand"progressed"(orsothestorygoes)toexploringJoycefrom
theperspectivesofculturalstudies.Deconstructionispass.Evenitsverynameseemsnolongertoserveanypurpose,havingbeensupersededbysuchtermsas
deconstructionismordeconstructionalism.AscriticslikeJonathanLoesbergdemonstrate,however,muchworkremainstobedoneinunderstandingthefullimpact
ofDerrida'suseofanaesthetic,literarylanguageinhisphilosophicalinvestigations.Derrida'sreadingofJoyceisofparticularrelevancetowhatLoesbergcalls
"aestheticismasinherentlyaninterpretationofhistoricalandideologicalissues"(Loesberg1991:9).

ThereisaproblemwithtryingtocategorizeDerrida'sworkaccordingtotheeither/ordistinctionbetweenliteratureandphilosophy,atleastuntilDerrida'suseofan
aestheticlanguageinhisphilosophicalinvestigationsisbetterunderstood.Afurtherproblemresultsfrompigeonholinghisworkwiththephilosophicallyfoundational
principlesofteleologyandlinearprogressionorthetaxonomicsystemsofliterature,philosophy,orcriticaltheory.LocatingDerrida'sworkatsomepointalongthe
linearchronologyofdevelopmentsinthehistoryofcriticalthinkingsaysomewherebetween

 Pagexii

structuralismandsemioticsandneohistoricismisanalogoustoplacingJoyce'swritingsomewherebetweenConradandGoldingindevelopmentsofthenovelduring
thetwentiethcentury.

Ofcourse,DerridaandJoycecanbe,andare,classifiedinthisway,butonlybysettingasidethepoweroftheirrespectiveachievementsandthewaysinwhichtheir
writingssubverttheveryconceptsandprinciples(presence,facticity,genre,teleology,progression,linearity)uponwhichsuchcategorizingandclassificationare
grounded.ThewritingsofJoyceandDerridarupturethetaxonomicstructuresthatarefoundedupontheseconceptsandprinciples.Theserupturesareanalogouswith
thegapintotheunconsciousopenedbyFreud,andthepracticeofcriticismafterJoyceandDerridainsomerespectsengagesinthesameprojectasthe
psychoanalystswhofollowedFreud.LacanarguesthattheFreudianunconsciouswasforgottenasFreudforesawitwouldbe.It"closeditselfupagainst[Freud's]
messagethankstothoseactivepractitionersoforthopaedicsthattheanalysts...became,busyingthemselves,bypsychologizinganalytictheory,institchingupthis
gap"(Lacan1978:23).Joycecriticismmayhave"movedon"and"progressed"beyonddeconstruction,butithasdonesobyclosingofforignoringtheconceptual
rupturesandtextualspacesopenedupinthewritingsofbothJoyceandDerrida.Itistheserupturesandspaces,aswellastheintertextualplaybetweenthem,thatare
thesubjectsofthisstudy.

EchoingDerrida'swords,RodolpheGascharguesthatDerrida'swritingsbelongtobothliterarycriticismandphilosophyatthesametimethattheybelongtoneither.
ThisstudyattemptstoshowhowDerridacountersignsJoyce'swritingasonethatinhabitsthesameaesthetictextualtopoiashisown.Derridaconsciouslysituateshis
writingsbetweenphilosophyandliteratureinordertoexplorewhatgoesonbetweentextsgiventhoselabels.Atthesametime,heinterrogatesthe"archic"concepts
(presence,mimesis,teleology,representation,andsoon)uponwhichbothliteratureandphilosophyaregrounded.Whilethereisaclearlyrecognizabledeconstructive
methodofliterarycriticismthatcanbelocatedsomewherebetweenstructuralismandculturalstudiesinrecenttrendsinliterarystudies,thatmethodhassurprisingly
littletodowithDerrida'swritings.

TheattempttosystematizeDerrida'swritingsinordertoproduceamethodologyforanalyzingliterarytextsnecessarilyhastooverlook(amongstotherthings)
Derrida'squestioningoftheveryprocessofsystematizationonwhichthedeconstructive"method"ofliterarycriticismisgrounded.Questioningthefoundingconcepts
andprocessesofhisowndisciplineisanimportantpartofDerrida'swriting,andsuchapreparatory

 Pagexiii

examinationoftheboundariesofthecriticaldisciplineisnoticeablylackinginmuchsocalleddeconstructiveliterarycriticism.DiscussingtherelevanceofDerrida's
philosophyforliterarycriticism,Gaschstates:"Socalleddeconstructivecriticism,which...isbutanoffspringofNewCriticism,hasnot,tomyknowledge,
undertakenthesepreparatorysteps"(Gasch1986:255).

Derrida'sfrequentbracketingofcertaintermsbyplacingthemwithinthe"doublemarks"traditionallyreservedforspeech,or"socalled"spokentextwithinwriting,is
partofhisinterrogationofkeytermsandconceptsfromhisdisciplineofphilosophy.Hisuseofparenthesesandhisstrategyofplacingkeytermssuchasbeingsous
ratureorundererasurearealsoimportanttechniquesinDerrida'sinvestigationofthehorizonsofphilosophyandwriting.ThetermbeingisforDerridacontinually
andcontinuouslyinvolvedwiththefoundingphilosophicalquestionof"Whatis?"Whetherinaninvestigationoftheindividualexistenceofparticularphenomena(the
lettersofaword,theconstructionofabook,thefunctionofthepeninscribingwriting)oraspartofaninvestigationofBeingasaphilosophicalconcept,Derrida
followsHeideggerinremarkingthetermwithcrossedlinesinordertoremindusthattheinvestigationofBeingisthefoundationofphilosophyandonethatisongoing.
Indeed,thenotionofBeingasanongoingprocessofbecomingwouldseemtobeoneofthereasonswhyDerridafindsJoyce'swritingssuchapowerfulattraction.

ForDerrida,Joyce'swritingsarenotonlyapartofwhattraditionalliterarycriticismdefinesasliterature,butalsoaseriesofpowerfuloperationsinwhatDerrida
signifiesas"Literature."Literature(outsidethedoublemarks)frequentlyreliesonphilosophicalconceptssuchasbeingandmimesisorrepresentation(aconcept
philosophicallydefinedbyPlato,asweshallsee)thatitrarelyquestions,butbehavesasifitcouldconfidentlyanswerthequestionofwhat,exactly,theseconcepts
signify"Literature"suspendstheseconcepts,identifiesthenecessityofinvestigatingthem,andthenproceedstodoso.

Traditionalliterarycharactersareoftenpresentedtoreaderswithanunquestionedandunquestioningrelianceonthephilosophicalconceptofexistenceorbeing(and
indeedupontheprocessofrepresentationbywhichlanguagemakescharacter"present"tothereader)theconceptofbeingatworkin"Literature"iscontinually
investigatedandcalledintoquestiontoremindusthatthequestioningofbeingisaprimary,pressing,ongoing,andunfinishedmatterforphilosophyand"Literature"
alike.Joyce'swritingsinvestigateandinterrogatetheconceptsofbeinguponwhichthepresenta

 Pagexiv

tionofcharactersinlanguageispremisedinnumerousways(forexample,destabilizingidentity,interchanging"novelistic"charactersandthoseofthealphabet,creating
a"beingwithadifference"[FW269.15]),andDerrida'sworkiscontinuallyhauntedbythewaysinwhichtheydoso.

Insofarasitviewsitselfashaving"movedon"or"progressed"fromdeconstruction,contemporaryculturalandhistoricalcriticismseemstoconfuseDerrida'swritings
withprogramsofsystematicliterarydeconstruction.Derrida'swritingsworkagainstsuchprograms.Unfortunately,criticswhohaverecognizedthishavesometimes
mistakenlylinkedDerrida'sworkandparticularlyhisuseofpoeticorfigurativelanguageinphilosophicalinvestigationswithnihilismorantihistoricism.

SuchanassociationmightstemfromDerrida'suseofliterarylanguageinhisexplorationofthelimitsofphilosophicallogicandreason.LoesbergexaminesDerrida's
useofaestheticandliterarylanguageandfindsnofoundationforthecriticismofDerridaasanihilist:"Derrida'sphilosophicalanalysis...doesnotundoallconstraints
oflogicandreasoninfavorofanihilistfreeplay,butratheridentifiesanecessarycontradictionwithinphilosophy'sambitiontoofferfoundationalrulesgoverningall
knowledge"(Loesberg1991:7).

Asweshallseeinthecourseofthisstudy,Derridastronglydeniestheclaimthathisworkisnothistorical.Hefirmlyinsiststhathe"isverymuchahistorian,very
historicist,"andherejectscriticswhoaccusehimofahistoricismandbelievethatdeconstructionisnotconcernedwithhistory.Derridaissuspiciousofthose
professional"historians"whoare"naivelyconcerned"withobjectifyingthe''contentofascience,"andhisworkrevealsseriousreservationsaboutanyhistoricismthat
failstoconsiderthevitaltooloflanguagewithwhichhistoricismgathersitsevidenceandthenrepresentsthisevidenceandtheargumentspremiseduponit(Derrida
1992b:54,55).

Culturaltheoryconcernsitselfwiththeproductionofliterarytextsashistoricalandculturalproducts.Itisgroundedonconceptsofhistoryandthehistorical
developmentsofculturethatareoftenrefinedandqualifiedbutrarely,ifever,fullyinterrogated.DiscussingRaymondWilliams'sdefinitionsofculture,forexample,
JohnStoreyconcludesthatthe"principalfunction"oftextsasculturalpracticesis"tosignify,toproduceortobetheoccasionfortheproductionofmeaning"(Storey
1993:2).Theconceptsuponwhichmeaningdepends(presence,sense,reason,comprehension)arenotanissue.

LikethesystematicdeconstructivecriticismthatGaschidentifiesasabranchofNewCriticism,culturaltheoryconcernsitselfwiththesystematic

 Pagexv

investigationofthiscultural"productionofmeaning"ratherthananyinvestigationofwhatthat"meaning"mightinandofitselfmean.Theinterrogationofthefundamental
conceptsonwhichmeaningreliesisanongoingconcerninDerrida'sworkandonethatDerridashareswiththewriterwhotransformedthetitleTheMeaningof
Meaninginto"themaymeaminningofmaimoomeining!"(FW267.3).

Joyce'sdefamiliarizingofthesewordsisalsoadecapitalizingofthetitleofthebookbyC.K.OgdenandI.A.Richardsthatinvestigateshowsocalledliterarymeaning
isrhetoricallyandpoeticallyproducedandcomprehendedbythereader.Joyce'sdecapitalizinganddefamiliarizingpunonthetitlerobsitofitslegalstatusasatitleina
doubleprocessthatinvitesthereadertointerrogatehow"themeaningofmeaning"canloseits"original"meaningandgainanapparentlynewsetofmeaningswhilestill
maintainingitssignifyingplaywiththeoriginaryphrase.Italsoinvitesustointerrogatetheprocessofmimesisatworkinthese(atleast)doubleoperationsbythe
positioningofthephrasenexttothebotanicalpun"Mimosamultimimetica"(FW267.23).

Mimesisandtheproductionofanalwaysatleastdoublemeaningsustainedbythetensionbetweenthesignifiedobjectandtheveryprocessofsignificationitself:these
aretheoperationsbetweenDerrida'swritingsandhisreadingsandremarkingofJoyce'stextsthatformthefocusofthisstudy.Thefunctionofthematiccriticismisthe
elaborationofmeaningaccordingtothelogicofthethemethespacebetweentheconceptofmeaningandwhatthemeaningofthatconceptmightbeisapartofthose
double(anddoubling)textualspacesarticulatedbyJoyceandrearticulated,remarked,andexploredinDerrida'sdeconstruction.

Whatfollowsmarksoutthosespacesbetweenthelinesofthetextsfromwhichthecitationsatthebeginningofthisprefacehavebeentakeninordertoregraftthem
andsetthemtoworkinthehopeofremarkingasmallamountofthevastintertextualplaygoingonbetweenthewritingpracticesfromwhichtheywereremovedand
backtowhosesitestheycontinuetoradiate.ItiswrittenforreadersandloversofwritingwhomayhaveaninterestinthewritingsofeitherJamesJoyceorJacques
Derrida,orboth,anditshouldbeofparticularinteresttoanyonewhohasattemptedtounderstandtheimpactthatJoycehashadonDerrida'stheories,or,touse
Derrida'swords,thewaysinwhich"Joyce'sghostisalwayscomingonboard"Derrida'swriting,"eveninthemostacademicpiecesofwork"(Derrida1984a:149).In
focusingprimarilyonthosepartsofDerrida'swritingsandtalkswhereDerridaisclearlyofferingareadingofJoyce,Ihavetriedto

 Pagexvi

teaseoutsomeofthewaysinwhichJoyce'sghostcomes"onboard"Derrida'swork.

ThismetaphoroftheghostisonetowhichDerridareturnsinhisworkSpectersofMarx,wherehediscussestheinabilityoftraditionalformsofscholarshiptodeal
withthemetaphoricalconceptoftheghost:"Therehasneverbeenascholarwhoreally,andasscholar,dealswithghosts.Atraditionalscholardoesnotbelievein
ghostsnorinallthatcouldbecalledthevirtualspaceofspectrality."Theproblemsofdealingwithghostsareimportantinthisstudy,andtheymanifestthemselvesin
numerousways.Theproblemcausedfortraditionalformsofscholarshipisaresultoftheambiguousrelationshipthatthenotionsofghostsandhauntinghavewiththe
philosophicalconceptofbeing:"Therehasneverbeenascholarwho...doesnotbelieveinthesharpdistinctionbetweentherealandtheunreal,theactualandthe
inactual,thelivingandthenonliving,beingandnonbeing"(Derrida1994:11).ThemediumfordealingwithJoyce'shauntingofDerrida'sworkwouldseemtherefore
tolieelsewherethaninthetraditionalformsofscholarship.

Iwastemptedtogivethisstudythetitle(Im)possibilities.ReaderswhohavestruggledwithDerrida'swritingsonHegel'sviewoftherelationshipsbetweena
traditionalprefaceandtheotherpartsofabookinDisseminationmightwellhavesomeunderstandingofthistemptation.BorrowingDerrida'sowntechniqueofusing
his"doublemarks"torewriteconfusionas"(con)fusion,"Ihadhopedthat"(im)possibilities"mightconveysomesenseofthedoublebindfacinganyonewritingon
JoyceandDerrida.Thisdoublebindisproducedbytheimpossibilityofeverfullycomprehendingallofthepolysemousmeaningsandcomplextextualoperationsof
eitherofthetwowriters.Completingabookthatmightofferafullnessofmeaningontwosuchpowerfulwritersisanimpossibilityevenifonedreamsofthepossibility
ofdoingso.

SinceJoyce,andperhapsevenmoresinceDerrida,ourunderstandingoftheformofabookasanideologicalstructurehasbeenradicallychanged,andanyattemptto
discusstherelationshipbetweenthesetwowriterswithinthetraditionalformofthebookisinacertainsensedoomedtofailure.BothDerridaandJoycehave
producedbookswithoutconventionalstructuresorendings.Theybothteachusthatourconceptofthebookasanideologicalformaswellasourideasaboutthe
relationshipsbetweenspeechandwritingcan,andshouldbe,radicallyrethought.Joyce'sworksaresofrequentlydiscussedwithsuchliterarytermsasshortstory,
novel,epic,andplotandcharacterthatitiseasytoforgethowradicallyJoycehasaffected

 Pagexvii

ourunderstandingofthoseterms.ReadersofFinnegansWakeareawarethatitscharacterscanbelettersofthealphabetaswellasimitationsoflivingpeople,andit
isinthespacesbetweenliteralinscriptionandmimesisthatJoyce'swritingschallengemanyofourconventionalunderstandingsaboutliteratureandwriting.Joyce's
narrativescanbeanalyzedwiththeconventionalAristotelianconceptofaplotasaunifiedstructurewithabeginning,middle,andend,butthosesamenarrativesalso
canbeseenoperatingaccordingtoanotherlogicalstructure,andthisdoublestructureexplainsoneofthepowerfulattractionsofJoyce'swritingsforDerrida.

AnyonewhohasattemptedtowriteonJoycewillknowthesenseoffailurewithwhichthattaskcanbegin.Whilethismightalsobethecaseforwritingabout
numerousotherwriters,withJoycethissenseoffailurecanbeintensifiedbythefeelingthatanythingonemighttrytosayaboutJoyce'swritinghasalreadybeensaidby
thatwritingitself.Thisisageneralpredicamentofallcommentaryandcriticism,buttheimmensecomplexitiesofJoyce'swritingsmakethepredicamentmoreobvious
thanitmightbeinthecaseofcommentaryonotherwriters.DerridasumsuptheimpossibilityofwritingonJoycewhenhediscussesthewaysinwhichweareall
caughtinJoyce's"archiveasinaspider'sweb"(Derrida1984a:146).StephenDedalusmayhavethoughthewascapableofflyingbythenetsthatIrelandthrewupto
preventhissoultakingflight,butanyonewhotriestoreadFinnegansWakewillknowthatJoycehasflungupaseriesofnetsfromwhichthereisnoescape.

FinnegansWakeisabookthatwecanneverfinishreadinginthesamewaythatwecanfinishreadingabookbyotherauthors.Thisisbecauseofthetext'sendless
circularity.AsStephenHeathargues,there"isnoconclusiontobereachedinareadingofJoyce'stext"(Heath1984:61).Thedifficultiesofanalyzingand
understandingJoyce'swritingcanbeunderstoodbyametaphorfromtheWake:Wepunchanothersetofholesinthetextwithourcriticalforks,butthenforgetthat
wemadethoseholesourselvesaswespendourtimewonderingabouttheirsignificanceinJoyce'stext.Derridasummarizestheimpossibilityoffinishingareadingof
theWakewhenhediscusseshowaftereven"twentyfiveorthirtyyears"oftryingtoreadJoyce'stext,thereadermuststill"stayontheedgeofreadingJoyce...and
theendlessplungethrowsyoubackontotheriverbank,onthebrinkofanotherpossibleimmersion,adinfinitum"(Derrida1984a:148).

AbookonDerrida'sreadingofJoyceisalsoanimpossiblebooktofinishbecausethedesiretocreateanendlessencyclopedicformatworkinJoyce'swritingrepeats
itselfinDerrida'swork.Itispossibletodreamofcompleting

 Pagexviii

abookonJoyceandDerrida,butevenonesimultaneousreadingofFinnegansWakeandGlasisenoughtoturnthatdreamintoanightmare.Itisnotpossibleto
finishreadingtheWake,anddeconstructionrequiresan"interminableanalysis"thatcannotbeachievedbya"unilineartext,orapunctualposition,anoperationsigned
byasingleauthor"(Derrida1987b:42).AllonecandoisacceptDerrida'snecessityofreadingandrereading"thoseinwhosewake[he]write[s]."Rereadingthe
authorswhomDerridareadsandrereadsalsothrowsusbackintoJoyce's"jungleofwoods,''whereweagainfindourselvesfeelingasifweare"lostinthebush."One
wayoftryingtofindapathoutofthisbushisbyoccupyingsomeofthemarginalpositionsinscribedbyJoyceandremarkedbyDerridainordertouncoversomeof
theintertextualrelaysandcircuitsbetweentheprojectsofthesetwowriters.WewillseehowthepowerfulforceofthemarginalinJoyceanimportancealready
notedbyseveralwritersonJoyceisadoptedandmodifiedbyDerridaandsettoworkinhisprojectofdeconstruction.

UntilDissemination,JoyceseemstohaveoccupiedamarginalpositioninDerrida'swriting,and,aswewillseeinexaminingthattext,somecriticsstillseeJoyce
occupyingamarginal(inthesenseofunimportant)positioninhiswork.FromDerrida'sperspective,however,describingJoyce'spositionasmarginalisnotatallthe
sameassayingthatJoyce'sworkisunimportant.ForDerrida,thetermmarginfunctionsbothasasignifierofthetraditionalborderofthetextandasametaphorfor
thepositionsfromwhichdeconstructivereadingsandanalysescantakeplace.Asaresultofdeconstruction'soverturningofthehierarchicaltermsoftraditionalbinary
oppositions(maleandfemalelightanddarkgoodandevilinsideandoutsidenatureandculture)theoperationsofmarginalinscriptionscanrivalandovershadowthe
importanceofthecentralcolumn(s)intermsofpower,meaning,orimportance.

Derrida'snotionsofmarginalityareatworkintheideasaboutthesubversivemarginsoffictionaltextsdefinedbyShariBenstock:"footnotesinfictionaltextsdonot
necessarilyfollowtherulesthatgovernannotationincriticaltexts:theymayormaynotprovidecitation,explication,elaboration,ordefinitionforanaspectofthetext
theymayormaynotfollow'standardform'theymayormaynotbesubordinatetothetexttowhichtheyareaffixed"(Benstock1983:2034).

BenstockwasoneofthefirstcriticstolinkDerrida'snotionsofmarginalitywiththeoperationsofthemarginaliaandfootnotesofFinnegansWake'stenthsection.In
herstudyofthatsection,Benstockdiscusses"Derrida'sgeneralconcernforallthatexistsatthemarginsofdiscourseliterallyandphysicallyontheprintedpageas
wellasintellectually,linguis

 Pagexix

tically,andpsychologicallyintheactofwriting."BenstockalsonotesthatDerrida'sconcernwiththemarginsofdiscourseis"frequentlythestatedsubjectofhis
writings"andis"alsoapparentinhisownuseoftextualadjuncts"(Benstock1983:220n.1).

Derrida'suseofmarginalpositionsasbothathemeandasitefordeconstructionoffersnewinterpretativestrategiesaswellasinsightsintothedeconstructive
operationswithinspecifictexts.InDissemination,forexample,Derrida'smarginalconcernsaremanifestinthelayoutofsomeofthemaintextandfootnotes.Inhis
investigationofhowtraditionaltheoriesofmimesiscanbesubvertedandtransformedwithinthegeneralplayoftextualdissemination,Derridaofferstheironic
statementthatit"isnotpossibleforustoexamineheretheextremelycomplexsystemofPlato'sconceptofmimesis*."Hethenproceedstoexaminepreciselyhow
Plato'sconceptofmimesisisdevelopedintheDialoguesand"formsakindoflogicalmachine"that"dealsoutalltheclichsofcriticismtocome''(Derrida1981:86
87n.14).Thismappingisdonemarginallyinthefiveorsoparagraphsofafootnotethatrequiresthe"main"texttooccupymuchlessspaceontheprintedpagethan
doesthefootnote.

In"Implications,"Derridausesmarginasametaphorforthepositionsheoccupiesinthetextshedeconstructs:"itisnecessarytoreadandrereadthoseinwhose
wakeIwrite,the'books'inwhosemarginsandbetweenwhoselinesImarkoutandreadatextsimultaneouslyalmostidenticalandentirelyother"(Derrida1987b:4
emphasisadded).Whetherornotthe"wake"inthispassagecanbeincludedwiththeseveralmarginalallusionstoJoyce'stextthatDerridamakeselsewhere,itwillbe
helpfultokeeptheparadoxicalimportanceofmarginsinmindaswelookatJoyce'sappearanceinmarginalpositionswithinDerrida'swork.

ForbothJoyceandDerrida,marginalpartsofatextarecapableofaforcethatproducesimportanteffectswithinthetext'smainbody.Theoperationsofthisforcecan
disruptandoverturnthetraditional,hierarchicalevaluationofthemainbodyofatextasmoreimportantandpowerfulthanitsmarginalcounterpart.Derridaclearly
identifiesthemarginalpositionasimportantforhisownworkinthepassagecitedabove.InUlyssesboththejarofPlumtree'sPottedMeatandthesloganadvertising
itarerelativelyunimportantintermsofthetraditionalemphasisplacedonthenovel'scentralcharactersandplots.Joyce'swriting,however,givesthismarginaltextual
fragmentapowerbelyingitsstatusasaminor,realistictextualdetailinthenarrativebymakingthepottedmeatanditsadvertisingslogansignifiersofhumor,love,
betrayal,anddeath,aswellasthetextualslippagethatunderminesastrictlyrepresentationalreadingofJoyce'stext.Hedoesthis

 Pagexx

throughrepeatingtheadindifferentcontexts,and,asAstradurEysteinssondemonstrates,thefrequentrepetitions"manipulateandchange[its]significance,"increasing
thead'spowertodisruptandsubverttherealisticnarrative(Eysteinsson1990:227).

Inotherwords,thedisseminativerepetitionoftheminorormarginalelementsofnarrativethattraditionalcriticismtreatasrealisticdetailcanhaveverypowerfultextual
effectsanddisrupteventhephilosophicalandliteraryprinciplesuponwhichsuchcriticismisfounded.ThePlumtreeslogan,forexample,whichcouldbetreatedasa
relativelyminortouchofrealisticdetail,triggersoffapowerfulinterrogationoftheveryconceptofmimesisorrepresentationonwhichmanycarefulreadingsof
Ulysseshavebeenconstructed.

AlthoughIusedbothDerrida'sFrenchtextsandtheEnglishtranslationsofhisworkinresearchingthisstudy,IhavewrittenitinEnglishforreaderswhoarenotaverse
toreadingDerridaintranslation.MypurposeinwritingthebookhasnotbeentheproductionofanadvancedlinguisticstudyoftheeffectsoftranslatingeitherJoyceor
Derrida,butaninvestigationofwhatgoesonbetweentheirwritingsandamarkingofsomeofthewaysinwhichDerrida'sreadingsofJoycehaveaffectedthevarious
writingstrategieshehasemployedduringthedevelopmentofhisvariousdeconstructivetheories.ReferencestoDerrida'stextsaretothepublishedEnglishtranslations.

ThereisasenseinwhichDerridaseemstohavehadEnglishreadersinmindasanimportantpartoftheaudiencetowhomhewrites.ThepeopleforwhomIwrotethis
studyarenotthelinguistsandotherscholarswithavalidacademicinterestinthenuanceslostandgainedintranslation,butthosereaders,thinkers,students,and
teachersforwhomreadingDerridaand/orJoyceremainsanexciting,ifcontinuallydaunting,challenge.Thinkingofthisaudience,IamremindedofBlake'spleatothe
reader'sofhisJerusalem:"Therefore[Dear]Reader,[forgive]whatyoudonotapprove"(Blake1982:145).

Acknowledgments

Thisbookwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutthework,thekindness,andthegenerosityofmanyJoyceans.ElliottGoseattheUniversityofBritishColumbia
supervisedmydissertationonDerridaandFinnegansWake,andIremainindebtedtohimforhisinterestandwisecounsel.InadditiontotheworkofShariBenstock
andMurrayMcArthur,bothofwhomhavegraciouslypermittedmetoquoteextensivelyfromtheirwritings,Margot

 Pagexxi

Norris'sTheDecenteredUniverseofFinnegansWake:AStructuralistAnalysis(1974)hasbeenanindispensablestudyforeveryoneinterestedinDerrida'swork
asacontextforreadingJoyce.ChristinevanBoheemen's"DeconstructionAfterJoyce"(1988)followedinthefootstepsofBenstock'sworkandemphasizedDerrida's
indebtednesstoJoyce.TheeditorsandwritersofPostStructuralistJoyce(1984)broughttheimportanceofFrenchreadingsofJoycetoeverybody'sattention,and
JeanMichelRabat,oneofthecontributorstothatcollectionofessays,wasextremelygenerousandhelpfulinhiscriticismofsomeofmyearlierwork.

TherehavebeentoomanyJoyceanstonamewhohavehelpedmeinmyattemptsatunderstandingJoyce,butconversationswithBonnieKimeScott,SuzetteHenke,
andSheldonBrivichavebeenparticularlyhelpful.IthankJohnBishopandAugustineMartinforsomedelightfulandilluminatingconversationsinDublin.GusMartin
andTerenceDolangavemetheopportunitytoteachatsomeoftheJamesJoycesummerschoolsinDublin,whereIdiscussedmyideaswiththestaffandstudents.
FritzSennandGeertLernouthavebeentwoofthebestBlakeancorporealenemiesforwhomareaderofJoycecouldhavewished.BernardBenstockencouraged
mewhen,inhiswords,Ifelt"caughtinthecrossfirebetweentheoreticalandantitheoreticalcamps"ofJoycestudies.ZackBowenhasbeenverygenerousand
supportiveinhiscommentsonmywork.

AtUniversityofNewEnglandinNewSouthWales,JulianCrofthasbeenagoodfriendandastaunchsupporterofJoycestudiesinAustralia.BrianBirchall,themost
HegelianofAustralianphilosophers,hasprovedaninvaluabledialecticalsoundingboard.MythankstoSallyNicolfortypingearlierdraftsofthemanuscript.

IcompletedthefinaldraftsofthisstudywhileIwasavisitingresearchfellowattheUniversityofYork.IamagainindebtedtothekindgenerosityofJacques
Berthoud,whomadeitpossibleformetoacceptthishonorarypostatYorksothatIcouldcompletethestudy.LizFlemingdeservesmythanksforthe
encouragementshegavetomeattheUniversityofEastLondon.MeganRoughleydeservesaspecialthankyouforhergeneroushelpinthesubstantiveediting,critical
analysis,andcorrectivereadingsthatwereanessentialpartoftheprocessbywhichthisstudywasrealized.

 Pagexxiii

Foryoumaybeaspracticalasispredicablebutyoumusthavethepropersortofaccidenttomeetthatkindofbeingwithadifference.
FW269.1315

 Page1

Chapter1
JoyceinDerrida'sReadingofHusserl
Derrida'sfirstwrittenencounterwithJoycetookplacearoundthesametimehecompletedhisfirstmajorworkonthephenomenologyofEdmundHusserl.Husserl's
workwasamongDerrida'sfirstphilosophicalinterests,andDerridafoundJoyce'sliterarywritingsvaluableforprovidinganalternativeperspectiveonHusserl'sgoalof
phenomenologicalunivocity.DerridausesJoyceasamodelandsourceinthedevelopmentoftheaestheticismwithwhich"heoutlines"the"problems...withinthe
foundationalmovementsofContinentalPhilosophy"(Loesberg1991:7).TheseproblemsincludethoseDerridafindsinHusserl'sattempttocreateaninternaland
univocallanguagebywhichthetranscendentalconsciousnesscan"escapefromlanguage'sexternality''(Loesberg1991:87).

In195354DerridavisitedtheHusserlArchivesatLouvainandthencompletedhishigherstudiesdissertation,"TheProblemofGenesisinthePhilosophyofHusserl."
In1956hewasawardedagrantasa"specialauditor"toattendHarvardUniversityonwhatBenningtondescribesasthe

 Page2

"somewhatfictitiouspretextofconsultingmicrofilmsofunpublishedworkbyHusserl"(BenningtonandDerrida1993:329).DerridaspentmuchofthistimeatHarvard
readingJoyce.

AtthesametimethathebeganworkonEdmundHusserl'sOriginofGeometry:AnIntroduction,DerridabegantodrawonJoyceasanalternativemodelforthe
complexrelationshipsamongculture,language,andhistoryhewasinvestigatinginHusserl.ThisdatefortheemergenceofasignificantinterestinJoyceonDerrida's
partisconfirmedbythereferencetoJoyceinthestudyofHusserlandbyDerrida'sstatement,in1982,that"youstayontheedgeofreadingJoyceformethishas
beengoingonfortwentyfiveorthirtyyears"(Derrida1984a:148).

DerridapositionsJoycenexttoHusserlinEdmundHusserl'sOriginofGeometry:AnIntroductionbecauseoftheirrespectiveattitudestowardlanguageandtheideal
formsofhistorythatwerethefocusofmuchofHusserl'swork.ThecontrastwithJoyceandhisprojectofcollapsinghistoryintothesynchronic,equivocalformsof
writingappearsinDerrida'sexplorationsofHusserl'stheoriesoflanguageandtheircontinualappealstotheimperativeofunivocity,ortheunityofasinglevoiceand
signifier,initsrelationshiptoobjectivity.

InHusserl'sprojectofdevelopingphenomenologyasapure,nonempiricaldiscipline,historyisvaluabletotheextentthatitfacilitatesthetransmissionandrevelationof
ideal,objectivephilosophicalandmathematicalformsfromonegenerationofphilosopherstothenext.Theseformsareaccessibleasobjectsofconsciousness(the
basicandirrefutableexistents)becauseoftheirobjectiveandindependentexistenceascorrelativesofstatesofmindcommontothethoughtsofdifferentmindsin
differentculturesthroughoutdifferentperiods.ForHusserlthere"mustbesomeobjectivityintheoriginofanidealityfortheidealitytoberecognisable"(Leavey
1989:13).Thisinsistenceonobjectivityraisesthequestionofhowsuchanobjectivitymightbeachieved.ForHusserltheanswerislinguistic.Heseeksaunivocal
linguisticmodetoprovidetheobjectivityandmaketheidealityrecognizable.Hewantsaformoflanguagethatwillenablesensetoobtain"itsidealobjectivity"(Leavey
1989:13).

DerridaidentifiesthreedistinctlinguisticlevelsofidealobjectivityinHusserl'swork.Thefirstisthe"primary"levelofthe"word'sidealObjectivity."Onthislevel,a
specificwordcanbe"freeandthereforeideal,''comparedwithitssensible,phonetic,orgraphicincarnationsonlywithina"factohistoricallanguage."Thewordcanbe
seenas"free"inthatitisnotdependenton,oridenticalwith,anyofitsparticularmaterializations.Inwhateverwayitismanifested,thewordis"alwaysthesameword
whichis

 Page3

meantandrecognized"(Derrida1989:67).Atthesametime,itremainsinterrelatedwith"thedefactoexistenceofagivenlanguage."Thewordroyalty,forexample,
mightoccurasanidealformindependentofitsmaterializationinthisqueenorthatdukeorinanyimageofeither.Itisalso"free"inthatitis''recognizable"indifferent
languages(royaut)butitstillremainstiedtothespecificlanguageinwhichitmakessense.

Ona"secondary"and"higherdegreeofidealObjectivity,"aword'ssensecanbeavailableindifferentlanguagesthroughdifferingsignifiers.Thismeansthatthe
ideality,theformoftheidea(ofsomething,forexample,likeatreethatcanbesignifiedbysuchdifferingwordsas"tree,""arbre,"or"baum"),isfree"fromallfactual
linguisticsubjectivity"(Derrida1989:7071).Inotherwords,theidealconceptorcontentof"tree"isindependentofthesubject(andsubjectivity)oftheutteranceor
expression(thespeaker'sidentity,nationality,language,placeandtime,andsoon).However,thisidealityis"limited"inthat,inspiteofthecontent'sindependence
fromthesubject,itremainstiedtothenatural,contingentrealityofthetreeencounteredasasensibleobjectthatis,it"adherestoanempiricalsubjectivity"andis
"empiricallyconditioned"(Derrida1989:71).

Thethirdlevelof"absoluteidealObjectivity"isthelevelofthefree,idealgeometricalformsthataretheultimateobjectofHusserl'sinvestigations.Onthis"tertiary"
level,the"idealObjectivityofgeometryisabsoluteandwithoutanykindoflimit."Theidealityofgeometryis"nolongeronlythatoftheexpressionorintentional
contentitisthatoftheobjectitself"(Derrida1989:72).

Exploringthisthirdlevelofideality,DerridauncoverswhatheseesasanessentialparadoxinHusserl'sproject:iftheidealobjectsinthemselvesdonotrequireany
specificlanguagestobeexpressed,howcantheyberevealed?Hedescribestheparadoxinthefollowingway:"withouttheapparentfallbackintolanguageand
therebyintohistory,afallwhichwouldalienatetheidealpurityofsense,sensewouldremainanempiricalformationimprisonedasfactinapsychologicalsubjectivity
intheinventor'shead."Furthermore,ifthelinguistic"historicalincarnationsetsfreethetranscendental,insteadofbindingit,"thenthis"lastnotion,thetranscendental,
mustthenberethought"(Derrida1989:77).Pointingtothenecessityoflanguagefortheexpressionoftheideal,andemphasizingthehistoricalfacticityoftheideal
expressedinlanguage,DerridaworkstowarddeconstructingthefundamentalHusserlianbeliefthatidealformscouldberediscoveredthroughapracticeofproduction
iftheiraccretedsignificationsweresomehowerased,renderingthemnolongersubjecttowrittenorspokenlinguistictraditions,orhistory.

 Page4

Husserlseeshumankindliving"inoneandthesameworld"andpotentiallycognizantofthesameidealforms.Thatthereareidealforms,albeitsignifiedbyavarietyof
differentsignifiersfromdifferentlanguages,"establishesthepossibilityofauniversallanguage"(Derrida1989:79).Thisuniversallanguageofidealformsboth
establishesandrequirestheunivocityofsingularidealforms.Itiswithinthiscontextofthenatureoftheidealandthefunctionsoflanguageinrevealingidealformsthat
DerridacomparestherespectiveprojectsofHusserl,whichinsistonunivocity,andofJoyce,whichinsistonequivocity.

Husserl'sdesiretoeliminateequivocityislinkedtowhatLoesbergdescribesasphenomenology'sclaimofa"decisivebreakwithphilosophy"andphilosophy's
complex,equivocalrelationshipswithitsownhistory(Loesberg1991:86).Husserl'sprimaryconcernwas"definingatranscendentalconsciousness."Toeliminatethe
effectsofphilosophicalandlinguisticequivocity,he"firstexpels[equivocalandexternal]communicationfromthelanguageofthetranscendental
consciousness"(Loesberg1991:87).

ForHusserl,Derridacontends,"equivocityalwaysevidencesacertaindepthofdevelopmentandconcealmentofapast"(Derrida1989:102).Tocounterthe
equivocityofhistoricalandphilosophicallanguage,Husserl"proposesaninwardspeechthatenactsapure,imaginativerepresentation."This"pure
representation"(wereitpossible)wouldtranscendtheequivocal(andparadoxically)concealingrevelationsofthepastandtranscend"anypresumptionofanoutside
object"andthelimitationsofexternalcommunication(Loesberg1991:87).

Equivocityconcealsthepastbecauseits"depthofdevelopment,"itsaccretionofsignifications,obscuresthehistoricalidealitiesofthepastevenintheveryprocessof
(equivocal)significationbywhichitrevealsthem.Thememoryofacultureisequivocalinsimultaneouslyconcealingpasteventsintheveryprocessbywhichitattempts
torevealthem.Furthermore,anyindividualattempttorememberorinternallymemorizethehistoryofthecultureisdefeatedintheattempttogainfullaccesstothe
idealformsofthatculturebytheequivocityoperatingintheverylanguagemakingthehistoryofacultureaccessible.

Giventheseconditions,Derridasuggestsonehasa"choiceoftwoendeavours"onecanmake"whenonewishestoassumeandinteriorizethememoryofaculturein
akindofrecollection"(Derrida1989:102).Oneendeavoristheefforttolocatethemostunivocalexpressionofaculture'smemoryandthenstriveforanequally
univocallanguageinwhichtoexpresstheinteriorizedmemoryofthatculture.Theotheristoaccountfor,

 Page5

andattempttotakeonboard,theequivocitymakingaunivocalaccessandexpressionoftheculture'smemoryimpossible.Thesearethetwoendeavorschosen
respectivelybyJoyceandHusserl.Joyceattempts"torepeatandtakeresponsibilityforequivocationitself"Husserltries"toreduceorimpoverishempiricallanguage"
tothepointwhereitsunivocityistransparent(Derrida1989:102,103).JoycestrivesforanoverdeterminedequivocityHusserl,forapureunivocity.

TheprojectsofHusserlandJoyceproceedfromcomparableantihistoricistpositions.DerridausesStephen'sfamouscommentabouthistoryfromUlyssesasthebasis
forhiscreationofthe"transcendentalparallels"betweenthetwo,althoughitseemstobeinFinnegansWakethatheseesJoyce'sprojectattainingastatusequalto
thatofHusserl.DrawingonStephen'sproclamationofhistoryas"anightmarefromwhich[he]istryingtoawake,"DerridaappliesStephen'swordstotheprojectsof
bothwriters,statingthat"Husserl'sproject,asthetranscendental'parallel'toJoyce's,knowsthesamerelativity"asJoyce'sproject.

LikethatofJoyce,Husserl'sproject"proceededfromacertainantihistoricismandawill'toawake'fromthe'nightmare'of'history'aswellasawilltomasterthat
nightmareinatotalandpresentresumption"(Derrida1989:103).InHusserl,thisantihistoricismentailstheattempttoreturntooriginalidealformsandovercomethe
limitationsoftheirarticulationinspecific,historicallydeterminedformsinJoyce,itistheattempttobringthepastintothepresentofawritingthatseekstocollapsethe
chronologicaldistancebetweenspecifichistoricalevents,myths,andnarrativesandtoarticulatetheseeventssynchronicallyinametadiscoursedescribingitselfasa
"collupsus"ofthe"onethousandandonestories"(FW5.27,2829)ittells,a"collideorscape"(143.28)inwhichhistoricallyspecificmythsandeventscollideinthe
continuousandcontiguouspresentsofJoyce'snarratives.

HusserlwishedtouncovertheidealgeometricalformsthataretheoriginalhistoricalformsofallsubsequentgeometryinDerrida'sreading,Joycewishedtouncover
theidealformsof"mythology,religion,sciences,arts,literature,politics,philosophy,andsoforth"(Derrida1989:102).Joyce'sprojectmovesinthedirectionofthe
Hegelianideal,encyclopedicanduniversalcontainingformHusserl'sinthedirectionofthepure,univocalidealandoriginalgeometricform.Husserl'sprojectmoves
towardrevealingparticularidealformsJoyce'stowardrevealinggeneralizedidealforms.Joycestrivesforthemediumofauniversallanguageofequivocationthat
mightbeabletotakeonboardtheformsofalllanguagesHusserl,forthemediumof

 Page6

aunivocallanguagecapableofrenderingitselftransparentsothatitmightsomehowrevealtheoriginsofgeometricalformswithoutthemediationoflanguage.

TheparadoxicaljuxtapositionofJoyceandHusserlprovidesphilosophicalandliterarysupportforDerrida'scritiqueofneohistoricism.ThepurposeofDerrida's
comparisonoftheirprojectsisadelineationoftheirsharedteleology,therespective,ideal,yetimpossiblelanguagesforwhichtheystrive,andthedifferentpositionsof
relativitythatbothHusserlandJoycehadtoadopt.Joyce'sprojectentailsrepeatingandtakingresponsibility"forallequivocationitself,utilizingalanguagethatcould
equalizethegreatestpossiblesynchronywiththegreatestpotentialforburied,accumulated,andinterwovenintentionswithineachlinguisticatom,eachvocable,each
word,eachsimpleproposition,inallworldlyculturesandtheirmostingeniousforms"(Derrida1989:102).

Incontrasttothis,Husserl'sprojectistoridlanguageofallequivocation,to"reduceorimpoverishempiricallanguagemethodicallytothepointwhereitsunivocaland
translatableelementsareactuallytransparent."Theultimategoalisto"reachbackandgraspagainatitspuresourceahistoricityortraditionalitythatnodefacto
historicaltotalitywillyieldofitself"(Derrida1989:103).HusserlattemptstoreachbackanduncoverthishistoricityJoyce,torecreateit,tobringitintothepresent
andwakeitfromthenightmareofhistoryinwhichitslumbers.

Neitherapureunivocitynorpureequivocityispossible,andthereinliesanother(asymmetrical)parallelbetweentheprojectsofHusserlandJoyce.Husserlstrovefor
apure(andultimatelyimpossible)univocitybuthadtoadmitan"irreducible,enriching,andalwaysrenascentequivocity."Culturesareconstructedbylanguageand
sustainedandsupportedbyacontinuallinguisticexchangeinwhichintentionandmemoryaswellasmeaningarerealizedthroughequivocity.Withoutequivocitythe
idealwouldbecome"paralyzed"(suchparalysisisdetailedinDubliners).Equivocitycanthusbeseenasthe"congenitalmarkofeveryculture"(Derrida1989:103).In
investigatingthetransmissionoftheidealformsofgeometry,Husserlwasnecessarilydealingwithculturallytransmittedformsoflanguageevenifhewasseekingways
ofaccesstothepure,originalidealsofthegeometricalforms.

Joyce'sprojectofsituatinghimselfwithinequivocity,withinasmanydiverselinguisticfragmentsfromasmanylanguagesaspossible,could"onlysucceedbyallottingits
sharetounivocity"(Derrida1989:103).Incorporatingallofthepossiblelinguisticforms(written,spoken,phonetic,ideogrammatic,pictogrammatic,hieroglyphic,
mathematical)fromalllan

 Page7

guagesintoasingletextualsiteisanimpossibility.Andevenifitwerepossibletodoso,thetextrepeatingtheseforms"wouldhavebeenunintelligibleatleastitwould
haveremainedsoforeverandforeveryone"(Derrida1989:103).

Whatmakesthenumerouslanguages,puns,typographicalunorthodoxies,geometricalfigures,andsiglaofFinnegansWakeintelligibletosomeextentisthe
incorporationofvariousunivocalstrands(thebaselanguageofEnglish,therecognizablegeometricpatterns,theencodingofthesiglainEnglish,therecognizablesong
rhythms,andsoon)withinthetext.Husserl'sdesireforpure,originalgeometricformsisadesireforidealityso,too,isJoyce'sgoalofcreatingauniversallanguagefor
the"onethousandandonestories,alltold,ofthesame"(FW5.2829).Thisshareddesireforidealityandtheantitheticaldirectionoftheprojectsinwhichitmanifests
itselfisanimportantforceinDerrida'sparadoxicaljuxtapositionofthetwowriters.

Derrida'sdeconstructionofHusserl'sTheOriginsofGeometrysetsJoyce'swritingstoworkasacorrectivetothelimitationsofHusserl'saspirationsforapureideal
univocity,aunivocitythatisinthelastresortunattainable.Nevertheless,itisHusserl'sunivocityandrelativitythatDerridausestodefinetheteleologyofbothprojects.
TheirrespectiveprojectsarerelativebecausetheequivocityHusserlattemptstoavoidisthatforwhichJoycestrivesandtheunivocityJoyce'sprojectseekstoevade
isthatatwhichHusserl'sprojectaims.Butthisrelativityisnotsymmetricallybalanced.Derridacontendsthat"[i]ftheunivocityinvestigatedbyHusserlandthe
equivocationgeneralizedbyJoyceareinfactrelative,theyare,therefore,notsosymmetrically.Fortheircommontelos,thepositivevalueofunivocity,is
immediatelyrevealedonlywithintherelativitythatHusserldefined"(Derrida1989:104).TheequivocalprojectJoyceundertakesisnotpossiblewithouttheunivocity
desiredbyHusserl,forunivocityis"thatwithoutwhichtheveryequivocationsofempiricalcultureandhistorywouldnotbepossible"(Derrida1989:1045).Itwasthe
veryunivocityJoycesoughttoavoidbysituatinghimselfinthemidstofanoverdeterminedequivocitythatmadethatequivocitypossible.

ComparingthelimitednumberofcitationsofJoycewiththevastamountofattentionDerridadevotestoHusserlinAnIntroductionrevealsJoyce'spositionasthatof
amarginalfigureinrelationshiptoacentralfigure.Atthesametime,Derrida'slaternotionsonmarginalpositionsasthepositionsfromwhichdeconstructioncanget
underwayenableustoseethatinhisfirstmajorstudyDerridaisalreadyassumingamarginalpositioninwhichheemploysJoyce'swritingtoanalyzeandcritique
Husserl'sproject.The

 Page8

citationofonenowwellknownsentencebyStephenDedalusandDerrida'ssummaryofJoyce'sprojectintheWake(asummaryrevealingDerrida'sinterestin,and
familiaritywith,Joyce'sfinalwork)createsamarginalpositioninAnIntroduction.ThisparadoxicallyimportantmarginalpositionsituatesDerridainthemarginsof
Joyce'stextandsetshisreadingofJoycetoworkinthecenterofhisreadingofHusserl.Overturningthetraditional,hierarchicalprivilegingofthecenter(ofthe
subject,ofhisreadingofHusserl,ofHusserl'sconceptofhistoryandtheideal),DerridasetshisreadingofJoycetoworkasheinitiatesoneofthepowerfulrhetorical
andtextualstrategiesthatmarkhislaterwritings.

 Page9

Chapter2
TheMarginalJoyceinWritingandDifference
WehaveseenthemetaphorofbeinghauntedbyJoyce'sghostthatDerridaoffersin"TwoWordsforJoyce":"everytimeIwrite,andeveninthemostacademic
piecesofwork,Joyce'sghostisalwayscomingonboard"(Derrida1984a:149).UsingJoyce'sghostasapartofhisprojectofpushingandexpandingtheborders
definedbytraditionalconceptsofbeingandexistence(inboththeirliteraryandphilosophicalappearances),Derrida'smetaphorofJoyceasghostallowshimtotreat
Joyce'snameasheelsewheretreatsthevariouslynamedformsof"tobe"relatedtothephilosophicalconceptofBeing:placingthem"undererasure"(Spivak
1976:xiv).

Thequestioningoftherelationshipbetweenthenameandtheobjectitsignifies,ofthesignifieranditssignified,isaforcefulstrategyinDerrida'ssolicitationofthe
conceptofbeingandphilosophicaldefinitionsofexist

 Page10

enceandthestructuresofexistence.InSpectersofMarxDerridafurtherdevelopsthenotionsofghostandhauntingasapartofhisprojectofsolicitingand
interrogatingtheconceptofbeing.Thelogicgoverningaghost'shauntingenablesDerridatobringtheideaofothernessoralteritytohisinvestigation.Discussing
hauntingintermsofthe"firsttime"andrepetition,hearguesthathauntingismarkedas"Jailtogetherother....Thislogicofhauntingwouldnotbemerelylargerand
morepowerfulthananontologyorathinkingofBeing....Itwouldharborwithinitself...eschatologyandteleologythemselves"(Derrida1994:10).

Derrida'stechniqueofplacingcertaintermsundererasuremimicsthestrategysuggestedbyHeidegger,inTheQuestionofBeing,ofdrawingcrossedlinesoverthe
wordBeing.ForHeidegger,drawingthesecrossedlinesovertheword"wardsoff...especiallythehabitofconceiving'Being'assomethingstandingbyitself."Itis
alsolinkedtoexposingthe"presumptuousdemandthat[thinking]knowthesolutionoftheriddlesandbringsalvation"(Spivak1976:xv).Placingthesignifiersofbeing,
liketheverbtobeoris,undererasureallowsthenegativeotherofthesignifiertocomeintoplay.AsDerridasaysoftheassertion"readingiswriting":"thisoneness
designatesneitherundifferentiated(con)fusionnoridentityatperfectresttheisthatcouplesreadingwithwritingmustripapart"(Derrida1981:6364).

ThemetaphorofJoyce'sghosthauntingDerrida'sdeconstructiveinvestigationsoftheconceptofbeingbringsintoplaytheforceofJoyce'swritinguponDerrida's
investigationsatthesametimethatitsuggestssomethingofthesignificanceofJoyceinDerrida'swork.InWritingandDifferenceJoyce'sghosthauntsDerrida's
writingfrommarginalpositions,and,asaghost,Joycebothisandisnotanimportantforce.

IntheessaysofWritingandDifference,asinDerrida'sreadingofHusserl,Joyce'spositionsaremarginal.Thefirstoftheseisinthefootnotestotheessay"Forceand
Signification,"whereDerridainvestigatesthedistinctioncriticismmakesbetweenitselfanditsobjectintermsofforce:"Criticismhenceforthknowsitselfseparated
fromforce,occasionallyavengingitselfonforcebygravelyandprofoundlyprovingthatseparationistheconditionofthework,andnotonlyofthediscourseonthe
work"(Derrida1978:5).Inthefootnotetothispassageheoffersameditationonthetraditionaldistinctionbetweenthe"creativeforce"and"thecriticalact."

ThismeditationrecitesFlaubert'spropositionthat"'Onewritescriticismwhenonecannotcreateart',"and,followingthatproposition,thelistofunproductive
relationshipsbetweenwritersandcritics.Therecitationends

 Page11

with"AndwhenthetranslationofHegelisfinished,Lordknowswherewewillendup."Derridaclaimsthat"FlaubertwasrighttofearHegel"andcitesHeidegger's
quotationofHegel'scriticismofart:"'itsformhasceasedtobethehighestneedofthespirit'."FollowingtherecitationofFlaubertandHeidegger'scitationofHegel,
Joyce'snameappearsasasignifierofacreativeforceinamostmarginalposition,situatedbetweenProustandFaulkner,asoneofthewriterswhocanbeexplained
bythefactthatthetranslationofHegel(outofGermancertainly,butalsooutofHegeliantermsintothosethatmightmakeHegeleasiertocomprehend)"hasn'tbeen
finished"(Derrida1979:302n.4).

ThismarginalcitationofJoyceisimportantinjuxtaposingthewriterwithHegelasDerridaearlierjuxtaposedhimwithHusserl.Italsosomewhatambiguouslyoffersthe
notionthatJoycemight,ormightnot,havereadHegel"ThedifferencebetweenMallarmandtheseotherwritersisperhapsthereadingofHegel"(Derrida
1978:302n.4emphasisadded)andthatJoycemightbe"explain[ed]"bytheunfinishedbusinessofHegel.Themetaphorofhauntingexplainsthispossibilityof
Joyceas"perhaps"aHegelianwriter,forthepossibilityexistsontheveryborderbelongingtohaunting:"betweentherealandtheunreal,theactualandtheinactual...
intheoppositionbetweenwhatispresentandwhatisnot"(Derrida1994:II).

ThepossibilityofsomekindoflinkbetweenHegelandJoyceinterestsanumberofJoyceans,butempiricalhistoriansintheJoyceancommunityarefrustratedbythe
difficultiesoftryingtotakeaprecisemeasurementoftheextenttowhichDerridaseesJoyceasaHegelianghost.GeertLernout,acriticwhostronglydisagreeswith
theideaofJoyceaseitheraHegelianwriteroramajorpowerinDerrida'swriting,notesthatthe"linkingofJoyceandHegelhadoriginallybeensuggestedbyJean
Paris"in1957and"hasbeenelaboratedsincebyagreatnumberofcritics,"includingJacquesAubert,JeanMichelRabat,AlainDavid,andGeoffreyHartman
(Lernout1990:59).

WewillconsiderthesignificanceofDerrida'slinkingofHegelandJoycelaterinthischapterandelsewhereinthebook.Thepointhereisthereliabilityoftheempirical
historicismthatdismissesDerridaas"reliablewitnessonJoyce"(Lernout1990:61).ThisisnotaclaimDerridamakesforhimself,butoneLernoutclaimsDerridais
making.ElaboratingtheFrenchcriticalcontextforDerrida'slinkingofJoyceandHegel,LernoutcitesJoyceinhisattempttodismissDerrida'sreadingofJoyceas
groundedon"faultyreasoning,'woman'sreason'oroxymoron."TryingtorecontextualizeDerrida'sdeconstructivereadingintothelimitedtermsofahistoricalem

 Page12

piricismfoundedonutilitarianism,LernoutarguesthatDerrida'sreadingis"questionable"becauseDerridaiscitingthewordsofLynchandthosewords"cannotinany
usefulsensebetakenastheexpressionoftheauthor'sopinions"(Lernout1990:34emphasisadded).Thisinvocationofaunivocal,linguistictransparency(wordsare
thetransparentmediumfortheexpressionoftheiruser'sideas)appliestheHusserlianhistoricismDerridafindsdeconstructedinJoyce'swritinginordertoplaceJoyce
backintotheverynightmareofhistoricistempiricismfromwhichStephenDedaluswishedtoawakeandoutofwhichJoycesuccessfullywrotehimself.

ThesecondessayhauntedbyJoyce'sghostis,appropriately,aninvestigationintomadnessexploringthelimitationsofDescartes'scogitoindefiningmadnessasastate
ofbeing."CogitoandtheHistoryofMadness"deconstructsMichelFoucault's"MadnessandCivilization:AHistoryofInsanityintheAgeofReason."Itdemonstrates
howDerrida'sexteacher'sviewofmadnesswaslimitedbyitsrelianceontheCartesianideaofthecogitoinitsattempttodefinemadness.Whileconsciouslysituating
himselfinthepositionofanexdisciple,Derridastatesthatheretains"theconsciousnessofanadmiringandgratefuldisciple"(Derrida1978:31)Forthisexploration
ofmadness,DerridamarginalizesacommentJoycemadeaboutthewritingofUlysses.Inthelefthandcolumnatthebeginningoftheessay,Derridainscribes
Kierkegaard'sstatement"TheInstantofDecisionisMadness."Justbelowthis,anddirectlyinlinewiththetitle,Folieetdraison:Histoiredelafoliel'ge
classique,Derridapositions,''Inanyeventthisbookwasterriblydaring.Atransparentsheetseparatesitfrommadness.(Joyce,speakingofUlysses)"(Derrida
1978:31).

Withthesetwocitations,DerridacreatesatextualplaythatJoycehimselfhadalreadyemployedandforegroundedinFinnegansWake:amarginal,polysemoususeof
wordsandphrasessimultaneouslysignifyinginseveraldifferentdirections.OneoftheconclusionsatwhichDerridaarrivesinthisessayisthatallcriticaldecisionsentail
acrisisinwhichthereisanexposuretoatleastthepossibilityofmadness:"Butthecrisisisalsodecision,thecaesuraofwhichFoucaultspeaks,inthesenseofkrinein,
thechoiceanddivisionbetweenthetwowaysseparatedbyParmenidesinhispoem,thewayoflogosandthenonway,thelabyrinth,thepalintropeinwhichlogosis
lostthewayofmeaningandthewayofnonmeaningofBeingandofnonBeing"(Derrida1978:62).Thismomentofdecision,whichopensthepossibilityofmadness,
canbelinkedtotheapparitionoftheghostwhoseappearancetakesplaceon"theverybordersbetweenbeingandnonbeing,betweenwhatisandwhatisnot."This
issomethingDerridaexploresinidentifyingHamlet'squestioning"tobeornottobe?"asafundamentally

 Page13

philosophicalquestionthatislinkedtotheapparitionoftheghostinShakespeare'splay(Derrida1994:1011).

ThereadingofDescartesthatDerridaoffersasasupplementtoFoucault'sdistinguishestwoaspectsoftheCartesiancogitothatcanandmustbeseparatedinthe
"crisisofdecision."Thefirstisthespectralaspect,the"nonway,"the''labyrinth"andpalintropic,hyperbolicprojectoftheCartesiancogito.Possessinga"mad
audacity,"thishyperbolicprojectentailsthe"returntoanoriginalpointwhichnolongerbelongstoeitheradeterminedreasonoradeterminedunreason,nolonger
belongstothemasoppositionoralternative"(Derrida1978:56).Thesecondaspectisthat"whichbelongstoafactualhistoricalstructure"(Derrida1978:60).

Derrida'sinterestintheprojectsofHusserlandJoycecanbeconsideredinthecontextofthesetwoaspectsofthecogito,forbothwritersHusserlthroughunivocity
andJoycethroughequivocitysoughttoescapethelimiteddeterminationofthe"factualhistoricalstructure[s]"oftheirrespectivetraditionsinordertoreturntothe
"commonorigin"ofthe"zeropoint,"where"alldeterminedcontradictions,intheformofgiven,factualhistoricalstructures,canappear,andappearasrelativetothis
zeropointatwhichdeterminedmeaningandnonmeaningcometogetherintheircommonorigin"(Derrida1978:56).

ThecrisisofdecisioninwhichthechoicebetweenthesetwooptionsismadeisthecrisisofHamlet,whoexperienceskrinein,ortheKierkegaardianmadinstantof
decision,inhisencounterwiththeirrational,withthesimultaneousbeingandnonbeingofhisfather'sghost,anencounterrearticulatedinUlyssesandemployedasa
framingdeviceinDerrida'sSpectersofMarx.CitingJoyce'swordsonthetransparentsheetseparatingUlyssesfrommadnessbringsJoyce'sghostonboard
Derrida'sreadingofhisteacher'sthoughtsonmadness,buttheteacherwasunabletoapproachmadnessbecauseunlikeJoyce's"transparentsheet,"theCartesianego
isanopaqueblockkeepingmadnessfromFoucault'ssightevenasitallowshimtothinkofitasapossibility:"Iwhothink,Icannotbemad"(Foucault,citedinDerrida
1978:55).

ThepossibilityofreadingthroughthetransparentsheetseparatingUlyssesfrommadnesskeepsthepossibilityofseeingthismadnessinplay.ThewordsofJoyce's
ghost,ofJoyce'snameasasignifierof"BeingandnonBeing"articulateamadnessthatcanbekeptatbayyetstillseen.ThesewordsofKierkegaardandJoyce
situatedinthemarginatthebeginningofDerrida'sessayanticipatesuchconclusionsevenastheysimultaneouslyengageinaplaywitheachotherandwiththewordsin
themain,righthandcolumnoftheessaythatconstitutetheintroduction.Theyofferawayof

 Page14

meaningwhenreadassignifiersofeachotherandofnonmeaning(foreachother)whenreadasseparateanddistinctsignifiersofthemaincolumnofDerrida'stext.

Thewaysinwhichthesecitationsareinvolvedinanintertextualplaywitheachother,withtheopeningwordsandwiththeconcludingwordsoftheessay,arenot
unlikethewaysinwhichthemarginaliaoperateintheWake'slessonssection.Atthebeginningof2.2,forexample,thelefthandmarginalinscription"withhisbroad
andhairyface,toIrelandadisgrace"(FW260.lh),signifiesthe"bigguard"whois"shot"(FW260.67)inthecentralcolumnofthetextaswellasthevariationson
theadultmalefigureswhoappearinthelefthandcolumnaftertheinitialfigurewiththe"hairyface."

Atthesametime,thisfigureisalsoinvolvedinasignifyingplaywiththelistofpatriarchs,philosophers,andbiblicalfigureswhoappearinthelefthandmarginonthe
section'spenultimatepage(307),aswellaswiththe"Pep"figureaddressedinthe"NIGHTLETTER,"withwhichthesectionconcludes.Allofthesefiguresaretreated
asthetargetsofantiphallocentricforcesandrestagethemovementofHamletagainstOldHamletandClaudiusofStephenDedalusagainstthefatherlypriestandking
hemustkillinhismindandofShem,Shaun,andIssyagainstHCE.InSpectersofMarxDerridausestheappearanceoftheghostfromHamlettoelaboratehis
theoryof"hauntology"(Derrida1994:10)in"CogitoandtheHistoryofMadness"heraisesthespecterofhisold,paternalteacherinordertoexorciseitfromhisown
investigationofmadness.

Thegeneralthemeofovercomingthefather(bytakinghisplace,goingbeyondhim,orsymbolicallykillinghim)foundinHamletandrearticulatedinJoyce'sUlysses
andDerrida'swritingisimportantthroughouttheWake.ThesamethemeisrestagedbyDerridainhisovercomingoftheteacherwhohadonceheldapedagogicand
parentalpositioninDerrida'stimeasastudent.Theopeningwordsof"CogitoandtheHistoryofMadness"refertoFoucault'sstudyofmadnessasa"pointof
departure"forthe"reflections"onmadnessandreasonthatconstitutetheessay.This"pointofdeparture"involvesthecriticalmomentinwhichDerridadecidesto
leavetheworkofhisexteachertoreexamineitcriticallyfromapointthatwouldnothavebeenpossiblewhenhewasstillinthepositionofastudent.

Kierkegaard'spronouncementontheinstantofdecisionasanopeningofthepossibilityofmadnesssignifiesthemomentwhentheconsciousdecisiontopartfromthe
teacherismade.Thedecision"not...todispute,buttoengageindialoguewiththemaster"producesastateofmelancholia"anunhappyconsciousness"(Derrida
1978:31).Thisunhappinessis"intermi

 Page15

nable"andcomesfromthestudenthavingtothinkofwhathasbeenpresentasanabsence:it"stemsfromthefactthathedoesnotyetknoworisstillconcealing
fromhimselfthatthemaster,likereallife,mayalwaysbeabsent"(Derrida1978:32).

DerridadoublesthemadnessofKierkegaard'sdecisionwiththepossibleJoyceanmadnessthatisseparatedfromUlyssesbya"transparentsheet,"and,astheessay
reveals,the"transparentsheet"operatesasametaphorforthepositionbetweentheCartesiancogitoandthemadnessthatittriestocomprehend.Asthecreatorof
UlyssesandthisseemstobeoneofthereasonsforDerrida'suseoftheJoyceanfragmentJoyceisawareofhistextas"other"astheuseofalanguagethat
wouldhavebeenmadnesshaditnotbecomeUlysses.Inbecomingthecogitothatis"assuredofwhatitsays,"theJoyceancogitotakesthe''terriblydaring"critical
decisiontoriskmadnessinbecomingthe"other"thatisthelanguageofUlyssesinitstotality.WhatDerridasaysoflanguageingeneralholdsalsofortheparticular
languageofJoyce:"beingthebreakwithmadness,itadheresmorethoroughlytoitsessenceandvocation...ifitpitsitselfagainstmadness...andgetscloser...to
it:tothepointofbeingseparatedfromitonlybythe'transparentsheet'ofwhichJoycespeaks,thatis,byitself"(Derrida1978:55).

DerridapositionsJoyce'swordsinaprecisealignmentwiththetitleofFoucault'sbook,atitleoccupyingthepositionofthe"other"toboththecommentsby
KierkegaardandJoyce,aswelltoDerrida'sviewsonFoucault'sinabilitytocomprehendmadnessbecauseitisalwaysinthepositionoftheothertotheCartesian
cogito.Thewords"Inanyeventthisbookwasterriblydaring.Atransparentsheetseparatesitfrommad"aredividedintothreelinesthatareinanoffsetalignment
withtwolinesinthecentralcolumnconstitutedbythewords"Foucault'sbookFolieetdraison:Histoiredelafoliel'geclassique."Theeffectoftheoffset
alignmentcreatesthepossibilitythatJoyce'swordscansignifythetitleofFoucault'stext,the"transparentsheet"referringtothemarginal"paperspace"betweenJoyce's
spectralwordsandthetitleofFoucault'stext.

TheJoycean"other,"marginaltextualfragment,separatedfromthecentraltextbytheblankspacebetweenthem,signifiesFoucault'sfailuretoescapethelimitationsof
theCartesiancogitoinhisefforttocomprehendmadness.FromDerrida'sperspective,themadnessFoucaultfoughttodefineultimatelyremainsinthepositionofthe
otherbecauseFoucaultfollowedtheCartesiancogitoalongthepathofthe"factualhistoricalstructures"butfailedtofollowitalongthe"nonway"ofthehyperbolic
project.Governedbythenecessarilylinear,historicalmodeloftheCartesiancogito,

 Page16

Foucault's"HistoryofMadness"remainsanempiricisthistoryofthemadnessthattheneoclassicalperiodsoughttodefineandregulateunderthecontroloftherational
cogito.Itfailedtograspthephenomenologicalessenceofmadnessbecauseitcouldnotseethatmadnessasitsownalterity.

Thepositionofthesubject(oftheindividual,ofthetheme,oftheidea)inrelationshiptothetotallyotherisatworkin"ViolenceandMetaphysics:AnEssayonthe
ThoughtofEmmanuelLevinas."DerridainvestigatesthethoughtofLevinasasitmovesfromagreementwithsomeoftheideasofHusserltowardanacceptanceof
otherideas(andideasoftheother)fromHeidegger,amovementDerridainterpretsasaforcefulmovementawayfromHusserlasother.BothHusserlandHeidegger
occupythepositionoftheother,evenasLevinasusestwocentralHeideggereanthemesagainstHusserl.Thefirstis"theidea...thatintheontologicalordertheworld
ofscienceisposteriortotheconcreteandvagueworldofperception,anddependsuponit."ThisthemeisusedtoattackHusserl'svision"inthisconcreteworld[of]a
worldofperceivedobjectsaboveall"(Derrida1978:87).

ThesecondattackagainstHusserl:"ifHusserlwasrightinhisoppositiontohistoricismandnaturalistichistory,heneglected'thehistoricalsituationofman...
understoodinanothersense'."This"other"sense(andthesenseoftheotherquaother)liesinthefactualhistoricityLevinasfindsHusserlneglecting.Thecorrectionto
suchneglectisfoundinthe"'historicalsituationofman...understoodinanothersense'"thatis,inthe"historicityandtemporality"whichis"'theverysubstantialityof
hissubstance'...'[T]hisstructure...occupiessuchanimportantplaceinHeidegger'sthought'''(Derrida1978:87).

Thestructureoftheessayisthatofalterity,oftherelationshipbetweenthesubjectanditsother,andthisstructureprovidesthecontextinwhichDerridaexploresthe
developmentofLevinas'sthoughtasitmovesfromanagreementwithHusserltoanagreementwithHeidegger(andthenontoadisagreementwithHeidegger's
ontology).ThisstructureisalreadyatworkinthepassagefromMatthewArnold'sCultureandAnarchy,which,likethecitationsfromKierkegaardandJoycein
"CogitoandtheHistoryofMadness,"isinscribedinthelefthandmarginatthebeginningoftheessay:"HebraismandHellenismbetweenthesetwopointsof
influencemovesourworld.Atonetimeitfeelsmorepowerfullytheattractionofoneofthem,atanothertimeoftheotheranditoughttobe,thoughitneveris,evenly
andhappilybalancedbetweenthem"(Derrida1978:79emphasisadded).TheHebraicandHellenicfunctionastotallyotherforeachotheras

 Page17

wellasfortheworldaseachinturnbecomestheotherinwhose"influencemovesourworld."

DerridaalsouncoversthestructureoftheoneandtheotheratworkintwoinitialstagesofLevinas'sthought:theHusserlianandtheHeideggerean.Thesereflecttwo
majorforcesdevelopingoutofHegel'sthinking.Thesetwoforcesarticulatethedifferencesbetween"philosophyasapowerandadventureofthequestionitselfand
philosophyasadeterminedeventorturningpointwithinthisadventure"(Derrida1978:81).

UsingthestructureandplayofHegeliandialecticinwhichtheantithesisoperatesastheotherofthethesisuntilitissublatedandbroughtintothethesisandsettowork
untilanotherantithesisarises,Derridastructureshisessaytotraceavarietyoftheticantitheticalpatterns.TheseincludethedialecticaldevelopmentofLevinas'sthought
asitmovesfromaHusserlianthesistoanantiHusserlianacceptanceofpartsofHeidegger'sontologyandthenontoanalmostHusserlianrejectionofHeidegger.
Theyalsoincludethelarger,subsumingdialecticoftheHellenic/HebraicpatternwithinwhichDerridatracesthedevelopmentofLevinas'sthinkingandwhichDerrida
suspendsabovetheentireessaybyinscribingitinthemarginoftheopeningpassage.And,attheendoftheessay,followingtherepetitionofanideaaboutJoycethat
heofferedinthenotesofthefirstessayinthecollection,thatJoycemightbeanHegeliannovelist"perhapsthemostHegelianofmodernnovelists"(Derrida
1978:153emphasisadded)Derridaoffersthe"neutralproposition,"thepeculiarsynthesis,ofJoyce'sUlysses:"'Jewgreekisgreekjew'."ForDerrida,this
propositionarticulatesJoyce'sprojectinUlyssesasonethatmovesbetweenpreciselythetwopolesoftheHellenicandHebraicidentifiedbyArnoldinthemarginal
citationDerridaplacesatthebeginningof"ViolenceandMetaphysics."

Theconclusiontowardwhich"ViolenceandMetaphysics"leadsisthatthethoughtofLevinasfeels,inthewordsofArnold,"morepowerfullytheattraction"of
HebraismthanofHellenism:Levinas"totallyrenewsempiricism,andinversesitbyrevealingittoitselfasmetaphysics"(Derrida1978:151).TheempiricismofLevinas
isanempiricismcreating"anirruptionofthetotallyotherandnothingcansoprofoundlysolicittheGreeklogosphilosophythanthisirruptionofthe"totallyother"
andnothingcantosuchanextentreawakenthelogostoitsoriginastoitsmortality,itsother.''Thisirruptionofthe"totallyother"mayalsobethe"experienceofthe
infinitelyotherJudaism"(Derrida1978:152).

Derrida'ssenseofJudaism'salterityastheotheroftheClassicalGreekandtheChristiantraditionsoccursperiodicallythroughouthiswork,and

 Page18

wewilllookatitfurtherinthecontextofGlasaswellasinDerrida'sspeakingonJoyce.DerridaisattentivetoBloom'sstatusasaJew,astatusthatconsignsBloom
totheroleoftheotherintheDublinofUlysses,andDerrida'sinterestinBloom'sJudaismisneverfarfromhisconcernswiththattext.

InhiscounterparttoBennington'stextinJacquesDerrida,DerridameditatesuponhisownJewishidentityandheritageaspartofhismourningforhismother,
consciouslymarkinghisplacewithintheClassicalandChristiantraditionsastheplaceoftheother.Atthesametime,heappropriatestheformofAugustine's
Confessionsforhisown"circumfession,"usingthecoincidental,biographicaldetailofhishavingdwelledliterallyintheplaceoftheotherbyvirtueofhisfamily's
residenceonthe"RueSaintAugustin,Algiers"(BenningtonandDerrida1993:5).HealsopursueshisownJudaisminhisdiscussionoftherelationshipbetweenJoyce's
writingsandtheacademicreceptionofthosewritings,whereheidentifieshimselfwithBloom'sidentificationas"benBloomElijah"andpointsoutthathe''too[is]
calledElijah:thisname...wasgivenmeonmyseventhday"(Derrida1992a:284).

Derrida'sinterestinLevinasandthelatter'sattractiontoHebraismhelpsaccountforDerrida'sattractiontoLevinas'sthought.HebraismplaysamajorroleinLevinas's
"encounterwiththeabsolutelyother."ThisencounterisanessentialpartofLevinas'seschatology.Itis"theencounter,theonlywayout,theonlyadventuringoutside
oneselftowardtheunforeseeablyother."Ethically,thisencounterentailsa"renunciationofhope."Indeed,withinLevinas'sLatracedel'autre,"eschatologydoesnot
only'appear'hopeless,"but"isgivenassuch."Renunciation"belongstoitsessentialmeaning"(Derrida1978:95).

ForDerrida,Levinas'sencounterwiththeothercannotbeexperiencedexceptasatracebecausethere"isnowaytoconceptualizetheencounter."Whileitis"present
attheheartofexperience,"itisonlymadepossible"bytheother,theunforeseeable'resistanttoallcategories'"(Derrida1978:95).Theencounterisanethical
establishmentofsimultaneousrelationwith,andseparationfrom,theother,anditisa"beingtogetherasseparation"that"precedesorexceedssociety,collectivity,
community."Levinas'stermforitisreligion,andthisreligion"opensethics"because,forLevinas,the"ethicalrelationisareligiousrelation."

Thisreligionisnotonereligionamongstothersbutatranscendentreligionmakingitpossibletoacceptseparation(withouthope)fromtheotherastheonlyrelationwith
theother.Itis"thereligion,thereligiosityofthereligious"anditrevealstheradicalrelationshipsbetweentheoryandethics

 Page19

andthebeginningofmetaphysicsthatemergewhentheorybeginsthecritiqueofitselfasontology:"Metaphysicsbeginswhentheorycriticizesitselfasontology,...
andwhenmetaphysics...letsitselfbeputintoquestionbytheotherinthemovementofethics"(Derrida1978:96).Therenunciationofhopeisanethicalmovement
towardthetotallyother,andtherelationofseparationfromthetotallyotheristheethicalrelationwhichBeinghaswiththetotallyother.

Onetrajectoryfollowedby"ViolenceandMetaphysics"movesalongthethemeofHebraismtowardJoyce'sversionoftherelationbetweenbeingandtheotherwithin
thecontextoftheHellenic/Hebraicantithesis.ThemeetingofBloomandDedalusisastagingofthesameplaybetweenHellenismandHebraismatworkinthe
ArnoldiancitationDerridacitesatthebeginningofhisessayandexpressedinthecitationofJoycethatendstheessay:"'Jewgreekisgreekjew.Extremesmeet'."
HebraismandHellenismandJewgreekprovidetheframefortheentirework.

Derridaends(butdoesnotconclude)theessaywithundecidabilitytheundecidabilityoftherelationbetweenHegelandJoyce,"perhapsthemostHegelianof
modernnovelists,"andtheultimateundecidabilityoftherelationsbetweentheJewandGreek:"doesthestrangedialoguebetweentheJewandtheGreek,peaceitself,
havetheformoftheabsolute,speculativelogicofHegel....Or,onthecontrary,doesthispeacehavetheformofinfiniteseparationandoftheunthinkable,unsayable
transcendenceoftheother?"(Derrida1978:153).

Settingtoworkthepowerofundecidabilitythatincreasesinforceduringthecourseofhislaterwork,Derridafinishestheessaywithafinalquestiononthemeaning
andlegitimacyofthecopulaisinJoyce'sproposition:"Andwhatisthelegitimacy,whatisthemeaningofthecopulainthispropositionfromperhapsthemostHegelian
ofmodernnovelists:'Jewgreekisgreekjew.Extremesmeet'?"(Derrida1978:153).Derrida's"undecidables"areexaminedinthefinalchapterofthisstudy,butone
answertothefinalquestionofDerrida'sessayonLevinasthathasalreadybeencitedisworthrecitingasanendtothissecondchapter:the"oneness"signifiedbythe
copulais"designatesneitherundifferentiated(con)fusionnoridentityatperfectresttheisthatcouples[thesubjectandpropositionofasentencereadingandwriting
"Jewgreek"and''greekjew"]mustripapart"(Derrida1981:6364).

 Page20

Chapter3
MovementsfromtheMargins:
Dissemination
ThischaptertracesthespectralpositionsJoyce'sghostoccupiesinDissemination.Likethosewehavealreadyexamined,theseareagainmarginalpositionsbutthe
effectsofJoyce'shauntingofDisseminationaremorereadilydiscerniblethantheeffectsofthathauntinginDerrida'searliertexts.Severalinterrelated,generalthemes
linktogetherJoyce'shauntingofDissemination,ThePostCard,andGlas:thestructureofthebookasanideologicalstructure,therelationshipsbetweenspeech
andwriting,therelationshipsbetweenfathersandsons,andtheoperationsofdesireinwriting.

InallthreetextsDerridaisconcernedwiththequestionofthestructureofthebookasanideologicalstructurefoundedontheconceptofthenotionofunity(ofthe
bookanditscomponentparts)anditstripartitepatternofbeginning,middle,andend.ThisconcernisapparentfromtheopeningsentenceofDissemination:"This
(therefore)willnothavebeenabook"(Derrida1981:3).OneimplicationofthisforourreadingofDissemination

 Page21

andtheWakeistheestablishmentofacontextforcomparingtherespectivedeconstructionsoftheideologicalformofthestructureofthebookbyJoyceandDerrida.

InDisseminationDerridafocusesspecificallyonthestructureofthebookasanideologicalformdeterminingthematerialwaysinwhichthebookisorderedandits
languagetypographicallydisplayed.EvenacursoryglanceatthewayinwhichthecolumnfromPlato's"Philebus"ispositionednexttoapassagefromMallarm's
"Mimique"intheinitialpagesofDissemination's''TheDoubleSession"revealsthepossibilityforanintertextualplaybetweenthesepassagessimilartotheonemade
possiblebythe"groupedtextualfield"oftheWake's"lessons"section(2.2).

TheostensiblesourceforDerrida'sinterrogationofthetraditionalstructureofthebookistheintroductiontoHegel'sPhenomenologyofSpirit.Intheopeningsection
ofthiswork,Hegelexaminesthetraditionalstructurebywhichtheintroductoryprefacebeginsabookasanideologicalpattern,and,accordingtoDerrida,Hegel's
conclusionisthat"foraphilosophicaltextassuch,aprefaceisneitherusefulnorevenpossible"(Derrida1981:11).

Hegel'sdismissaloftheprefaceisbasedonthepremisethatthesortofexplanatorysummaryanauthormightofferinapreface"seemsnotonlysuperfluousbut,in
viewofthenatureofthesubjectmatter,eveninappropriateandmisleading."Thisisbecause"whatevermightappropriatelybesaidaboutthephilosophyina
prefacesayahistoricalstatementofthemaindriftandthepointofview,thegeneralcontentandresults,astringofrandomassertionsandassurancesabouttruth
noneofthiscanbeacceptedasthewayinwhichtoexpoundphilosophicaltruth"(Hegel1977:1).Derridaseestherelationshipbetweentheprefaceorintroduction
andthebodyofthebookintermsofastrugglebetween,ontheonehand,thelaboroftheconceptconstitutedbythephilosophicalexpositionthatisthebody,and,on
theother,theexteriorityofthislaborthatissimultaneouslyitssummaryandanticipationinthepreface.Theargumentpresentedinthebookisthephilosophythe
summaryintheprefaceisonlyaboutit.

ThisdistinctioncanberelatedtothedoublebindofmimesisDerridadiscussesinDisseminationandexploresinhisreadingsofJoyce.Aswewillsee,mimesis,or
representation,strivestosaysomethingabouttheobjectbeingrepresentedinlanguageundertheguiseofmakingthatobjectpresentagain(represented)inlanguage.
Indeconstructingthetraditional,hierarchicalprivilegingofthoughtoverspeechandspeechoverwriting,Derridainvestigateshowrepresentationisfoundeduponthe
philosophicalconcept

 Page22

ofpresence.Hequestionsthesufficiencyofthatconcepttoaccountforthedistinctionbetweenalinguisticarticulationaboutaparticularsubjectandonethatclaimsto
makethatsubjectpresent.Chapter8'sexaminationoftextualoperationsinUlyssesthatDerrida's"undecidables"cansignifyexploreshowJoyceremarksthe
operationsofthisdoublebindinhisnarrative.

Derridaarguesthat"[i]ftheforewordisindispensable,itisbecausetheprevailingculturestillimposesbothformalismandempiricism."This"culturemustbefought,or
rather'formed'...better,cultivatedmorecarefully.ThenecessityofprefacesbelongstotheBildung"(Derrida1981:1112).Derridahasdescribedhisown
participationinattemptingtofightorbetter''form"theprevalentculturalinsistenceontheprefaceandthetraditionalideologicalconceptofthebookasoneofthe
primaryconcernsofhisownwriting:"Inwhatyoucallmybooks,whatisfirstofallputinquestionistheunityofthebookandtheunity'book'consideredasaperfect
totality,withalltheimplicationsofsuchaconcept.Andyouknowthattheseimplicationsconcerntheentiretyofourculture"(Derrida1987b:3).

DerridafindsHegel'scontributiontothephilosophicalstrugglewiththeideaoftheunityofthebooksoimportantthathedescribesHegelas"thelastphilosopherofthe
bookandthefirstthinkerofwriting"(Derrida1976:26).Hegel'sworkmarksatransitionbetweenwritingenclosedintheideologicallyprescribedformofthebookand
arethinkingofwritingthatquestionstheformsinwhichitispresented.Joyce,whomwehaveseenDerridadescribeas"perhapsthemostHegelianofmodernist
novelists,"hasalsohadamajorimpactonDerrida'srethinkingandrewritingoftheformofthebook.

Derrida'sdeconstructionofthetraditionalformofbookinDisseminationisclearlyinfluencedbyhisreadingofJoyce'sWakebutsomeJoycescholarstakeacynical
viewoftheideathatthesecondsectionofDissemination,"Plato'sPharmacy,"is"nothingbutareadingofFinnegansWake"(Derrida198188n.20).Suchcynicism
hasdonelittletodisproveDerrida'sinitialclaimorhislaterreiterationofit:"IhadthefeelingthatwithouttoomuchdifficultyonecouldhavepresentedLaPharmacie
dePlatonasasortofindirectreadingofFinnegansWake,whichmimes,betweenShemandShaun,betweenthepenmanandthepostman,downtothefinestand
mostfinelyironizeddetail,thewholesceneofthepharmakos,thepharmakon,thevariousfunctionsofThoth,th'other,etc."(Derrida1984a:150).Asthischapterwill
attempttoshow,Derrida'sreadingoftheWakeisnotconcernedwithprovingheisa"Joyceanexpert"(Derridaviewsthisphraseassomethingofanoxymoron)but
withrestaging,or"miming,"someofthat

 Page23

text'sarticulationofcertainmythemesandthepositionsofsomeoftheirmajorcharacters.

Inallfairnesstoempiricistcritics,theirprimaryconcerniswithhistorical,empiricaltextualmatters.OneofGeertLernout'smainobjectionstoDerridastemsfromwhat
heterms"Derrida'scharacteristicallyunhistorical"readings(Lernout1990:60).Derrida'sclaim,however,isthatJoyce's"ghostisalwayscomingonboard...every
time[he]write[s]"and"eveninthemostacademicpiecesofwork,"anditiseasytoseethedifficultiesempiricistswouldfaceintryingtodealwiththemetaphorof
Joyce'sghost(Derrida1984a:149emphasisadded).

Derridaaddressessuchcriticswhenhestressesthehistoricalgroundingofhisownwork:"Contrarytowhatsomepeoplebelieveorhaveaninterestinmakingbelieve,
Iconsidermyselfverymuchahistorian,veryhistoricist....Wemustconstantlyrecallthishistoricalsolidarityandthewayinwhichitisputtogether"(Derrida
1992b:54).AswesawinhiscomparisonofJoyce'sequivocitywithHusserl'sunivocity,Derridaisveryconcernedwiththewaysinwhichhistoricalsolidaritycan
obscuretheveryhistoricalfiguresitstrivestoreveal.JoyceandHusserlofferantitheticalmodesforrememberingandinteriorizingcultureandhistorywithintheir
writing,butHusserl'sunivocalidealwasasimpossibletoachieveasJoyce'sperfectequivocity.Husserlcouldnotridthelanguageheusedofequivocityanymorethan
Joycecouldtakeonboardalllanguages,myths,andnarratives.

Incomparingtheprojectsofthetwowriters,Derrida'scritiqueofthesortofhistoricalandempiricalproofdemandedbycriticssuchasLernoutisthatthe"pure
historicity"soughtbybothHusserlandJoycecannotbeproducedbythecomplicityofanempiricismandhistoricismthatignoresthewaysinwhichtheythemselves
representhistory:"nodefactohistoricaltotalitywillyield[historicity]ofitself"(Derrida1989:103).

FinnegansWakeperformsaveryHegelianlikedismantlingofthehistoricallydetermined,traditionalideologicalstructureofthebook,andDerridahasdescribed
"Plato'sPharmacy"'srelationshiptotheWakeas"themostmodest,themostmiserabledescendantofacorpus"(Derrida1984a:150).As"modest"and''miserable"as
thisrelationmight(ironically)be,itwouldbesurprisingifJoyce'sghostwerenothauntingthestructuresofthetextinwhich"Plato'sPharmacy"offersitsdeconstructive
solicitationoftherulesandcompositionsoftexts,language,andwriting.

InsettingouttodeconstructtheideologythatwouldenableDissemination,orindeedanyofhisother"books,"tobereadaccordingtothetraditionalrulesoflinearity
andteleologythatgovernanddeterminethestruc

 Page24

turesofthebook,DerridaisdoinglittlemorethanremarkingtheachievementsofbothHegelandJoyceinmakingtheirreadersrethinkhowtheideologicalstructure
ofthebookrestrictivelydeterminesandlimitstheplayofthewritingitcontainsandinreiteratingthedeconstructiveanddisruptiveeffectsofthoseachievementswithin
hiswork.

FinnegansWake'sformalsolicitationofthetraditionalstructureofthebookisevidentinitsfusingtogetherofitsown"beginning"and"end."Itiswellknownthatthe
Wake'sfinalwordsconstitutethefirsthalfofasentencethatendsonthetext'sfirstpage.Thecompletesentenceis"Awayalonealastalovedalongthe"(FW
628.1516)"riverrun,pastEveandAdam's,fromswerveofshoretobendofbay,bringsusbyacommodiusvicusofrecirculationbacktoHowthCastleand
Environs"(FW3.13).Muchhasbeenmade,inaliterarycontext,ofthecircularitythatthisbrokensentenceachievesbyallowingthereadertolinktheultimateand
initialwordsofthetext,andithasbeennotedthatthecircularpatternachievedbythissentencehastheeffectofgivingtheWakeatleastadoublestructure.Thebook
hasseventeendiscretesectionsthatarefrequentlyreferredtoaschapters.Fromanotherperspectivedeterminedbythelogicoftheideologyofthestructureofabook,
theWakealsohassixteenchaptersorsections,oneofwhichcontainsboththebeginningandtheend.

Accordingtotherulesregulatingtheconceptofabookasaunityandtotality,nopartofabookcanbegreaterthanthebookasawhole.Thetraditionalformand
logicofthebookdictatethatabookisgreaterthanthechaptersofwhichitiscomposedthatachapterisgreaterthanthesectionsandparagraphsconstitutingitthat
aparagraphisgreaterthanthesentenceswhichconstituteitandthatthesentenceisgreaterthanitsconstitutivewordsandletters.Ifthisisthecase,thenbecausethe
Wake'sultimateandinitialwordsconstituteonesentence,thefinalandfirstchaptersofJoyce'stextconstituteonesinglechapterorsection.Thismeansthatthenumber
ofsectionsissixteen.Thesameistrueforthenumberof"books"intowhichtheWakeisdivided.Thetraditionalviewthatitconsistsoffourbooksmustbemodifiedif
thelastsectionisapartofthefirstsectionbecauseofthesentencefusingthemtogether.Joyce,infact,makesusthinktheimpossibleformulas17=16and4=3,for
histexthasbothsixteenandseventeenchaptersaswellasthreeandfoursections.Thetextalsomakesusrethinktherelationshipsofthe"beginning"and"end"andof
the"inside"and''outside"ofthebook,forifthesixteenthsectionandthethirdpartcontainboththe"end"andthe"beginning,"theymustmetaphoricallycontainalso
thatwhichisbetweentheendandthebeginning:the"outside"ofthebook.

 Page25

FormuchofDissemination(aswellasinmanyotherplaceswithinhiswork),Derridafocusesontheconceptofthe"doublemark"ofdoublequotationmarks,of
therelationshipbetweenamodelanditsmimetic"double,"andofthatbetweentheinteriorandexteriorofthephilosophicalconcept.IndiscussingHegel'screationofa
prefacethat"hemustwrite,inordertodenounceapreface,"forexample,DerridaarguesthatHegel'spreface"mustbeassignedtwolocationsandtwosortsof
scope."Inotherwords,theprefacehas''double"locationsandscopes.Hegel'spreface"belongsbothtotheinsideandtotheoutsideoftheconcept."However,
"accordingtoaprocessofmediationanddialecticalreappropriation,"whichitwasapartofHegel'sgeniustoarticulate,"theinsideofspeculativephilosophysublates
itsownoutsideasamomentofnegativity."

Derridaseesthisarticulationofthe"prefatorymoment"aspartofanessential"lessonofHegel'stobemaintained,ifpossible,beyondHegelianism":"Theprefatory
momentisnecessarilyopenedupbythecriticalgapbetweenthelogicalorscientificdevelopmentofphilosophyanditsempiricistorformalistlag"(Derrida1981:11).
TomaintainHegel'slesson"beyondHegelianism,"Derridamovesfromthemodelofdialecticalsublationtothenonconceptsof(con)fusionandcontamination."(Con)
fusion"signifiesthewaysinwhichgrammaticalsubjectsandpredicates,andtheinsideandoutside(ofconcepts,oftexts,ofwriting)canbejoinedtogetherwithout
losingtheirindividualidentitiesintheconsolidationofsublation."(Con)fusion"isnotthelackofordersignifiedby"confusion"(althoughitisapunonthatterm)buta
"fusion"ofonetermwith("con")another(andits"other"),whichallowsbothtoretaintheirindividualityanddifferencewhilebeingfusedtogether,andtocontaminate
eachotherthroughtheirproximity,asaparasitecontaminatesthebodyofitshost.

IfJoyce'sghostishauntingandcontaminatingDerrida'sownattempttoevadetherepressivestricturesoftheideologyofthebookinthewritingofDissemination,itis
surelythroughJoyce'sownmonumentalachievementoftheWakeasa"double"writingpracticeinwhichtheunityofthebookisthreatenedanddisturbedbyits
"Doublends"(FW20.16),thetwoendingsofthebookunderminingthesinglebeginningandendingdemandedbythetraditionalbibliographicmodelofunity."(Con)
fusion"offersausefulsignifieroftheWake'srelationshipwithitsownexteriority.TheWake'sfirstandlastpages"(con)fuse"itsinitialandultimatewordsintoasingle
sentence.(Con)fusionisalsoappropriateforsignifyingthereadingprocessthatlinksthefirstandlastpagesoftheWaketogetherthroughthatsentence,requiringthe
readertoturnfromthefinalpagetothefirstinordertocompletethesentence.Thisentailsametaphoricfoldingbackofthebook's

 Page26

coversothattheoutercoverwouldsuccessfullyenclosethephalliccolumnofitsspine(ametaphorDerridaemploysinGlas).Analternativemodelcouldbethe
articulationofthefirstandfinalwordsofthetextas"Awayalonealastalovedalongthe[THEOUTSIDEOFFINNEGANSWAKE]riverrun,pastEveand
Adam's,fromswerveofshoretobendofbay,bringsusbyacommodiusvicusofrecirculationbacktoHowthCastleandEnvirons"(FW628.15163.13).

ThefirstmodelissustainedbyALP'slast"leaf":"Myleaveshavedriftedfromme.All.Butoneclingsstill.I'llbearitonme.Toremindmeof.Lff!"(FW628.67).This
"one"leafisofcourseatleasttwoadouble(andDublin)leaf,themimeticimitationofaleaffromatreeonthebanksoftheLiffeyandthelinguisticallyselfreflective
lastleaf,orpage,ofthetextonwhichthewordisprinted.Theonefloatsontopoftherivertheotherbearstheinscribed,orprinted,marksofALP's"leaves"upon
itself.(In''Plato'sPharmacy,"Derridanotesthedoublingsignificanceofthe"'leaf':asignificantmetaphor,...orratheronetakenfromthesignifierfaceofthings,since
theleafwithitsrectoandversofirstappearsasasurfaceandsupportforwriting"[Derrida1981:112].)Thislastpageisalsoaprefatorypageasitbearsthelast
wordsthatALPasLiffeypronouncesbeforesherunsintoDublinBay,andthelastwordsofthetextasitpreparesthereadertoreturntothebeginningofanew
cycleofthebook.ItisverymuchlikeapageofHegel'spreface:"YesifHegelwritesbeyondwhathewantstosay,eachpageoftheprefacecomesungluedfrom
itselfandisforthwithdivided:hybridorbifacial."Insofarasareaderchoosestoendareadingofthetextwiththefinalpage,hewillbeabletoremarkatraditional
linearnarrativefollowingAristotle'sprescriptionofthetripartitebeginning,middle,andendpatternifhechoosestolinkthefirstandlastpartofthesentencetogether,
hewillbeabletoexperiencehowthetext'scircularnarrative,withits"bifacial"ending/preface,confoundsthatideologicalprescription,remarkingitsown"other"form
(andtheformofitsother)initsalterity.

"Plato'sPharmacy"isthesectionofDisseminationDerridadescribesasa"readingofFinnegansWake,"anditisonthisonesentencefromafootnoteofDerrida's
essaythatLernoutbaseshiscriticismofDerridaasareaderofJoyce.Thefootnoteoffersthefollowingobservations:"Theparagraphthatisabouttoendherewill
havemarkedthefactthatthispharmacyofPlato'salsobringsintoplay[entrane]Bataille'stext,inscribingwithinthestoryoftheeggthesunoftheaccursdpart[la
partMaudite]thewholeofthatessay,aswillquicklybecomeapparent,beingitselfnothingbutareadingofFinnegansWake"(Derrida1981:88n.20).Lernout
picksupontheambiguityofthephrase"thewholeofthatessay"andpointsoutthatthe

 Page27

"primereferent"forthe"essaymaywellbetheessayofBatailleandnot'Plato'sPharmacy'"(Lernout1990:60).

Lernout'sargumentiscomplexandreferstoseveraldifferentversionsofDerrida'sessay,butthethrustofhisargumentholdsevenforthe1968and1972editions,
wherethefootnoteappearsasnumber17ratherthan20,andthephrase"thatessay"istranslatedas"thisessay."However,theplayfulambiguitythatLernouttreatsas
ahistoricalandempiricalproblemispreciselythatveryforcethatthewritingsofJoyceandDerridacontinuallyexploitasamostpowerfullinguisticandcreative
resource.In"TwoWordsforJoyce,"forexample,DerridafollowsJoyceinexploitingthe"doublegenitive"inthephrase"ofFinnegansWake''todescribehisessay
asonethatsimultaneouslyoffersa"modest"readingofJoyce'stextand"wasreadinadvance"bythattext:"Thisdoublegenitiveimpliedthatthismodestessaywas
readinadvancebyFinnegansWake,initswakeorlineage,attheverymomentthatLaPharmaciedePlatonwasitselfpresentingitselfasareadingheador
principleofdecipherment(inshortanothersoftware)forapossibleunderstandingofFinnegansWake"(Derrida1984a:150).DerridavaluesJoyce'swritingbecause
oftheplayofsuchplurivocityaswellasthestrategiesitoffersfordeconstructingunilinearandteleologicallydeterminedmodelsofwriting.

Thethirdpartof"Plato'sPharmacy"is"TheFilialInscription:Theuth,Hermes,Thoth,Nab,Nebo,"andDerridarecitesasoneofthethreeepigraphsforthesectiona
passagefromAPortraitoftheArtistasaYoungMan:"Asenseoffearoftheunknownmovedintheheartofhisweariness,afearofsymbolsandportents,ofthe
hawklikemanwhosenameheboresoaringoutofhiscaptivityonosierwovenwing,ofThoth,thegodofwriters,writingwithareeduponatabletandbearingonhis
narrowibisheadthecuspedmoon"(Derrida1981:84).Derridausesthispassageasapreludetohisinvestigationofthemesandfiguresthatarealsoarticulatedby
Joyce'swriting,andparticularlyFinnegansWake:theroleofThoth,thegodofwriting,whocanusetheambiguityofthetermpharmakostooutwitthepatriarchal
AmmonRabyemphasizingitsambivalentsemanticvaluesof"poison"or"medicine"accordingtohisowndesirestherelationshipsoffathersandsonsandofspeech
andwriting,aswellasofwritingandmemory,oftheselfandtheother,andoftheinsideandtheoutsideoftexts.DerridausesthepassagefromPortraitasapartof
hisstrategyofmappingout"theinternal,structuralnecessitywhichalonehasmadepossiblesuchcommunicationandanyeventualcontagionofmythemes"(Derrida
1981:85).ThesemythemesarepreciselythosearticulatedbythewritingsofbothPlatoandJoyce.

 Page28

In"TwoWordsforJoyce"Derridareturnstothesamethemesandfigures,seeinginFinnegansWakearearticulationoftherelationshipsbetweenThothandthe
"others"ofThoth(tropedintheWakeas"thorher"[FW224.33]and"th'other''[FW452.13]),likeHorus,Osiris,andSethwithintherelationshipbetweenShemand
Shaun,"whichmimes,downtothefinestandmostfinelyironizeddetail,thewholesceneofthepharmakos"(Derrida1984a:150).Thothisamarginalandpowerful
figureinFinnegansWake,andasthegodofwriting,heisverysignificanttoJoyce.AlthoughThothisthebrotherofOsiris,healsoparticipatesinSeth'splantokill
OsirisinthewellknownstoryofOsiris'sdismemberment.JoycecondensesthestoryofHorus'srevengeforhisfather'smurderinto"HowtoPullaGoodHorus
coupevenwhenOldsireisDeadtotheWorld"(FW105.2829),oneofthe"manynames"(FW104.5),oralternativetitles,fortheWakeastheyaretropedas
ALP's"untitledmamafesta"(FW104.4).

"Plato'sPharmacy"alsorevealsDerrida'sinterestincontaminationinthewaysinwhichthemythsandnarrativesofdifferentculturescontaminateeachother,the
waysinwhichliteratureandphilosophycontaminateeachother,andthewaysinwhichwritingmaybeseenascontaminatingspeech.Inthesecondsectionof"Plato's
Pharmacy,""TheFatherofLogos,"DerridaexploresthecontaminationofGreekphilosophybytheEgyptianmythofthestoryofThamus(theGreekgodAmmon)and
Theuth,orThoth,aswellasAmmon'sfearthatspeechandmemorywillbecontaminatedbythe"discipline"and"pharmakon"ofwritingTheuthpresentsto
Thamus/Ammon.Thamus/Ammonis"godthekingthatspeaks"(asopposedtoonewhomightwrite),andDerridaseeshisrefusalofwritingasaparentalrefusal:
"Thepharmakon[writing]isherepresentedtothefatherandisbyhimrejected"(Derrida1981:76).Therejectionofwritingbythegodkingfatherwhospeakshas
theeffectoflinkingwritingwiththeabsenceofthefatherand,eventually,withthepatricidethatenableswritingtotakeplace.

ApartofDerrida'sinterestintheWakestemsfromJoyce'scompletionoftheprojectinitiatedbyThoth,andthatprojectismappedoutinthevarioustextsexploredin
"Plato'sPharmacy."Thoth'spharmakonofwritingcanreplacethespeechthatthegodkingfatherwishestoprotectbutforwritingtotakeplace,thefathermustbe
killed.IntheWake,HCEmustanddoesfall.Shemthepenmantakestheplaceofhisfatherandappropriateshisfather'spen/penistowritewhenhestartsto"root
withearwacker'spensileintheouterofhislauscher"(FW173.910).This"outer"isboththeouterpartofShem'searandthe"other"earofthereaderorlistener
("lauscher")

 Page29

whomustpracticeStephenHeath's"opticallisten"(Heath1984a:58)inordertohearthespeechthatisoverturnedandsettoworkwithinthewritingofShem's"letter
selfpennedtoone'sother"(FW489.3334).

ThesamefiguresandnarrativesofEgyptianmyththatJoycetakesfromTheEgyptianBookoftheDeadandrefiguresinFinnegansWakeareinvestigatedby
DerridaasheexaminesPlato'stexts.Joycerefiguresthegod,AmmonRa,inthepun"EnelRah":ShaunthePost's"headhasbeentouchedbythegodEnelRah"(FW
237.278).DerridaisinterestedinAmmonRa'soriginas"thegreatfalcon,hatchedfromhisegg"aswellasinthedescriptionofthe"eggofthegreatcackler"(Derrida
1981:87).Joyceinvokesthereturnof"theGreatCackler''who"comesagain"(FW237.34),weavingthatfigureintothenarrativeofthehen,BiddyDoran,who
discoversboththeWakeandtheletterthatfigureswithinit(andtheWakeisinturnfiguredbytheletter)whilepeckingatthemiddenheap.Derridaexaminesthe
importanceofthe"eggofthegreatcackler"inthecontextofthe"powerofspeech"asapowerthatis"onewiththepowerofcreation"(Derrida1981:87),andJoyce
hasBiddy(herselfacreatorofeggs)discoveraportionofthe"Wake,"whichisawrittentextbringingitslanguagetooperateontheverybordersbetweenspeechand
writing:thewritten,inscribed,printedlanguagebringswithinitselfandsetstoworkparonomasiaandthesimilaritiesinsoundofspokenlanguage.

ForbothJoyceandDerrida,writingisa"filialinscription."Thefatherproducesthespokenword,whosevalueisguaranteedbythepresenceofthefather.Asa"living
thing,logosissuesfromafather"(Derrida1981:143)writingis"themiserableson"(Derrida1981:145).BothJoyce'sShemandTheuthoftheEgyptianmyths
contaminatingPlato'stextsarethesonswhomustwrite.Thothdeclareshimselftobe"theeldestsonofRa"(Derrida1981:87).IntheWake,Shem,thesonofALP
andHCE,writesdowntheletterutteredbyALPforHCE:"Letter,carriedofShaun,sonofHeK,writtenofShem,brotherofShaun,utteredforALP,motherof
Shem,forHeK,fatherofShaun"(FW420.1719).JoyceusesthesamedoublegenitivethatDerridaexploressothatShemisboththewriteroftheletterandits
subject:theletterisoneof,orby,Shem,anditsimultaneouslytellsataleof,orabout,Shemandhisfamily.

OneofthefundamentalfeaturesoftheEarwickerfamilyromanceisthatHCEhasfallenintosleepanddeathandcontinuestofallthroughoutthenarrative.AsMacool
andFinnegan,heismournedatthewakeandinterredasthe"brontoichthyanformoutlinedaslumbered"(FW7.2021).ItisALP'sdesirethatHCE"standuptall!
Straight."(FW620.1),butALPflows

 Page30

outintoherown"coldmadfearyfather"(FW628.2)beforehedoesso,andthereaderisthrownbacktothefirstpageinordertoexperiencethefallofFinnagain.
Shem,thesonandpenman,writesthetaletellingoftheviolenceagainsthisfather("itmayhalfbeenamissfiredbrick"[FW5.26])thatturnsJoyce'sbookintoa
"cubehouse"rockingas"earwitnesstothethunderof[HCE's]arafatas"(FW5.1415).Shembears''earwitness"(5.14)toEarwickerinJoyce's
"soundconducting"(FW183.09)narratives,butHCE'svoicesoundsonlyasamuffledmemoryasShem'sfailingsarerevealed:"thesonorpatricidalwritingcannot
failtoexposehimself,too"(Derrida1981:146).

Derridasees"Plato'sPharmacy"asa"modestessay"that"wasreadinadvance"byJoyce'stext(Derrida1984a:150).Hisarticulationof"thewholesceneofthe
pharmakos"isthusaremarkingofthesiteofthepharmakosasthatsiteisalreadywovenintoJoyce'swriting.InthewarfarebetweenShemandShaunasGluggand
Chuff,GluggShemisalsoThoth,the"thotherbrother"(FW224.33).InthetaleoftheOndtandtheGracehoper,theOndtisfiguredasThothwhenheis"thothfully
makingchillyspacesathisphexaffrontoftheicinglass"(FW415.28emphasisadded).ShemthepenmanisidentifiedwithThothbecauseShaunthepostisa"postal
cleric,"andShemThoth,or"Thot's,""neverthepostalcleric"(FW485.36).Duringthereveriethatbeginswithanaddresstohissister,Issy,Shaun,inhisroleofJaun,
linksThothwiththe"other"andthe"author,"aswellaswithHowth,whereHCE'sheadisburied,andwiththesiteofthefamilyhomeinChapelizod:"justthinkinglike
thauthorhowlongI'dlikemyselftobecontinuedatHothelizod"(FW452.910emphasisadded).

InthisJaunpassage,Issyis"Sissibis"(FW452.8),whichlinksherwithThoth,whohastheheadofanibis,aswellaswiththeEgyptiangoddessIsis.Elsewhere,
however,ALPislinkedwithIsisthroughtheoperationsofthedoublegenitivethatDerridaalsoemploys.InreplacingtheChristiangodwithALP,theWakedeclares
that"Annawas,Liviais,Plurabelle'stobe"(FW215.24).Plurabellepossessesbeingbecauseofthegenitiveapostrophe,butastheapostrophealsosignifiesthe
missing"i"of"is,"shealsoisbeing.ALPhasbeingand,simultaneously,isbeing:Sheistobe,or"is""is."ThisidentificationisagainsettoworkinALP'smonologue
whenshedeclares,"Whatwillbeis.Is"(FW620.32).ThepunonthenameofIsisandthedoubled"is"ofthepresenttenseverbisalsorepeatedafterthedeclaration
that"itisalwaystomorrowintoth'stother'splace"andapunonAmmonand"Amen"(FW570.1213):"Hereweshalldoafarwalk(Opity)anygokhaibitstillthe
numberoneofsairey'splace.Is,is"(FW570.2830).

 Page31

Although"Plato'sPharmacy"offersfewexplicitreferencestoPortraitandFinnegansWake,themythematic,figural,andconceptualarticulationsofDerrida'swritings
offer"other"evidenceofJoyce'shauntingofDissemination(andofhispowerfulforce,alongwithPlato'sandHegel's,asthe"other"ofDerrida'stext)aswellasan
intimationoftheeffectofthathauntingontheworkstocome,''tomorrowintoth'stother'splace."AssumingafilialpositiontowardJoyceashisother,asthefatherof
hisownwriting,DerridasituateshimselfinthemarginsofJoyce'stextandreworks,remarks,andreiteratessomeofthewaysinwhichJoyceweavesthestoryof
Thothasfather,brother,author,andotherintohisownversionofthe"onethousandandonestories,alltold,ofthesame"(FW5.289).

 Page32

Chapter4
PostcardstoJoyce
Thedoublestructureproducedinthedistancebetweentheassertionofmetaphysicalpremisesandpropositionsandtheironicdetachmentfromthemisa"trait,or
ratherretrait"that"wouldfarexceedtheperiodizationsof'literaryhistory'...fromHomertoJoyce,beforeHomerandafterJoyce"(Derrida1992b:50).Itisthe
effectsofsuchdoublestructures(assertionsandironicdetachment)ortraitsastheyoperatebetweenSocratesandPlato,SocratesandFreud,FreudandJoyce,and
JoyceandDerridathatareremarkedintheenigmaticandplayfulmessagesinscribedonthebackofDerrida'sfictitious,philosophical,andliterarypostcards.

ThePostCard'ssolicitationoftheideologyofthebookisstagedthroughitsidentificationofitselfasaseriesofrelatedpostcardsratherthanasaunifiedbookthe
Wake'sidentificationofitselfasaletter,ratherthanabook,writtenbyShemthepenmanandcarriedbyShaunthepost,hauntsDerrida'smeditationsonpostcardsand
postalsystemsaswellashisideasontherelationshipsbetweenwriters,theirwritings,andaddressees.

DerridausesthefiguresofSocratesandPlatotoexploretherelationshipbetweenShemandShaunaswellashisownrelationshipwithJoyce,a

 Page33

relationshipweshallseeDerridadiscussintermsechoingthefilialpositioninwhichheexploresPlato'srelationshiptoSocrates.DisseminationandThePostCard
areobviouslylinkedtogetherbythefiguresofthetwoclassicalphilosophers.Inthe"Plato'sPharmacy"sectionofDissemination,Socratesistheteacherinthe
positionofthefatherwhoseteachingsdetermineandhauntPlato'stextsbutwhocomestoplayafilialrolehimselfinthetextswrittenbyhispupil.Withinthosetexts,
however,Socrates,asthesonofhiscreator,inturn"supplementsandreplacestheimpossiblenoesis,theforbiddenintuitionofthefaceofthefather(goodsun
capital)"(Derrida1981:167).InThePostCard,therelationshipbetweenSocratesandPlatoisthesubjectofanextensivemeditationthattakesasitsstartingpoint
theconfigurationofthesetwocharactersastheyarerepresentedonthefrontofthetextintheillustrationfromtheBodleianLibrary'sengravedfrontispieceofMatthew
Paris'sthirteenthcentury"fortunetellingbook,"PrognosticaSocratisbasilei.

InThePostCardthe"author"ofthepostcardsdeclares"neverhaveIbeensodelirious"(Derrida1987a:17).Thisdeliriumisaformofmadnessakintothatwhich
DerridaexploresinhisdeconstructionofFoucault'srelianceontheCartesiancogitoandhisexplorationofthemomentofdecisionandthepossibilityofmadnessthat
theinstantofthekrineinproduces.Derrida'spostcardreadingsengageinthe"madness"ofhyperbolethatproducesthe''delirious"readingsoftherelationships
betweenPlatoandSocrates(inwhichPlato"ispushinghimselfoffonaskateboard"or"takingtramfaresinapoorcountry"[Derrida1987a:17]).PlatoandSocrates
arefiguredas"S.andp."(Derrida1987a:13),and,asShariBenstockpointsout,S.andp.arealsofiguredas"ShemthepenmanandShaunthepostman"(Benstock
1984:173).ThisfiguringofSocratesandPlatoasShemandShaunisalreadyoperatinginDissemination,Aswehaveseen,Derridadescribes"Plato'sPharmacy"as
an"indirectreading"oftheWake,miming,"betweenShemandShaun,betweenthepenmanandthepostman,downtothefinestandmostfinelyironizeddetail,the
wholesceneofthepharmakos"(Derrida1984a:150).

ShaftBenstockandMurrayMcArthurhaveproducedindepthinvestigationsoftherelationshipsbetweenJoyce'swritingandDerrida'sThePostCard,andtheir
workisessentialtoanunderstandingofhowJoycehauntsDerrida'swork.WhilesummarizingsomeoftheirimportantinsightsintoDerrida'stext,thischapterdrawson
theJoyceanandDerrideantechniqueofdoublinginordertoreadsomeofBenstock'sinsightsasacontextforMcArthurbeforemovingontoconsidersomeofthe
waysinwhichDerridainvokesthespectershauntinghiswritinginordertoestablishtheiralterity

 Page34

asdoublesofhisownwork.ThisrhetoricalstrategyentailsassumingthepositionofSocratestoJoyce'sPlato,therebyreversingthepositionassignedtohimby
McArthur.

Inwhatisperhapsthecloserreadingofthetwo,ShariBenstockstructures"TheLetteroftheLaw:LaCartePostaleinFinnegansWake"byreproducingthedouble
patternsfromJoyce'stextthatDerridahasalreadyemployed.Withinthetwosectionsproducedwiththisstrategy,Benstockunfoldsvariousstructuralandreading
principlesproducedbytheWakeandThePostCardrespectively.Startingwithaninitial"frameup,"Benstockcompares"TheBalladofTimFinnegan"withJoyce's
useofthesongandshowshowthe"complexityofallusivelevelsinthistitlesuggeststhecompactedlinguisticstructureofJoyce'stext,astructurethatcannotcontain
themultiplicityofitsownmeaning[and]whosebordersareoverrunbyexcessesoflanguage"(BenstockI984:163).

Followingthis"FrameUp,"andusingaplayfulcombinationofJoyceanandDerrideanstrategies(note,forexample,howBenstock'stitleplacesLaCartePostale
insideFinnegansWake),Benstockoffersthefollowing"frames"that"havealreadyshapedourreadingofFinnegansWake":

1.Themissingapostropheinthetitle.This"breaks"theframeofthe"Ballad"forourreadingandsimultaneouslyproducesa"pluralizingandplayfulnessofgrammatical
structurethatopensupratherthanenclosesourreadingofthetext."

2.ThecircularityoftheWake'snarrative.Joyce'stextappearstohavea"sealed,internalized,whole,perfectandcomplete"structure,butthismeansthatthereisno
beginning,nooneopeningintothetext.Asaresult,thereader"alwaysseemstostandbothinsideandoutsideitsdimensions"(adoublepositionechoingDerrida's
assertionthat"thereisnooutsidetothetext"),and"[t]herearetoomanyanswerstothequestion,'wheredoesitbegin?'"(Benstock1984:164).

3.WithinthelargercircularpatternoftheWake,thereaderencountersintersectingpointswithsmaller,circularnarrativeunits:"Therearestorieswithinstories,each
tellingimbeddedinanotherframeofrecedingconcentricrings."Inthe"cyclicstructure...onealwaysreads'through'theringinsearchofthestructureofthenext
ring."ThetraditionalreasonforthisstructurehasbeenthattheWakeisadream.Benstockseesthisraisingasmanyquestions(aboutthedream,thedreamer,
"entrancesandbeginnings,ofaccesstoinformation,oflostoriginsandobscuredsources")asitanswers,soshe

 Page35

advocatesa"multiple'frameofreference'allowingforamaximumnumberofcorrespondencesbetweendreamsandletters"(Benstock1984:16566).

4.TherearemultiplereadingsoftheWake'sdream,anda"singlereadingtranslatesinsteadintoavarietyofreadingsasthedreameventsshift,disperse,regroupand
transferthemselves."Likesocalled"real"dreams,theWake'sdreamcannotbefullyrecovered,and"thesources...areobscured."Theidentityofthedreamer,the
particulareventsofthedream,itssettingsandparticularitieswillalwaysinvolveuncertaintybecausethe"purposefulambiguityofdreamandrealityapersistentfactor
ofthedreamsituationturnsthedreamstructurebackonitself,shiftingitsborders"(Benstock1984:16667).

5.Theambiguitiesofthedreamandrealityare"carriedover"totheframeoftheletterwithwhichthetextmetonymicallyidentifiesitself.Thisresultsfrom(andhelpsto
cause)a"confusionof[theletter's]textuallimits."Theletter"containsalltheversionsofthedreamstory,comprisesallthetellingsofthetale,andincludesalltheletters
oftheWakethosewrittenbythechildren,theletterfoundbyBiddytheheninthemiddenheap,andvariousanonymousletters"(Benstock1984:168).

6.Theletters(missivesandalphabeticletters)arealso"nightletter[s],""frames"withwhichtheWakeattempts"totranslatethedreameranddreamsubjectintothe
letteranditspotentialreader."ItisherethatBenstockbeginstolinkJoyceandDerridathroughtheoperationsofdesireasitisexpressedindreams,encodedin
writingandthendistributedthroughthepostalnetworkinThePostCard.Whatshesaysofthedreamandthelettercanbeappliedtotheexpressionofdesirein
Derrida'spostcards:"thestorythelettertellsrestson...aseriesofexchanges:thestructuralframesofthedreamandtheletter[andofDerrida's"desire''andhis
"postcards"]'correspondto'therelationshipbetweentheunconsciousandtheconscious,betweenthestatesofsleepingandwaking"(Benstock1984:16869).

7.Desireisthe"missing'content'"oftheWake'sletters,andthisdesireis"repressedsothatitcanonlybeactedoutindreamsoractedonthroughwriting."Desire
followscircuitouspathsinwhichitisdisplacedandtransferredontoalternative"others."Benstocklinkstheexpression,transmission,andnetworkofdesirecirculating
throughoutJoyce'stextwiththepostalnetworktraversing(andtraversedby)

 Page36

Derrida'spostcards:"Thistrajectoryofdesire,whichisalsoasystemofpostes,beginsinthenecessitytodiscoverdesire'sdestinationandauthority,tochartthespace
betweendesireanditsobject,toactoutthesexualimpulseforwhichdreamingandwritingareonlytransferences.Totracethepathofthisdesire,tofollowthesystem
ofthepostes,istodiscoverdesireanditsobject,toknowthedestinationofthelove/lustletter,andtoknowwhyitmustalwaysbelost"(Benstock1984:16970).

These"frames"aremirroredbyaseriestakenfromDerrida'sThePostCard.LiketheseriesoflettersinJoyce'stexts,Derrida'spostcardsprovidea"frameof
referenceforanalysisofthecomponentsofcorrespondence,destination,desireandauthority."Explainingthatthereaderis,in"lieuofadefinition,""givenreading
optionsthatseemtocorrespondtowritingoptionsthat[sheherself]tookupand(perhaps)discarded,''Benstockmapsoutthe"multiplepurposes"ofDerrida's
envois,orpostcards.Theseincludethepossiblerelationshipsbetweenaseriesofpostcardsandtheprefaceforabookthelinksforgedbythewriting,sending,and
receivingofthepostcardsthequestionoftheauthorityofthepostcard'ssenderandits(intended)receiverthedoublerolesthatweplayasreadersofThePostCard
andasreadersofindividualpostcards(Benstock1984:171).

Likethe"frames"oftheWake,Derrida'sframes,or"multipurposes,"servetodismantleeachotherevenastheysustainarelationshipwitheachother.The"initial
frameofreference,thepostalcard,"forexample,"isdislodgedevenbeforeourreadingofthepostalcardshascommenced"(Benstock1984:172).Theproliferationof
thepostcardsunderminesasystematicanalysisofhowthepostcardingeneralmightoperateevenasitmakesthepretenseofperformingthatanalysis.

Thepostcardofthecover,forexample,isacontinualpointofreferenceformanyofthepostcardsconstitutingThePostCard,yetitisinacertainwayasham,or
forgery,becauseitisapostcardthatisanimitationofwhatitdepicts.Astheacknowledgmentreveals,thecoverillustrationis"courtesyoftheBodleianLibrary,
Oxford."Itdepicts"PlatoandSocrates"fromthe"frontispieceofPrognosticaSocratisbasilei,afortunetellingbook.Englishthirteenthcentury,theworkof
MatthewParis.MS.Ashmole304,fol.31v(detail)"(Derrida1987:titlepageverso).TherepresentationsofPlatoandSocratesarenecessarilyimaginative
reproductions,andeveniftheillustrationdoesexistasapostcard,itwoulddosoonlyasasecondaryrepresentationofthefrontispiece.Bythetimeitisreproduced
onthecover

 Page37

ofDerrida'stext,itisatleasttwiceremovedfromtheoriginal.ThisquestionofthemodelanditsimitationreplaystheinvestigationsofmimesiswesawDerridamapout
inDissemination.

Investigatingtherelationshipsbetweendoubles(thejeandthetoiaswellasthevousandtuintheFrenchversionofDerrida'stext,andalsothedoublebetweenthe
desirerandtheobjectofdesire),Derridadescribesthestoryofthedouble("Ourstory"[emphasisadded])asa"twinprogeniture,aprocessionofSosie/sosie,
Atreus/Thyestes,Shem/Shaun,S/p,p/p(penman/postman)andmoreandmoreImetempsychosemyselffromyou"(Derrida1987a:142).Fromthis"procession,"
BenstockformulatestheDerrideanprincipleofwritingasacontinualproductionof''doubles":"Writinggivesrisetothis[metempsychose]ofOneandOtherthatdrives
thepen,thatisheardinthedialogueofallwriting,sothatthewritingofletters[Derrida'spostcardsandtheWake'sletters]theestablishmentofacorrespondence
createsasetofdoubles,doubled"(Benstock1984:173).

Benstockdemonstrateshowthe"doublebind"ofwritingexploredandarticulatedinThePostCardisthesamedoublebindproducedintheWake.Itisthedouble
producedbyamimeticreproductionofamodelandthatproducedbytheselfthatwritesto(andfor)theobjectofdesirethatissimultaneouslyaddressedand
reproducedinwriting.Thisdoublecreatesthe"dialecticofOneandOtherhypothesizedinthesettingofpentopaper"(Benstock1984:173).Thedoubleisalso
subversivebecause"authorityisproblematizedbytheactthatwouldseemtoestablish(thatis,underwrite)authority"(Benstock1984:173).

Inthenextchapter,wewillexamineDerrida'sinterestintheWake'snarrativeofthemythofBabelandhisdescriptionofJoyce'swritingas"babelizing."Benstock's
explanationofDerrida'sinterestinJoyce'sretellingoftheBabelstory(andhis"babelizing"writing),arguesthatthe"processofduplicationanddivision[which]best
illustrates[theproductionofthedoublebind]isthebuildingofthetowerofBabel"asitisarticulatedintheWake(Benstock1984:173).

AfterlookingatDerrida'suseofJoyce'sversionoftheBabelmyth,sheexplainsthetermsinwhichDerrida"posesthequestionsofWakewriting"andhowtheseterms
areatworkintheWake:
(1)theneedtoauthorizeatextbysigningone'snametoit(2)thedemandofthefather(Dieu,theMaster,YHWH,HCE)thatonebothhearandnothear,bothinscribeandhide,
hisnameinthelanguage,ademandthatbothmandatesanderases...thetranslationofhisname

 Page38

throughlanguage,ademandthatisthedoublebindofallwriting(3)thedivisionbetweenlanguageandthatwhichitdescribes...thenecessityoflanguagedisseminatedand
dispersed...tofallintothehandsofbetranslatedbyathirdpartyofnecessity,theletterShempensispostedthroughShaun,followingatrajectorythatShaunascarrier
ratherthanShemaswriterdetermines.(Benstock1984:174)

BenstockconcludesherinvestigationofDerridaandJoycewithananalysisoftheWake'sletterswithintheframesofwritingshefindsatworkinbothwriters.The
ultimateandinevitabledestinationforalldesireexpressedin,andconstitutedby,writingisdeath.Untilthatdestinationisreached,desireissustainedinaseriesof
displacementsandtransferencesperpetuatedbytheexchangeofwritingincorrespondence.Thewaysinwhichcorrespondenceisdelayed,misplaced,ormisdirected
enabledesiretooperateuntilitarrivesatitsfinaldestination.ForBenstock,boththe"postalsystemsofLaCartePostaleandFinnegansWakeillustratethevarious
waysthatthecommunicationofdesirecangoastray,belost,bedelayed,ortransferred"(Benstock1984:184).

UnlikeShariBenstock,MurrayMcArthurdoesnotinitiallyexaminethepossibilitythatThePostCardmaybemirroring,rearticulating,andputtingbackintopractice
thedoublebindofJoyce'swriting.Instead,heexploresJoyce'spositioninDerrida'stextasthe"placeoftheexample,exemplar,modelorparadigminDerrida's
textualpractice"(McArthur1995:227).EmphasizingJoyce's"necessity"fordeconstruction,hebeginswiththethesisthat"Joyce'sexampleofequivocity,his
babelizationandhiscondensationofthewholewithinthepart,hiscondensationoftheexampledowntotheveryletters,iswhatmakeshisprojectnecessaryto
deconstruction."Thisisthepurposeof"TheExampleofJoyce:DerridaReadingJoyce'':"toreadhowDerridahasfiguredthatnecessity,howhehasreadJoyceand,
asheclaims,beenreadbyJoyce"(McArthur1995:228).

McArthurusestheJoyceanfigureofthelabyrinthtodescribethe"vastnetworkofimbricatedrhetoricsandemblematicsorrelation"inwhichheseesJoyceoperating
asDerrida's"example,"andhe"followsDerrida'sowndirections"asthe"quickestwayinto,ifnotoutof,thislabyrinth."HedoesnottraceDerrida'sengagementwith
Joyce'swritingasitunfoldswithinThePostCard,butfocusesimmediatelyuponthecarddescribingDerrida'svisittoJoyce'sstatueintheFlunternCemeteryin
Zurich.Thiscard,dated"20June1978,"describesthecemeteryasa"museumofthemostcostlyhorrors,"andDerridalinksthestatueofJoycewithJoyce's"reading"
ofallof

 Page39

hisownfuturereaders:"alifesizeJoyce,inotherwordscolossalinthisplace,seated,withhiscane,acigaretteinhanditseemstome,andabookintheotherhand.
Hehasreadallofusandplunderedus,thatone.IimaginedhimlookingathimselfposedtherebyhiszealousdescendantsIsuppose"(Derrida1987a:148).

Derridathenallowsforthepossibilityofchanceplayingitspartinhisvisittothecemeteryinthesamewaythatheattemptstoletitoperateinsomuchofhisother
writing:"Wecontinuedtowalkaroundinthecemetery,speaking,Ibelieve,aboutPoeandYale,allthat."The"chance"encounterthenoccurs:"Attheendofanalley,
thetomboftheinventorofsomethinglikethetelescripter:EgonZoller,ErfinderdesTelephonographen.Thisinscriptionisengravedinstonebetweentwoglobes,
oneofwhichbearstheAlphaandtheOmega,andtheothermeridiansandakindoftelephonicdevicespittingoutabandofpaper."This"chance"discoveryofan
inventorinthefieldofcommunicationstechnologyfromwhichDerridaoftendrawshismetaphorsforJoyce'swriting(telephone,telegraph,gramophone,radio,
computer)hasacomiceffect,releasingtherepressionoftheearlier"mostcostlyhorrors'':"Aftertheraucousburstoflaughterwespentalongtimemusinginfrontof
thisphallusofmodernity"(Derrida1987a:148).

McArthurexploresDerrida'sencounterwithJoyce'sstatueinthecontextofaFreudian"primalscene."LinkingthestatuepostcardwiththecoverengravingofPlato
andSocratesasthetwocentersofThePostCard,hesuggeststhesetwo"overlappingcentres...canbeusedtoreadoneanother,theengravedsceneprovidingthe
contextforthecemeteryevents"(McArthur1995:228).TheengravingofPlatoandSocrates"providesanemblematicsofrelationandproduction,ofprimalsceneand
principlesofselection."Moreimportantly,"otherfigurescanbeandarepositionedintheplaceofthetwophilosophers,"andthisiswhatMcArthurdoes,placing
JoyceandDerridaintheplaceofSocratesandPlato:"IfJoycelookedathimselfwithDerridabesidehim,hewouldrecognizethatheisinthepositionofSocrates."
"Who,"heasks,"standsintheplaceofPlato,inthisoddcoupleoffiveandsevens,ofunleashedreversibilityandsubstitutability?...Now,clearly,itisDerrida
himself,thephilosopherwritingphilosophyasifitwereliterature,thewriterimplicatedinalltherhetoricsandemblematicsofrelationwiththiscolossus,asgrandson,
son,brother,friend,lover,antagonist,legatee"(McArthur1995:233).

ExploringDerrida'scommentabouthisdesiretoimitateJoyce"NeverhaveIimitatedanyonesoirresistibly"(Derrida1987a:142)McArthurconcludesthatJoyce
"bothhauntsanddrivesDerrida"andhasthesame

 Page40

effectonallofJoyce'sreaders.DerridaishauntedanddrivenbecauseJoyceprecededhim"inhismassiveexploitationofpostaltechnology,oflettersandwriting,of
sendingandreceiving,pairingandcoupling,ofbabelizingintheWake,"yetJoycealsoproducesa"readingorplunderingofallofus"(McArthur1995:235).

DrawingonthetechniqueofdoublingwithwhichheexplorestherelationshipsofSocratesandPlatoandShemandShaun,DerridacastshimselfintheroleofJoyce's
double,takingJoyceashis"other."ThedesiretoimitateJoyce"soirresistibly"culminatesinDerrida'sdesiretositonthekneesofJoyce'sfunerealstatueandread
Joyce'stextaloud.Joycehaswrittenthelastword:"Afterhim,nomorestartingover,drawtheveilandleteverythingcometopassbehindthecurtainsoflanguageat
theendofitsrope.Acoincidencenonetheless,forthatseminarontranslationIfollowedalltheBabelianindicationsinFinnegansWakeandyesterdayIwantedto
taketheplanetoZurichandreadoutloudsittingonhisknees,startingwiththebeginning(Babel,thefall,andtheFinnoPhoenicianmotif)"(Derrida1987a:240).

McArthur'sstudyeventuallymapsoutseveralofthedoublepatternswehavealreadyseenatworkinbothJoyceandDerrida.LikeBenstock,heexaminesthe"twin
progeniture"withwhichDerridamarksthedoublingof"Sosie/sosie...Shem/Shaun,S/p,"andtheSocrates/PlatopairingwithwhichDerridatropeshisrelationship
withJoyce.McArthurnoteshowthevisittothecemeteryinZurichisdoubledbyasimilarsceneinAmerica,whereDerridarunswithafriendwhosenameisadouble
ofJoyce's:"Speakingofcemeteries,IannouncetoyouthatIhavebeguntorunwithJim...andweruninthebigcemetery.Talkingallthetime,asiscorrect,and
fromtimetotimeIstop,panting,nexttoatomb...Jimtakesmypulse(he'smarvellous,I'lltellyouaboutJim,he'salittlecrazywithhisjogging,Idon'tknowwhathe
issettlingwithit,butineverythingandforeverythingheisamaster,Ithinkheknowseverything)"(Derrida1987a:157).

TheoperationsofsuchdoublingenableMcArthurtolookathowthe"twinforcesofwarandlove"functionina"displacedandrepressed"guisewithintheoperations
ofdesire,andhedrawsonBenstock'saccountofdesire'sdisplacementandtherepressionofwarandhateintheWake's"postalsystemofdesire"(Benstock
1984:163McArthur1995:236).Thedoublemotivationofdesireresultingfromitsrepressionanddisplacementoftheforcesbehindloveandwarcanbetracedback
todesire's(double)oscillationsbetweenthedeathandreproductiveimpulsesidentifiedbyFreudthisisacontextthatThePostCardopensupwhenDerridashiftshis

 Page41

attentionsfromtheSocrates/Plato,Joyce/Derridapairingsandexamines,in"Freud'sLegacy"and"Paralysis,"thedoublepatternsatworkinFreud'sanalysisofdesire.

Thepatternsof"doublemotivation"atworkinDerrida'sengagementwithJoyceare"mostsuccinctlydemonstrated"inDerrida'suseofJoyce'sGiacomoJoyce,an
immenselypowerfulsectionofThePostCardbecauseit"scans,reads,pillagesallthe'envois'[ofThePostCard]inadvance,inreverse."GiacomoJoyce''both
anticipatesandinterprets"ThePostCard,"readinganddictatingitscodes"(McArthur1995:237).Thepostcarddated"11August1979"opensandcloseswitha
citationofthistext:"James(thetwo,thethree),Jacques,GiacomoJoyceyourcontrefactureisamarvel,thecounterparttotheinvoice:'Envoy:lovemelovemy
umbrella....Iforgot,Giacomoalsohassevenletters.Lovemyombre,ellenotme.'Doyouloveme?'Andyou,tellme"(Derrida1987a:23839).

WithinthecontextofDerrida'sinterestinJoyce's"babelization"oflanguage,themovesthatDerridamakesasheshiftsfrom"James"through"Giacomo"tohisown
name,"Jacques,"areanexampleofthedoublebindoftranslation(wemustnottranslate,butthatisallwecando)examinedinmoredetailbythenextchapters.These
shiftsshouldbereadinthecontextof"babelization"andthedoublebindoftranslation.Thepassageis"highlybabelized"and"virtuallyimpossibletotranslate."The
problemiscreatedby"GiacomoJoyce"beinga"babelicname,likeSocrateandPlato":itis"oneofthehundredwordsofsevenandfiveletters"(McArthur
1995:237).In"TwoWordsforJoyce,"DerridaunderlinestheimportanceofGiacomoJoyceforThePostCard,atextthatis"[a]boveall...hauntedbyJoyce":
"WithawholefamilyofJames,Jacques,Giacomo,theGiacomoJoycescansalltheEnvoiswhicharesealed,neartheend,bytheEnvoyofG.C."(Derrida
1984a:151).DerridafollowsthiswitharecitationofthepassagesfromGiacomoJoycewehavejustexamined.

InaninterviewwithDerekAttridgeexaminedinthenextchapter,Derridaexplainshowheseeswritinginvolvedinanotherversionofthedoublestructure.Asawriter
respondstoatextthathehasread,itisnotpossibletoseparatethistextualresponsefromanautobiographicalresponse.ThereadingoftextsinwhichDerrida"mark
[s]outandread[s]atextsimultaneouslyalmostidenticalandentirelyother"isbothanautobiographicalresponseand,atthesametime,atextualresponse(Derrida
1987b:4).Theseparationofthetwoisanartificialseparationthatmustfeigntodistinguishbetweenthetwowhilerecognizingthatsuchaseparationisultimately
impossible.

 Page42

Discussinghowhis"adolescentdesire""directed[him]towardssomethinginwritingwhichwasneither"literaturenorphilosophy,Derridasuggeststhat"'[a]
utobiography'isperhapstheleastinadequatename,becauseitremainsformethemostenigmatic,themostopen,eventoday"(Derrida1992b:34).Thisdesireisitself
autobiographicandmanifeststhesamedoublestructuresofdesireingeneralandofwritingstructuredbydesire:''thedesiretowritecametome...inawaythatwas
asobscureasitwascompulsive,bothpowerlessandauthoritarian"(Derrida1992b:34emphasisadded).

McArthursuggeststhatitisjustsuchadoublestructureandautobiographicalelementthatmakesGiacomoJoycesoimportanttoThePostCardandthatJoyce's
text"bothanticipatesandinterpretsthelatertext,readinganddictatingitscodes."WhileGiacomoJoycewaspublishedposthumously,itbegan,likeThePostCard,
"asaprivateloveoffering,whoseaddresseeisbothknownandunknown,hiddenincode"(McArthur1995:237).McArthuridentifiesJoyce'sstudent,AmaliaPopper,
astheaddresseeofGiacomoJoyce(McArthur1995:241n.14).HethenmapsoutthewaysinwhichDerrida'senvois,orpostcards,areencodedandstructuredby
thecodesandpatternsofJoyce'stext.

Bothtextshesitate"betweenprivateandpublic,pullingback,in[Joyce's]caseintotheprivate."Bothtextsarealso"genericallyuncertain,bothautobiographicaland
fictional,bothcontinuousanddiscontinuous,bothopenandclosed"(McArthur1995:237).Bothtextsthusworkagainstthetraditionalstructureofthebookinsimilar
waystootherwritingsbyJoyceandDerrida.LikeDerrida'stext,Joyce'shasadoublestructurewithwhichitsimultaneously"showsandhidesitsprinciplesof
selection"its"entriesbeginandendandarearrangedaccordingtoacodethatmayonlybeknowntotheauthor"(McArthur1995:237).The"notionof[such]a
personal,hiddencodeisreinforced"bythewaysinwhichbothThePostCardandGiacomoJoycecontaintextual"fragments"thatappearinthewriters'othertexts
(McArthur1995:237).

McArthursituatesDerrida'sreadingofJoyceandthewaysinwhichThePostCardisreadinadvancebyJoyce'swritingsinthecontextofJoyce'sachievementofa
dreaminwhichallofhisreadersmusttakepart.Intheestablishmentofliteraryinstitutions(theInternationalJamesJoyceFoundation,theBailey'sAnnualJamesJoyce
SummerSchool,theJJQ,theJamesJoyceLiterarySupplement,thefoundationsandvariousorganizationsbearingJoyce'snameinZurich,Miami,Tokyo,Sydney,
England)devotedtohiswork,Joycehasattainedhisdreamof"aspecialinstitutionforhisoeuvre,inauguratedbyitlikeaneworder."ForDerrida,thisachievement
means

 Page43

thatweareall"peopleorcharactersinpartconstituted(asreaders,writers,critics,teachers)inandthroughJoyce'sdream.Aren'tweJoyce'sdream,hisdream
readers,theoneshedreamedofandwhomwedreamofbeinginourturn?"(Derrida1992b:74).

ItisthepowerfulirruptionofthisdreamanditsdoubleeffectswithinthehistoryofthedeconstructiveoperationsofwritingthatDerridamarksoutinhisengagements
withJoyce.Whileconfessinghis"intimidation"byJoycescholarsandadmittingthat"incompetence"isthe"profoundtruthof[his]relationshipto[Joyce's]work,"
Derridasimultaneouslycontendsthat"therecanbenoJoyceancompetence,inthecertainandstrictsenseoftheconceptofcompetence"(Derrida1992a:280,282).

TheironyatworkinDerrida'sdoubleposition(heis"incompetent"inafieldinwhichtherecanbenocompetence)remarksthe"sortofirony"that"ultimatelyall
literaryrhetoricingeneral"practicesinitsdeconstructivephases.AgreeingwithPauldeMan'ssuggestionthatallsuchrhetoric"isofitselfdeconstructive,"Derrida
arguesthat''anironyofdetachment"isatwork"withregardtometaphysicalbelieforthesis,evenwhenitapparentlyputsitforward"(Derrida1992b:50).

 Page44

Chapter5
ExampleandCounterexample:
FinnegansWakeandGlas
ChristophernorrisdescribesGlasas"Joycean,"adescriptionthatGeoffreyBenningtonlabels"silly"(Norris1987:243Bennington1994:18).Thereis,however,aset
ofrelationshipstobearticulatedbetweenthetwotextsthatDerridahimselfhasacknowledgedincallingGlas"asortofwake''(Derrida1984a:150).Glasfocuseson
theworkofHegelandGenet,andthepossibilitywehavealreadyseenDerridaconsiderthatJoycemaybethe"mostHegelianofnovelists"isworthkeepingin
mindwhileexamininghowDerridacountersignsJoyce'stechniqueswithGlas.Atthelevelofthetext'soverallstructure,Derrida'swritingdeconstructstheformin
whichthatwritingispresentedinwaysthatcontinuehisinvestigationofsuchnotionsaspresence,existence,unity,andmimesisastheyarearticulatedinlanguage.He
interrogatestheconceptualhorizonsoftheliteraryandphilosophicaldiscourseexploitedinGlas.

Itisin"TwoWordsforJoyce"thatDerridadescribesGlasas"alsoasortofwake."WhilethereisnoapparentdirectreferencetoJoyce'swritingin

 Page45

Glas,"TwoWordsforJoyce"makesitclearthatDerridaisplayfullyalludingtoJoyce'stextwithhisuseofthetermwake.Therearenumeroustextualandthematic
similaritiesbetweenFinnegansWakeandGlas,anditisclearthathisreadingofJoyce'stexthauntsthewaysinwhichDerridahasconstructedhisexplorationof
HegelandGenetbypositioningseparateanddiscretetextualcolumnsnexttoeachothersothatitisnecessarytoreadintertextuallyandfollowthewaysinwhichthe
textualplayoperatesacrossandbetweenthemarginsorbordersofthepage(s)andspace(s)separatingthecolumns.

BothJoyce'stextandDerrida'sengagewiththeseminalquestionoftherelationshipofwritingand(inherited)religion.InGlasDerridareturnstothecomplexissueof
Judaism(atworkintheessayonLevinasandexploredagainin"TwoWordsforJoyce")inanexplorationofHegel'smeditationonJewishhistoryandtheJewish
familyaswellasinthemotifofcircumcision,whichDerridaexploresasa"simulacrumofcastration"inthewritingofGenet.Thetwowordsin''TwoWordsforJoyce"
areHewarwehaveseenDerridaanalyzeJoyce'spunon"war"and"true"(Ger.wahr)inordertoreadHEWARasananagramofYAHWE,theJewishGodwho
proclaims,"Iamhewhoisorwhoam,"andwhodeclareswaronhumankind:"Hewar:hewashewhowas....Whereitwas,hewas,declaringwar,anditis
true"(Derrida1984a:145).

SusanHandelmanhasexploredDerrida'srelationshipwithHebraism.ShedefinesthealterityofDerrida'spositioninrelationshiptorabbinicalthought.Derrida'sisa
"heretichermeneutic,"andthe"specificform"ofhisJewishheresyis"metonymyrunamok,"ametonymy"declaringitselftobeindependentofallfoundationsandyet
claimingtobetheoriginandlawofeverything"(Handelman1982:122).OneofthegreatattractionsoftheWakeforDerridaisJoyce'sversionofthis"mad"metonymy
andthemetonymicchainsthatsustainthemanypunsonwhichtheWakeisfounded.

Joyce'simportanceinDerrida'sworkisalsoexplainedbythehighstakesplayedforbybothofthesereligiousexiles.JoycethoughtoftheWakeinbiblicalterms,
revealingthisinthewellknowndefenseofhisuseofpunning,whereinhecomparesthepunsonwhichtheWakeisfoundedwiththefoundationofChristianity:"The
HolyRomanCatholicApostolicChurchwasbuiltonapun.Itoughttobegoodenoughforme"(Ellmann1983:546).Handelmanhasshownthatinadditiontobeing
"alsoasortofawake"modeledonJoyce'stext,GlasfollowstheintertextualmodeloftheTalmud,whose"centralpatternofthetextsurroundedbycommentary"is
"alsotheformatofDerrida'sGlas"(Handelman1982:47).Whatisatstake,

 Page46

inbothtexts,forbothwriters,istheconfigurationoftherelationshipofwordandWordandofallthatthisrelationshipentails.

ThethreeWakeantechniquesforegroundedinGlasare:(1)aradicalexploitationofparonomasia,(2)theuseofacircularstructureforthetext,and(3)the
constructionofpagesfromcolumnsandmarginaliaengagedinatextualinterplaylikethatoftheTalmudandtheintertextualstructureJoyceconstructedforsection
11.2oftheWake.TheimportanceofDerrida'suseofaJoyceanlikeparonomasiaisechoedinGeoffreyHartman'sSavingtheTextandparticularlyin"Epiphonyin
Echoland"(Hartman1981:3366).

HartmanreadsthewordGlasasapunonthefinalsyllablesoftheFrenchpronunciationofHegelandaigle,attestingtoDerrida'sfollowingoftheJoycean
paronomasianinscriptionofdesireanddeath:Glasisanonomatopoeic"soundword"that"referstothedeathknellorpassingbell."Thewordis"endlessly'joyced'by
[Derrida],tosuggestthatvoicehasnomonumentexceptintheformofarattleinthethroatcoveredorsublimedbythepassingbell"(Hartman1981:5myemphasis).
HartmanusesJoyce'snameasaverbtorefertoDerrida'suseofJoyce'sparonomasia,butjoycingisalsoausefullyplayfultermforDerrida'sadaptationofthe
Wake'scircularityaswellashisadaptationoftheintertextualplayoftheWake'slessonssection.

BenningtondisagreeswithHartman'sreadingofGlas.HeusesDerrida'sstatementthatthereis"notonesinglepun"inGlastodescribeJoyceanasa"silly"adjective
forthetext.HedoesnotexplorethepossibilitythatDerrida'sstatementmaybeironic,orthefactthatDerrida'swritings,likethoseofJoyce,revealthatnopunisever
"single":allpunsentailatleastadoublephoneticrelationship(evenwhenthisphoneticrelationshipisrealizedgraphicallyasitfrequentlyiswiththeGLinGlas)withat
leastoneotherword(inJoyce'scasetherelationshipsarefrequentlymorethandoubleasJoyce'sisanoverdeterminedparonomasia)(Bennington1994:18).Punsand
homonymsproliferateinGlas:voleur(Fr.,"steal")andvolens(Lat.,''willing,"apunwhichalsoreproducesJoyce'spun,nolensvolens[Derrida1986a:171FW
271.20])theextendedpunsoncoup(cutandblow),coud(sew),cou(neck),cul(ass),col(collar),andcolle(glue)(Derrida1986a:162,169,179),andthecircular
andextremelyWakeanseriesofnumerouspuns(Gallia,Gallien,Gallowsgalalith,galley,andgalactic(Derrida1986a:12124,passim)generatedfromtheGLof
GlaspracticesthesametextualgenerationandproliferationasJoyce'sproductionofphrasesandnamesfromHCEandALP.

Derridastressestheimportanceofthejoycing,orJoyceanlike,punningofGlasinhisintroductiontoJohnP.LeaveyJr.'sGlassaryforGlas,"Prov

 Page47

erb:'Hethatwouldpun'."Thesefourwordsechothoseof"TwoWordsforJoyce,"andDerridasustainsthisechoingeffectinrepeating"twowords"ashestates:"I
shallsaythentwowords.Justtwowords,andofunequallength...IlimitmyselftotwoEnglishwords:editionandpun"(Derrida1986b:17emphasisadded).
PunningonthewordparonomasiaandtheGreekparanomos,Derridasuggeststhatpunsmaybeparanomos,or"againstthelaw,''andthat"thepunmustbe
morallycondemnedandassuchproscribed,forthepunsignalssomemalice...aperversetendencytotransgressthelawsofsociety"(Derrida1986b:18).

InthesamewaythattheWake'spunsworkinparttounderminecertaintraditional,establishedliteraryconventions(forexample,thatplotshaveaclearandwell
made,tripartite,beginningmiddleendpatternthatcharactersbeclearlynamedandrecognizableasseparateandindividualcharacters),Derrida'spunsareapartof
hisattempttoensurethatGlas"remainsillegibletotheextentthatitisperformedintheliterarymodeofsingularity,ratherthanintheacademicmodeofconformity."

This"modeofsingularity"remarksDerrida'sindebtednesstowhathetermsthe"singulareventofJoyce'swork"(Derrida1984a:146).BecauseJoyce'ssingularity
"bothordersandforbidstranslation"(Derrida1984a:154)hisworkcannotbereadilyreceivedintoacademiesthatconcernthemselveswithtranslation(ofone
languageintoanother,ofthelanguageofliteratureintothelanguageofcommentary,ofthepunintoitscomponentterms,and,mostimportantlyforDerrida,ofliterature
intophilosophyorviceversa).Derridabelievesthat"byintroducingtheunreceivableintothediscourseoftheacademyapowerfuleffectmaytakeplace,assisting
moreeffectivelythanwouldarationallyorganizedpersuasion,achangeinreading,makingpossibleapreviouslyunheardofreading"(Leavey1986:113c,b).

InthesamewaythattheWake'scirculartextualityevadestheconventionalnotionofalinearbookwithatraditionalbeginning,middle,andend,thecircularstructureof
GlasrevealsDerrida'sattempttobreakwiththeconventionalacademicstructureofaphilosophicaltext.(And,itshouldbenoted,boththeconventionalnotionsofthe
bookandthetraditionalacademicstructureofthephilosophicaltext"mimic"thelinearityofJudaicandChristianteleology.)Glasis"notcomposedintheconventional
manneroftheacademicbookbecauseitisexplicitlyanantibook,writtenasanalternativetotheclassicalmodelofthebook"(Leavey1986:29c).

Openingupthequestionofthedoublestructure,Glasalignstheattemptatproducingalineartextwithacertain"silliness":"ButifIlinearize,ifIlinemyselfupand
believesillinessthatIwriteonlyonetextatatime,

 Page48

thatcomesbacktothesamething,andthecostofthemarginmuststillbereckonedwith.IwinandIlose,ineverycase,myprick"(Derrida1986a:66).Retracingthe
networkofthemesontheprickinGenet'swriting,Derridaopensaseriesofmetaphorsontheprickasthepen,thepenis,thestylus,andtheinscriptionwithwhichthe
penpricksthepaperintheprocessoflinearinscription.Thisisonepartofthe"doubleposture"inscribedinthemarginsofthepassageonlinearizationandtheprick.

The"other"oftheprickinthe"doubleposture"istropedasthecirclethatcanenfoldtheprickandinvaginateit.Themetaphorisagaindouble:bothsexualandtextual,
linkingwritingwiththeoperationsofdesire:"Doublepostulation.Contradictionin(it)selfoftwoirreconcilabledesires.HereIgiveit,accusedinmyowntongue,the
titleDOUBLEBAND(S),puttingit(them)intoformandintoplaypractically.Atextlaces[sangle]intwosenses,intwosenses,intwodirections.Twicegirt.Band
contraband"(Derrida1986a:66).Theothersideoflinearityandoftheprick(andthe''other"ofthedesiremakingtheprickerect),theirdouble,arethecircleand
"band"thatDerridatropesasa"necklace,"a"goldenfleece,"anda"cunt."

Usingthemetaphorofthespineofthebookasaphalliccolumn,asthe"other"ofthecircularflowoflanguagewithinthetext,theWake'sinvitationtojointhelastand
firstpagesofitsprintedtextcanbereadastheinvitationtoallowtheflowingofALP's"riverrun"languagetoencircleandenclosethespinebearingthemasculinetitle
ofthebookinpreciselythesortoflacingidentifiedbyDerrida.

TracingGenet'smetaphorsinMiracleoftheRose,Derridaremarkshowthe"GoldenFleece""necklace"markstheringofdecapitation,"assign[s]totheexecutioner
thepartingline(circumcisionorcastration)"(Derrida1986a:62).Itmarks(bycovering)boththeneckjoiningheadtobodyandtheseveranceofheadfrombody,both
erectionandcastration:"Thegoldenfleecesurroundstheneck,thecunt,theverge,theapparitionortheappearanceofaholeinerection,ofaholeandanerectionat
once...thefleecesurroundsavolcano"(Derrida1986a:66).

TheWake'slessonssectiontropesHCEandALPasJoyce'sversionoftheprickandthecunt:"thisuprightone,withthatnoughtybesighedhimzeroine"(FW261.23
24).Thesexualsignificationofthe"uprightone"andthe"noughty"istriggeredbythepunonnoughtandnaughtyatworkin"noughty."Atafundamentalphysical
level,the"uprightone"andthe"noughty"aremathematical1and0andtextualHCE'serectpenisandALP'svaginahowever,the"noughty"that
"besighed"(bespoke,gave

 Page49

breathto)"him,"alsomakinghim"zeroine"(zeroein[G."one"]ornothing/one),presentsuswithanotherdoublebind:theerectionthatisahole.Inthissection,Dolph
fulfillsbothhisowndesireandthatofhisbrother,Kev,byusingapenciltodrawandestablish(erect)thediagramofALP'svagina.Thesexualimplicationsofthepen
aspenisareconfirmedbythedescriptionofthepen/penisas"apokestiff"andIssy'scommenton''[t]heimpudenceofthatingirl'sthings!"(296.2930andn.5).
Despite,orperhapsbecauseof,the"impudence"of"that,"thepencillineofdesireandthediagramofthedesiredarea"[d]oublepostulation,"a"[c]ontradictionin(it)
selfoftwoirreconcilabledesires."

Themetaphorsofthepenisandvagina,orprickandcunt(orthe"uprightone"andthe"noughty"),forthelinearandcircular,doublebindofthetext(itscircularityand
itsupright,phallic,externalspineandinternalcolumns)articulatedbytheWakefindtheirrearticulationinDerrida'stracingofthesamemetaphorsinhisreadingof
Genet.DerridausesGenet'smetaphoroftheflowerasglovetoexploretheoperationsofthissexualdoublebind.Theflower,whichis"[a]lwaystobecut
cuttableculpable[coupable]"..."equalscastration,phallus."Simultaneously,it"'signifies'again!atleastoverlapsvirginityingeneral,thevagina,theclitoris,
'femininesexuality,'matrilineargenealogy"(Derrida1986a:17,47).

Atstakeinthisflowermetaphorarethesimultaneityandequivalenceofdoublestructures.Thesearetropedasthesimultaneityandequivalenceofthe
castration/phallusandthehymen/vagina."Forcastrationtooverlapvirginity,forthephallustobereversedintothevagina,forallegedoppositestobeequivalentto
eachother,...theflowerhastobeturnedinsideoutlikeaglove,anditsstylelikeasheath"(Derrida1986a:47).This"Gloveisstretchedasasignifierofartifice."Itis
ametaphorforflowers,forthefloweringofdesire(aswellasthesimultaneouslyotherofflowering:thedefloweringof[de]siring)andforthewaysinwhichthephallus
canbe"reversedintothevagina."

Thisfloralandsexual(floweringanddefloweringmarkthedualityofdesire'soperations)metaphoroperatesacrossthebordersatthefoundationaldistinctionbetween
natureandcultureorthenaturalandtheartificial.TheexpressionofdesirewithwhattheWaketerms"allfloresofspeech"(FW143.04)bringstheforcesofnatural
desirewithintheartificeofculture,releasingandrealizingthemwithintheplayofalanguagethatfeignstorepresentthisdesirewhileoperatingasitssimulacra.The1
and0ofHCEandALP,whicharebothmathematicalsignifiersandwhatGlastermsthe"prick"andthe"cunt,"aresettoworkassignifiersthattranscend

 Page50

thelimitationsofthe"vulgar"code,whichwouldalignthemonlywithmaleandfemalegenitalia(inGlas,accordingtoadouble,punning,Joycean/Derrideanlogic,they
canbealignedwith"Genetalia").Theirdouble,feigningsignificationsofnumbersandsexualorgansoperateasfakeswhilesimultaneouslyparticipatinginthecreationof
thelargercontextoflinearityandcircularitythatsustain,atthestructurallevel,thesamedoublebindstracedbybothJoyceandDerrida.

ReadingGenet'sTheMaids,Derridapursuesthelogicoftheflower/gloveknot:"Buttheseglovesarenotonlyartificialandreversiblesignifiers,theyarealmostfake
gloves,kitchengloves,the'dishgloves'withwhich...thestranglingofMadameismimed....TheMaidsaregloves,theglovesofMadame....[a]toncecastrated
andcastrating...fullandvoidofthephallusofMadamethatMadamedoesnothave"(Derrida1986a:4748).Weshouldnotehow,acrossthepage,ontheother
sideofthisreadingofTheMaids,thelefthandcolumnoffersadiscussion,viaHegel,ofthelogicoftheapotropaic:"theJeweffects(on)himselfasimulacrumof
castrationinordertomarkhisownness,hisproperness....castratingoneselfalready,alwaysalready,inordertobeabletocastrateandrepressthethreatof
castration,renouncinglifeandmasteryinordertosecurethem...losinginadvancewhatonewantstoerectsuspendingwhatoneraisesaufheben"(Derrida
1986a:46).TheforeskinandthereversiblegloveoperatebetweenthetextsignedbyHegelandthatbyGenet,andthesamesignifiersopenintotheWake'shauntingof
Glas.

InFinnegansWake,themetaphorsoftheforeskinandthereversiblegloveoperateasALPsimultaneouslydrawsHCEintoher"languoofflows"(asaddressee,asthe
subjectofherlanguage,andtheonewhoisbothpenetratingandpenetrated)andinviteshimto"Riseup"(FW619.25)physicallyandsexually.ALPisHCE's
"elicitousbribe"(FW622.3),orbride,andshe"elicit[s]"himto"Reachdown.Alilmo.So.Drawbackyourglave''(FW621.24)."Glave"isanOldEnglishtermfor
smoothandatermforflattery(OED),butitalsopunsonthe"glove"ofHCE'sforeskin,or"falskin"(FW621.25).Whenitisdrawnback,orreversed,HCE's"Hot
andhairyhugon"(hishandandpenis)revealsaheadthatis"Smoosasaninfams"(FW621.2526).

Theglove/"falskin"reversingtorevealthequalitiesofbothinfancyandinfamy("infams")isalsoinvolvedinsuggestionsofcastrationandduplicitousdoubling:"Onetime
youtoldyou'dbeenburntinice.Andonetimeitwaschemicalledafteryoutakingalifeness.Maybethat'swhyyouholdyourhoddasif.Andpeoplethinksyoumissed
thescaffold.Offelldesign"

 Page51

(FW621.2629)."[T]akingalifeness,""hold[ing]yourhodasif,"leaving"people"tothinkthat''youmissedthescaffold":modesof"suspendingwhatoneraises."

The"doubleposture"whichisalsoadoublebind,(con)fusinglinearityandcirculation,isenactedgraphicallyonthepagesofbothGlasandtheWake.Thewaysin
whichtheWake'sfinalandopeningwords(intermsofphysicalplacement)couldbejoinedtogethertodefeatthetraditionalclosureofthebook'sphysicalandmaterial
beginningandclosingarereplayedbythedoublecolumnsofGlas.Thelefthandcolumnonthefinalpageofthetextendswiththewords"Butitrunstoitsruin
[perte],foritcountedwithout[sans]"(Derrida1986a:262).AsintheWake,thereisnofinalpunctuationmarktothisconcluding,incompletesentence,andthe
openingwordsofGlasprovideapredicatetofollowthepreposition"without[sans]":"what,afterall,oftheremain(s),today,forus,here,nowofaHegel?"(Derrida
1986a:1).

Similarly,thefinalwordsintherightandcolumnofGlasare:"Today,here,now,thedebrisof[dbrisde]"(Derrida1986a:262).Thissentencefragmentalsolacks
anyfinalpunctuationmarkandcanbelinked,viathelowercased(uncapitalized),initialwordofGlas'sopeningrighthandcolumn,with:"whatremainedofa
Rembrandttornintosmall,veryregularsquaresandrammeddowntheshitholeisdividedintwo"(Derrida1986a:1).

Thestructureofthefirstsentenceissuchthatitfusestogetheranassertion("Butitrunstoitsruin[perte]")acausalassertion("Butitrunstoitsruin[perte],forit
counted"[emphasisadded])andatleasttwoquestions("Butitrunstoitsruin[perte],foritcountedwithout[sans],""what,afterall"?and"what,afterall...remain
(s),today,forus,here,now,ofaHegel?").This(con)fusionofassertionandanswerrepeatsasimilar(con)fusiontothatoftheinitialsentenceoftheWake'slessons
section:"Aswetherearewherearewearewetherefromtomtittottoteetootomtotalitarian"(FW260.12).Thissentencecanbebrokendownintotheassertions"we
thereare"andquestionslike"wherearewe?"and"arewethere?."

ThestructureofthetwosentencesworkingacrossthegapbetweentheclosingandinitialpagesofGlasissuchthatitispossibletojointheultimatewordsoftheleft
handcolumnwiththeinitialwordsoftherighthandcolumnandviceversa.ThispossibilityissupportedbyDerrida'scommentsonthechiasmusatworkthroughout
Glas:"X,analmostperfectchiasm(us),morethanperfect,ofthetwotexts,eachonesetfacing[enregard]theother:agalleryandagraphythatguardoneanother
anddisappearfrom

 Page52

view."Derridadescribeshowthechiasmusleadsthereaderfromonecolumntoanother:"Theword'regard'thatopenstherightcolumnfixesyouagainattheendof
theleftcolumn"(Derrida1986a:4344).

Thealternative,chiasticstructureforthetwosentencestobelinkedbythereaderwouldbeasfollows:

(ClosingLhand)"Butitrunstoitsruin[perte],foritcountedwithout[sans]"(OpeningRhand)"'whatremainedofaRembrandttornintosmall,veryregular
squaresandrammeddowntheshithole'isdividedintwo."(ClosingRhand)"Today,herenow,thedebrisof[debrisde]"(OpeningLhand)"what,afterall,ofthe
remain(s),today,forus,here,now,ofaHegel?''

Thethemesofruinandsurvival,therelationshipsbetweenhistoryandthepresentandartandphilosophyrestageDerrida'searlierconcernswiththesethemesinhisuse
ofJoyce'sprojectasacounterforHusserl'sphenomenology.TheconsolidationofempiricalhistorycanthreatentheidealformsHusserlsoughtbyconcealingand
ruiningthemwithequivocalformsoflanguage,makingitimpossibletoarticulatetheirpureformsinthepresent.Joyce'sliteraryequivocalprojectoperatesasthe
doubleofHusserl'sphilosophicalstruggleforunivocity.Joyce'sartstrivestoescapefromhistorybydisplayingitinthepresenceofacompleteequivocityHusserl's
philosophyattemptstopurifyhistoryofequivocityinordertograspthehistoricalformsoftheidealattheirorigin.

Glas'sinvestigationofHegel'sphilosophyandGenet'sartisinterwovenwiththethemesofruinandsurvivalsustainedinbothcolumns.Linkingthecolumnsbyreading
themascontinuationsofeachotherinthedoublereadingmadepossiblebythe"Joycing,""Doublends"patternopensanew,doubleperspectiveonthesetopicsand
themes,producingachiasticlinkbetweenthem.Thischiasticcrossoveralsoreproducessomeoftheeffectscreatedbythecrossingoveroftheleftandrighthand
marginalcommentsintheWake'slessonssection.

Derrida'swillingnesstointroduce"unreceivable"(byacademia)writingpractices(includingpuns,doublestructures[oftexts,ofwords,ofletters,ofpunctuationmarks
andparentheses],"nonconcepts")intohisphilosophicaldiscourseandhisinterestinallowingliterature(and,mostimportantlyhere,thewritingsofJoyce)to
"contaminate"hisphilosophicalworkenableshiswritingtoavoidthelimiting"fixing[of]amission"foreitherliteratureorphilosophyatthesametimethatitenableshim
tointerrogatetheessenceofliteratureandpracticeaphilosophythat"interrogate[s]therelationshipbetweenspeechandwriting"(Derrida1992a:3839).

 Page53

Therationalandregulatedanalyticmethodsofacademicdiscoursecanexplaintheeffectsofthepun,butinsodoingtheyleavenoroomforittooperate:
Assoonas,inonemodeoranother,actuallyorvirtually,oneanalyses,exposes,andsodemonstratesrulesofdeformation,condensation,displacement,thenewglossaryandthe
newgrammarnolongerleaveanyplaceforthepun,atleastif...onepersistsinunderstandingbythisword,asisoftendoneincertainsocioideologicalsituationsandtodefend
certainnorms,thefreeplay,thecomplacentandslightlynarcissisticrelationtolanguage,theexerciseofvirtuositytonoprofit,withouteconomyofsenseorknowledge,without
anynecessitybutthatofenjoyingone'smasteryoverone'slanguageandtheothers.(Derrida1986b:18a)

AsignificantpartofDerrida'sengagementwiththepunsandbabelizingofJoyce's"babbling"languageisaresultofhisinterestinhisownHebraicbackgroundandhis
interestinsacredHebraictexts.WehavealreadytouchedonDerrida'sconcernwithJudaismandhisuseofJoyce'sproposition("Jewgreekisgreekjew.Extremes
meet")inhisreadingofLevinas,aswellastheimportanceofDerrida'sJudaisminthe"Circumfessions"ofJacquesDerrida.Joyce'suseoftheBabelmythause
Derridaemphasizesin''TwoWordsforJoyce"isanimportantpartoftheWake'sstatusasanersatzofasacredbooksuchastheBible.Thishelpstoaccountfor
therecurringmotifofthebiblicalnarrativeofthetowerofBabelinJoyce'stext,amotiftowhichDerridareturnsinhisdiscussionsofJoyce.SusanHandelmanhas
conductedextensiveinvestigationsintothegeneralsimilaritiesbetweenDerrida'sconceptofcritureandthetraditionsofHebraicsacredwritingsandnotedthesimilar
typographicalarrangementsbetweenthosewritingsandGlas(Handelman1982).

Herstudyshowshowthemarginalannotationsandexegesesbecomeincorporatedasapartofthesacredtexttowhichtheyreferandonwhichtheycomment.There
is,then,an"academic"precedenttoDerrida'spractice.Atthesametime,thearrangementofthetextonthepagesofGlasissimilartotheWake'slessonssectionand
provokesasimilardoubleandchiasticreadingofthetext.ItispossibletoseeGlasasaplayingoutofthe"literary"possibilities(ofboththeologicalandphilosophical
texts)inthe"academic"mode.

GlasisnottheonlytextinwhichDerridahassettoworkthetypographicalpatternsfoundinboththeTalmudandtheWake.Atthebeginningof

 Page54

"TheDoubleSession"inDissemination,forexample,helaysouttwodiscretesectionsoftextononepage.ThefirsttwelvelinesconsistofacitationofPhilebusin
whichSocratesandProtarchusdiscusssomeoftherelationshipsamongthought,speech,andwriting(Plato1961:1118e1119c).Aftertheseinitialtwelvelines,the
pageisverticallydividedintotwoparts,andapassagefromMallarm'sMimiqueissetalongsidetherestofthepassagefromPhilebus.Atthepointwherethepageis
dividedintotwocolumns,SocratesandProtarchushavemovedontothethemeofpainting.ThisthemeisechoedbyMallarm'smeditationsonthemetaphorofan
orchestra"markingwithitsgold,itsbrusheswiththoughtanddusk"(Derrida1981:175).Derridasetsthesetwopiecestogetherforseveralpurposes.Theseinclude:a
remarkingofthehistoricalperiodsbetweenPlato'sclassicalGreekthoughtandMallarm'smodernismanechoingofSocrates'discussionoflanguageandpaintingby
Mallarm'sthoughtsonsilenceandthecharacterofPierrotandanopeningupoftherelationshipsbetweenphilosophyandliteraturethatDerridausesasthe"double
bottom"fortheinvestigationofmimesisthatdominatesmuchofDissemination.

Theplacingtogetherofdifferent,discretesectionsoftextismorecomplexinGlasthanitisin"TheDoubleSession."InGlas,citationsfromHegelandGenetare
interspersedwithDerrida'sowncommentsandcitationsfromothertexts,bothofwhichexplain,echo,and/oramplifythetopicsofliterature,philosophy,andwriting
thethemesofruinandsurvival,ofdesire,femininity,andmasculinity,ofsexuality,domesticityanddeathandmotifsandimagesofinvaginationandensheathing,of
penetrationandinscription,andofcircumcision,castrationandproductionthataresimultaneouslyatworkinthecitationsofHegelandGenet.Forthemostpart,the
pagesofGlasarelaidoutineithertwoorthreecolumnsorganizedinsuchawaythatthereadingofonecolumnsimultaneouslycontaminatesandilluminatesthe
readingofitspartner(s).Onsomepages,smallblocksoftextaregraftedintooneormoreofthemajorcolumnsinsuchawayastointerruptthedevelopmentofthe
majorcolumnwhilesimultaneouslycommentinguponit.

WhatisforegroundedintheWake'slessonssection,"TheDoubleSession,"andGlasisthesuccessfulcreationof"bifurcatedwriting"andthesortof"groupedtextual
field"thatistheonlysite,Derridaargues,inwhichadeconstructiveoverturningofclassicalphilosophicalhierarchiescan''bemarked"(Derrida1987b:4142).While
manyofDerrida'stextsrevealsuchdoubleandbifurcatedinscriptions,"TheDoubleSession"andGlas,likeJoyce'slessonssection,foregroundanddrawattentionto
thiswritingthroughsimilartypographicalarrangementsandlayoutsontheirpages.

 Page55

Derridacontendsthattheoperationsofdeconstructionare"impossibletopoint...out,foraunilineartext,orapunctualposition,anoperationsignedbyasingle
author"(Derrida1987b:42).Hehasconstructedhisgroupedtextualfieldsfromtexts"signed"byPlato,Mallarm,Hegel,Genet,Joyce,andsoon.Joyce'slessons
sectionfeignsasigningbythefictionalcharactersofShem,Shaun,andIssy,butitalsoincludesthefragment"signed"byQuinetandthedoubleintertwinedcirclesof
thevesicapiscis,whichmusthavebeen"signed"bynumerouswritersandartistsbeforeDolphaddedhisownsignaturetothelist.(Weshouldalsonotethatthe
marginalannotationsandexegesesofHebraicsacredwritingsare"signed''byorcreditedtovariousRabbis.)

ShariBenstock'sinvestigationofJoyce'slessonssectionpinpointssomeofthespecificwaysinwhichthecolumnsofthatsectionoperatedeconstructively."Atthe
MarginsofDiscourse:FootnotesintheFictionalText"offersacloseanalysisofhowthefootnotesofthelessonssectionproducea"subventionof...authorial
prerogative"(Benstock1983:211).Thesefootnotesaremorelikediscretetextsinadeconstructive"groupedtextualfield"(Derrida1987b:42)thanthefootnotes
foundinscholarlytexts.They"donotkeepthetextwithinitsboundaries,lockedintoitsnarrativeformtheyinsistontakingitalways'outofbounds,'takingthereader
withthem.Theyresisttheveryauthoritytheypurportedlyserve"(Benstock1983:212).

IntheWake's"NIGHTLETTER"itistheauthorityofthephalliccolumndominatedbytalesofthepatriarchalHCEthatisresistedandoverturnedbythefemaledesire
ofALPandIssyaswellasbythebrotherswhosustaintheirdesireforthematernalALP.Derrida'sGlas"worksoverphallogocentrismfromthesideofthemother
andofwoman."It"followsthelawofwoman:'Natural,divine,feminine,nocturnal,familial...[i]nthis...place,ofthefamily"(Leavey1986:113).Joyce'slessons
sectionhasalreadydonepreciselythesame.Themarginsandfootnotesarethetextualsitesandpositionsofthetwinsandtheirsister,togethercreatinga"family
place."ThedialogueofthetwinscreatesthespacewithinthephallogocentriccolumninwhichthematernalALP'sdiagramisinscribed.Inthelessonssection,the
"uprightone"andthepaternal"Pep"areworkedover"fromthesideof"thefemale"noughty"and"Memmy"aswellasthefamilialsideofthematernal,thetwinsand
theirsister.Thisfamilysceneisasiteofloveandromancebutalsothesiteoftheirdoubles:warfareanddeath.

Derridafrequentlyfocusesuponwritingasakindofwarfare,andthereisawarfarebetweenthediscretetextualgroupsinthelessonssectionthatproceedsasfollows:
thereisaninitialintrusionofIssy'stextintothespacethatwaspreviouslyoccupiedbythecentralcolumn(179)thecentralcol

 Page56

umnresponds,asitwere,witharetaliatoryoccupationofIssy'sspace(280)Shaun'srighthandcommentsjoinintheassaultwithanincursionintothespaceofthe
centralcolumn(281,282),beforedisappearingforthreepages(28385)theyfightbackwithanotherintrusionintothecentralarea(286),whichprovokesthecentral
columntoexpandandtakeupbothmarginalspacesformorethanfivepages(28792).Itthenlooksasifpeacehasbeenrestored,untilthefinalpageofthesection,
whenthecentralcolumnisreducedtoa"thin"recitationofthenumbersonethroughten(thenumberofthesectionandofthephallic"uprightone...withthatnoughty
besighedhimzeroine"[FW261.2324]).Thesectionconcludeswiththe"NIGHTLETTER"signedbythesiblingsinvadingandoccupyingthespaceofthecentral
column.

WithinthelargercontextoftheWake'sliquid"languoofflows"thisinvasionissupportedbyJoyce'sownworkingoverofphallogocentricpatternsfromthesideofthe
motherandthefemale.ALPisthematernalanddominantfemaleofthenarrative,butALPalsosignifiestheWake'slanguage.Issylearnswoman'swriting,or
"gramma'sgrammar"(FW268.17)fromALP'smother,orIssy'sgrandmother(her"gramma"),andherlanguageisapartofAnna'swriting,themanyanagramsJoyce
createsfunctioningasAnna'sgrammes,orwrittenmarks.

ALP'snameisanimportantpartofJoyce'sfemaleworkingoverofphallogocentrism.ItcanbereadasatightlycompressedhistoryofWesternlanguagesasthose
languagesswingonwhatBarbaraJohnsoncallsthe"crucialhingesofWesternphilosophy:thetextualriftsanddriftsproducedbytheprocessoftranslationofthe
Greekphilosophers,precisely,intoLatin"(Johnson1981:182n.10).TheclassicalGreekanaisacontractionofanastethi,or"up!arise!"(LiddellandScott),and
ALP'scallforHCEis"Away!Riseup,manofthehooths"(FW619.25,emphasisadded).LiviaisthefemininedeclensionoftheRomanfamilyname,''Livius,"and
"plurabelle"fusesthemodernFrenchplu,belle,elle,andlewiththeLatincombiningprefixplura.Itisthewoman'slanguageofALPcallingHCEtohisresurrection,
andJoyce'swordismadeinfemaleflesh,thebiblicalgod"whoisandwhowasandwhoistocome"(Rev.1.8)beingreworkedintothefemale"Annawas,Liviais,
Plurabelle'stobe"(FW215.24).

Itispossible,then,tomarkJoyceandDerrida'ssharingandexplorationofsimilarthemes(writingaswarfareandpatricidetheroleandpowerofthemotherandof
theattachmenttothematernalandfamilialthefailureand/ordeathofthephallusthedistinctionsbetweennatureandcultureaswellasthosebetweenphilosophyand
literatureandsoon)evenifitisnot

 Page57

possibletosummarize,or"pointout,"alltheeffectsofsuchsharinginaunilinearwritingsuchasthis.

Onecanidentifythesimilartextualoperationsandtypographicallayoutsforegroundedbybothwritersastheygrafttogethervariouscitationsintoanintertext.The
stylesofbothwriters,however,produceeffectsthattheunilinearwritingrequiredandproducedbyacademicandscholarlyinstitutionscannot"pointout."Neither
writerproduces"books"(andthisbecomesparticularlytrueforJoycewiththeWake)intheacademicsenseoftheterm,andwhatDerridaandLeaveysayofGlas
can,ingeneralterms,alsobeappliedtotheWake:"itisa'readingeffect'[ratherthanabook]anexperimentinproducinganentirelyunanticipatedreading...The
aspect...mostlikelytoprovokethedefencemechanismsoftheinstitutionisitsstyle,whichisinanycasethatwhich...'remainsillegible'totheextentthatitis
performedintheliterarymodeofsingularityratherthanintheacademicmodeofconformity"(Leavey1986:113).

Derridadoesnotclaimtohave"read"Joyceortohave"proposedageneralreadingof[his]texts."Hisinterestlieselsewhere:inthe"singularity"ofJoyce'swork,a
singularitytowhichDerrida"triestorespond"or"countersign.''Joyce'sisanexampleofanequivocalwritingagainstalimitinghistoricityandareductiveempiricism.
Followinghisown"'logic'ofsingularity,"DerridausesJoyceasa"counterexample"ofequivocityagainsttheexampleofHusserl'sphenomenologicalhistoricism.In
GlasDerrida"countersigns"hisnametothestyleofJoyce'sparonomasiaasan"other"namefor"hewhowouldpun,"echoing,ashedoesso,thetitleofhisown"two
words"forJoyce:"Hewar."

 Page58

Chapter6
SpeakingofJoyce(I):
TheSpecterofJoyceinDerrida'sVoice(s)
DerridaHasSpokenonJoyceonatleastthreeoccasions.Thischapterfocusesonthefirsttwooftheseevents,whereinDerridaspokeprimarilyonJoyce'stexts.In
thethirdofDerrida'stalks,"'ThisStrangeInstitutionCalledLiterature':AnInterviewwithJacquesDerrida,"DerridaspokeonJoycewithinthecontextofthe
relationshipsamongdeconstructionandliterature,philosophy,andfeminism.ThisgeneraldiscussionusesJoyceasatouchstoneforwhatDerridahastosayonthese
issues.ThenextchapterexaminesitindetailandexploressomeoftheimplicationsthatDerrida'sreadingsofJoycehaveforhisthoughtsonthesematters.

EachtimeDerridahasspokenonJoyce,Joyce'swritingsoperatedwithinwhatDerridahadtosayaboutthosewritings,evenwhenDerrida'sownspokenwordswere
readfromawrittentext.ThesetextualspectersofJoyce'swordshaveimportantimplicationsforDerrida'sinvestigationsoftherelationshipsbetweenspeechand
writingandhisdeconstructiveoverturningoftheclassicalhierarchyprivilegingspeechoverwriting.

 Page59

Theprivilegingofspeechoverwritingisnotanisolatedeventbutpartofahistoricalandphilosophicaltextualplayoccurringbetweenothersignifiersattachedtoeach
oftheseterms.Inthesystemofbinaryopposition,theopposingtermsaremutuallyexclusive:absence,forexample,isthecompleteortotaloppositetopresence.
Attachedtospeecharesignifierssuchaspresence,goodness,truth,light,male,mastery,andwisdomattachedtowritingareabsence,badnessorevil,falsity,dark,
female,enslavement,andfoolishness.Thedoublestrategyofdeconstructionentailsmarkingtheintervalbetweentheopposingmembersofeachpairfromtheseterms
andthenreinscribingeachofthetermsinanewwritingpracticethat"simultaneouslyprovokestheoverturningofthehierarchyspeech/writing,andtheentiresystem
attachedtoit,andreleasesthedissonanceofwritingwithinspeech"(Derrida1981:42).

Derrida'sspeakingonJoyceexemplifieshisprojectofdeconstructingthespeech/writinghierarchyasitreleasesthedissonanceofJoyce's"writingwithin[Derrida's]
speech."ItalsorevealsamarkedchangeinDerrida'sattitudetowardJoyce'swriting.Inthetextsexaminedsofar,DerridausesJoyce'swriting,inpart,asmodelsand
exemplarsfortheorganizationofhisowntextsandascountersigningsorcounterexamplesofJoycewritings.Drawingonmanyofthemotifs,themes,andmythemes
articulatedbyJoyce,DerridagraftsfragmentsfromJoyce'swritingintohisownsothathisdoublewritingcanrespondtothefragmentsofJoyce'stextswhile
simultaneouslyallowingthemtosignifybacktowardthesiteoftheirremoval.InspeakingonJoyce,however,DerridarevealsafamiliaritywithJoyce'swritingone
effectofwhichisanincreaseoftheironicforceinhiswrittenandstatedreluctancetowriteorspeakonJoyce.

If,asMcArthursuggests,thedepictionofPlatoandSocratesfromThePostcardcanbereadasaconfigurationofJoyceandDerrida,thenDerrida'stalkingonJoyce
maywellsuggestthatinadditiontoallowingJoyce'swritingtoworkwithinhisownspeech,DerridahasalsodeconstructivelyoverturnedhisownrelationshiptoJoyce
sothatitisnolongeramaster/disciplerelationship,butoneinwhichthestudentchallengesthesuppositionsofthemasterandassumesthemaster'sposition,containing
andregulatingtheplayofthemaster'swordsandsettingthemtoworkwithinhisowndiscourse.

DerridawoulddoubtlessdenyanysuggestionthathehasthecompetencetoqualifyhimasamasterlyreaderofJoyce'stexts,buttheironyplayedoutinhisargument
thattherecanbenolegitimateJoyceancompetenceatteststoarefusalonDerrida'sparttosubmittoanyexistingJoyceanbodyforanevaluationofhiscompetence.
Derrida'saddresstotheNinthInternational

 Page60

JamesJoyceSymposiumacknowledgestheJoyceanswhomheaddressedandfromwhom,"asexperts,"hefeignedtoaskfora"diplomainJoycestudies"butthe
acknowledgmentandrequestareironicwithinthecontextofDerrida'sdecision"tointerrogate...theinstitutionofJoyceanexperts"(Derrida1992a:266).For
Derrida,there"canbenoJoyceancompetence....noJoyceanfoundation,noJoyceanlegitimacy''(Derrida1992a:282).Whiledenyingthepossibilityofanexpertise
inJoyceanmatters,DerridaidentifiesthenameofElijahasthenamethat"shouldbegiventoallthe'chairs'...the'panels'and'workshops'organizedby"theJoyce
Foundation.PlayfullyestablishinghisownJoyceanlegitimacy,headds,"ItooamcalledElijah:thisname...wasgivenmeonmyseventhday"(Derrida1992a:284).
Thestudentthusindicateshis"right"toassumethepositionofonewhocanregulatetheplayofhisJoyceanmasters'words.

Derrida'sfirstextensivetalkonJoycetookplacein1982."TwoWordsforJoyce"isdescribedbyGeoffreyBenningtonas"amoreorlessextemporarytalkgivenat
theCentreGeorgesPompidou,ParisinNovember,1982"(Derrida1984a:158n.1).GeertLernoutstatesthat"Derridagave[thetalk]atthecentenarycelebrationsin
BeauborginNovember1982"(Lernout1990:62).Whicheveroftheseaccountsiscorrect,"TwoWordsforJoyce"isimportantinrevealingtheoperationsofJoyce's
writingwithinDerrida'sspeechandtheforcewhichDerrida'sreadingsofJoycehavewithinDerrida'swritings.

Derrida'ssecondmajortalkonJoycewasthe"openingaddressattheNinthInternationalJamesJoyceSymposiuminFrankfurt."FritzSennwasresponsiblefor
invitingDerridatospeakatthesymposium,andmanyJoyceanswhowereawareofthe"continuingimportance"ofJoyceinDerrida'sworkwereeagertohearwhat
Derridahadtosay.AsDerekAttridgepointsout,however,"fewpeopleintheaudiencecouldhavebeenpreparedforthelong,detailed,circuitous,always
unpredictable,frequentlycomicexplorationofUlyssesthatdevelopedoutoftheapparentlyinnocuousopening,'Oui,oui,vousm'entendezbien,cesontdesmots
franais'"(Attridge1992b:253).

Derridaread"UlyssesGramophone:HearSayYesinJoyce"fromapreparedtext(whichwaspartiallyproducedwiththeaidofacassetterecorder,andthusthrough
technologyandspeech),butinreadingthetext,hisspeechechoesJoyce'swritingandrevealshisdesiretoevadethelinearityandprogressive,teleologicalstructures
governingmanytraditionalformsoflanguage.LikeUlyssesitself,"UlyssesGramophone"followsaseriesofcircularpatterns.InthesamewaythatJoyce'scharacters
keepcrossingeach

 Page61

other'spathsincyclicalpatternsofreturn,Derrida'sessaydepartsfromcertainpointsonlytoreturntothemagainaftercircuitous,rhetorical"loops"duringwhich
Derridapicksupotherthemesandmotifsinordertoletthemecholikecontrapuntalfreevoicesharmonizinghisdominantthemes.Attridgeseestheessayasa
consciousimitationofthedoublestructuresofJoyce'stexts.ItrespondstoJoyce'swritingandnarratesthedetailsofitsowncomposition:"Theessay'swandering
path,asitweavestogetherthestoryofitsowncomposition,fragmentsofthetextofUlysses,andanumberoftheissuesthatDerridahasaddressedatlength
elsewhere,mimesbothJoyce'snovel(togetherwithitsHomericpredecessor)andacrucialaspectofitsargument:thenecessaryconnectionbetweenchanceand
necessity"(Attridge1992b:253).

Although"UlyssesGramophone"focusesonitseponymoustext,Derrida'sreadingofUlyssesmaywellhavebeenfilteredthroughhisknowledgeoftheWake.Inthe
samewaythatFinnegansWakecontinuallyoffersfictitiousaccountsofitscreation,DerridacontinuallyreturnstothewaysinwhichhecreatedhistalkonJoyce.One
circle,or"trace"or"relay,"movesfromthereferencetothe''GreatBattle,Tokio,"whichBloomfindsintheeditionoftheTelegraphhereadsintheCabman'sShelter,
toDerrida'sownexperienceinTokyo,wherehe"begantodictatethemainideas[for"UlyssesGramophone"]intoapocketcassetterecorder"(Derrida1992a:259).
DerridakeepsreturningtohisvisittoTokyo,onesiteoftheWest's"other,"throughoutthetext.ThisremarksDerrida'sownalterity(intheEastasopposedtothe
West,wherehespeaksonJoycefromtheinstituteofJoycestudies)atthesametimethatitmarksDerrida'ssharedalteritywiththe"Tokio"ofwhichBloomreadsin
UlyssesandwithBloomhimself:bothexperiencetheirsharedJudaicheritageasanalterityandbotharelinkedthroughJapan,thesiteoftheWest's"other."Derrida
linksthissiteofalterityheshareswithBloomtothecreationofhistalk,tothethemeofpostcards(inUlysses,inhistextThePostCard,andinthebookshopinhis
Tokyohotel)aswellastotheelementofchance.

"[C]ontinuingthechronicleofmyexperiences"increatinghistext,DerridareturnstohisvisittoTokyoanddescribesachanceencounterwithanAmericantourist.
Thistourist"leanedovermyshoulderandsighed:'Somanybooks!Whatisthedefinitiveone?Isthereany?'...Ialmostreplied,'Yes,therearetwoofthem,Ulysses
andFinnegansWake"(Derrida1992a:265).InidentifyingthedefinitivebookastwotextsbyJoyce,Derridakeepsinplayboththesingularityhestressesasa
hallmarkoftheeventofJoyce'swritingandthedoublestructure(ofJoyce'stexts,ofhisown

 Page62

countersigningofthosetexts,andofhisownwritingasacounterexampletoJoyce)bywhichthissingularitydoublesandunfolds,asifbychance,inJoyce'stwotexts.

"TwoWordsforJoyce"

Like"UlyssesGramophone,""TwoWordsforJoyce"imitatesthecyclicalpatternsofreturninformingbothUlyssesandFinnegansWake.Derridabeginsbyalluding
totheimpossibilityofreadingJoyce,stating"itisalwaystoolatewithJoyce,Ishallsayonlytwowords"(Derrida1984a:145).Derrida's"twowords"(whichare''for"
Joyceinallsensesoftheterm)establishthepolesofthe"doublemark"thatissoimportantinbothhisandJoyce'swritings.TheimmenseachievementsofJoyce's
writingmean"itisalwaystoolatewithJoyce,"andthe"twowords"Derridainvestigateswithinthecontextoftheimpossibilityoftranslationoperateaspointsof
departureandreturnforthecyclicalpatternsthatstructure"TwoWordsforJoyce."

ThebelatednessofourresponsestoJoyceisdirectlylinkedtoDerrida'sconcernwiththetranslationof"Hewar"intoananagramoftheHebrewYAHWE.Already
anticipatingourattemptsattranslatingitslanguagesandidentifyingitspuns,Joyce'snarrationofthemythofBabel(andthedouble"babelizing"ofthewordswithwhich
henarratesit)restagesthe"declaredwarinlanguage"(Derrida1984a:146),whichdefeatsourtranslationsbyalwaysalreadyhavingconfoundedourattemptsto
translateJoyceintothestable,logical,andtraditionalunilinearlanguageoftheacademy.Joyce'sdreamofa"specialinstitutionforhisoeuvre"hastheeffectofturning
allofuswhoarehis"readers,writers,critics,teachers"intohisdream,"hisdreamreaders,theoneshedreamedofandwhomwedreamofbeinginourturn"(Derrida
1992a:74).

Thedeconstructiveconcernsemphasizedin"TwoWords"includetherelationshipsbetweenthereadingandwritingofwrittenorprintedtextsandthevocalizingand
hearingofthosetextswithinspeech.Derridabeginsbyaddressingtheserelationshipsbeforemovingontoconsiderthedoublebindoftranslation,whichmakes
translationimpossibleatthesametimethatitmakestranslationtheonlyoptionforunderstanding.DerridamovesfromtheachievementsandeffectsofJoyce's
"speechreading"(FW568.31)texttotheproblemsoftranslation(andtheshiftfromspeechtowritingandviceversaisitselfaparticularcaseoftranslation)onlyto
returntothese

 Page63

achievementsandeffectsinthesortofcyclicalpatternthatstructures"TwoWords."Duringthesecircuitousarticulationsofhisthemes,Derridaalsousesthetechnique
hefrequentlyadoptselsewhereinhisworkofopeninguptheautobiographicalelementsinboththegeneralpracticesofreadingandwritingandhisownspecific
engagementswithparticulartexts.

ThetwowordsonwhichDerridafocuseshisattentionare"HEWAR,"andthepreliminarytranslationhe"sketches"adoptstheWake'sowntechniqueof"babelizing":
"HEWARShewageswar...heiswar,whichcanalsobepronouncedbybabelizingabit...byGermanizing,then,inAngloSaxon,Hewar:hewashewhowas
('Iamhewhoisorwhoam',saysYAHWE)....Pushingthingsabit,takingthetimetodrawonthevowelandtolendanear,itwillhavebeentrue,wahr,that'swhat
canbekept[garder]orlookedat[regarder]intruth''(Derrida1984a:145).Derrida'sconcernswithJoyce'sbabelizingnarrativeofGod,violence,andlanguage
returnhimtothequestionofhistoricaltotalityandthehistoryofwarthatheexploredinhisreadingofLevinas'sattempttoseparatehimselffromHusserl'sreductionof
the"infinitealterity"tothestatusofthesame(Derrida1978:125).

InthehistoryofthewordaccordingtoJoyce,languagesappearwithYahweh'sdeclarationofwartoconfoundman'slanguage.ForLevinas"thereiswaronlyafter
theopeningofdiscourse"(Derrida1978:125emphasisadded).Joyce'sreading/rewritingofthehistoricalsimultaneityofviolenceandlanguagesupportDerrida's
argumentthatthe"philosopher(man)mustspeakandwritewithinthiswar...inwhichhealwaysalreadyknowshimselftobeengagedawarwhichheknowsis
inescapable."ThewordaccordingtoJoycealsoinscribesthe"other"ofacorrection(andthesimultaneousotherofcorrection)toLevinas'sviewofhistoryasatotality.
Thehistoryfromwhich"thephilosophercannotescape...isthehistoryofthedeparturesfromtotality"(Derrida1978:117emphasisadded).Historyisnotthe
totalitywhoselimitsHusserlwishedtotranscendthroughaunivocitythatmightmakeitpossibletograsptherootsofhistoryattheiroriginsnorisitthetotalityLevinas
saw"transcendedbyeschatology,metaphysicsorspeech.Itistranscendenceitself,"thesortoftranscendenceatworkintheequivocallanguagewithwhichJoyce
articulatessystemsandorders(ofmyths,language,war,history,religion,andliterature)asother.IntheequivocalfeigningofJoyce's"Shamwork"language:"Yetisno
bodypresentherewhichwasnottherebefore.Onlyisorderothered"(FW613.10,1314).Thismakingotheroforderremarkstheorderofthegodwhodeclares
warinlanguageastheorderoftheother,anditsetsthis"other"ordertoworkinconfoundingthestabilityofthesymbolandtrig

 Page64

geringthesymbol'sbecomingunmotivatedasasignoperatingwithintheinfinitudeofaplayregulatedbytheorderof,precisely,theother.

ThesectionfromtheWakeuponwhichDerridafixeshisattentionexploresthecomplexrelationshipsbetweentheGodoftheOldTestament,theattemptatbuilding
thetowerofBabel,thewarGoddeclaresindestroyingthetower,andtheensuingconfusionofhumanlanguagesthatmakestranslationanimpossiblenecessity.One
extendedpassagerestagesthedivinedeclarationofwaronhumankindinanimitationofthe"rhythmofBiblicalwriting":
AndletNekNekulonextolMakMakalandlethimsayuntohim:ImmiammiSemmi.AndshallnotBabelbewithLebab?Andhewar.Andheshallopenhismouthandanswer:I
hear,OIsmael,howtheylaudisonlyasmyloudisone.IfNekulonshallbehavonfalledsurelyMakalhavenhevens.Goto,letusextellMakal,yea,letusexceedinglyextell.
ThoughyouhavelienamungyourposspotsmyexcellencyisoverIsmael.GreatishimwhomisoverIsmaelandheshallmekanekofMakNakulon.Andhedeed.

Uplouderamainagain!

FortheCleareroftheAirfromonhighhasspokenintumbuldumtambaldamtohistembledimtombaldoomworrildand,moguphonoisedbythatphonemanon,theunhappitentsof
theearthhaveterrerumbledfromfimamentuntofundamentandfromtweedledeedummsdowntotwiddledeedees"(FW258.1024emphasisaddedcitedinDerrida1984a:15253).

Locatedclosetothecenteroftheprintedversionof"TwoWords,"thispassagehelpsprovideDerrida'stalkwithanalternativestructure(an"other"structure)tothe
seriesofcyclicaldigressionsinwhichDerridaarticulatesthemythemesofpaternity,(Yahweh's)language,naming,fraternity,warfare,anddeath.Likethe"crease''
dividingthetwohalvesof"TheDoubleSession"ofDissemination,threespacesorcreasesdivide"TwoWords"intofourdiscretesections.Eachofthesecreasesis
markedbythreeasterisksarrangedintheshapeofaninvertedtriangle.Themiddleoneofthesethreecreasesmarkedwiththeinvertedtriangleofasterisksoccurs
closetothecenterof"TwoWords."Ononesideofthiscrease,DerridacitesanextensivepassagefromhisPostCardontheotherside,hecitesthepassagefrom
theWake.

 Page65

Thisproducesaframeinwhich,andfromwhich,thetextsofJoyceandDerridamirroreachother,recreatingthedoublethatDerridamarksoutinJoyce.The
positioningofthepassagesallowsDerridatoexplorethenumerouswaysinwhichhistext,ThePostCard,is"[a]boveall...hauntedbyJoyce."Thetwopassages
mirroreachotheracrossthecentralcreaseorfoldmarkedbytheinvertedtriangleofthreeasterisks.Thesignificanceofthisinvertedtrianglemaybeanarbitrary
editorialortypesettingchoice,butitmayalsoreflect(evenastheresultofarandomchoiceorselection)Derrida'sinterestintheGreekletterDelta( )asaperfect
letterandafigureforJoyce'sALP.InDisseminationheoffersan"unacknowledgedquotationfromRobertGreerCohn'sL'OeuvredeMallarm:Uncoupde
Ds"(Lernout1990,6061):''Thetrianglewithitspointdownward,thelowerpartofSolomon'sseal,isatraditionalsymbolofthefeminineprinciple,exploited
extensivelyinFinnegansWake"(Derrida1981:330).

Exploringthethemeoflanguageasasiteofwarfare,DerridacompletesoneofhiscyclicalreturnstothepassagefromtheWakeandconsidersJoyce'stextasaradical
restagingofthemythicaleventsthattookplaceatBabel:"Inthelandscapeimmediatelysurroundingthe'hewar',weare,ifsuchapresentispossible,andthisplace,at
Babel:atthemomentwhenYAHWEHdeclareswar,HEWAR"(Derrida1984a,15354).FollowingtheexampleoftheWake'sradicalanagrams(asALP'sletter,
asherwords,theWakecanbereadas"Anna'sgrammes"),DerridareadsHEWARasapossibleanagramonthenameofYAHWEH:"exchangeofthefinalRand
thecentralHintheanagram'sthroat"(Derrida1984a:154).

ThevictimofthiswaratBabelisShemthepenman,andwriters,thosewhobearhisname("ImmiammiSemmi,""IamShem"),arepunishedas"thosewho,according
toGenesis,declaretheirintentionofbuildingthetowerinordertomakeanameforthemselves."(Shemthepenmanuseshispenandpenistobuildhislinguisticand
phallictowerevenasheparticipatesinwhattheWakedescribesasthe"wielderfight"ofa"penisolatewar"[FW3.6].)InDerrida'sreadingofJoyce'srecreationof
Babel,God'sconfoundingofthelanguagesofthetowerbuildersisadeconstructive"(con)fusion,"and"theLord...deconstructsbyspeakingthevocableofhis
choice,thenameofconfusion,whichinthehearing,couldbeconfusedwithawordindeedsignifying'confusion'"(Derrida1984a:154).

Loveisdoubledbyitsotherintheformsnecessarytowar.Derridacanthusremarkthedestructiveactofwar"asnotnecessarilyanythingotherthananelection,an
actoflove."IntheWake'srestagingoflanguageaswarfare,languageisalsoagestureoflove.Insupportofthishypothesis,

 Page66

Derridaquotesthepassage"foraughtIcareforthecontrary,thealliswhereinloveaswarandtheplanewhere..."(FW151.35152.1citedinDerrida
1984a:154).This(con)fusionofloveandwarwouldbewellknowntoreadersofJoycefamiliarwithJoyce'suseofGiordanoBruno'sdoctrineofthecoincidenceof
contraries,butitissimultaneouslya(con)fusionmarkingDerrida'sownambivalentattitudetowardJoyce.Ontheonehand,Derridahasadeepandabidingrespect
andadmirationforJoyce'sworkontheotherhand,hecanmarkthealterity,the"other"ofhisrespectandadmiration,whichoperateswithinhisindebtednessto
Joyce.Attheconclusionof''TwoWords,"Derridacompletesacyclethatheinitiatedinhisintroductionbyrecitingsomeofhisownwords:"'I'mnotsureIlike
Joyce...I'mnotsureheisliked...exceptwhenhelaughs...he'salwayslaughing...everythingisplayedoutinthedifferencebetweenseveraltonalitiesof
laughter'"(Derrida1984a:146,157).

ItisDerrida'sunderstandingofJoyce'swriting(anunderstandingsometimesmarkedasthealterityofa"notunderstanding"bythelimitedhistoricismandempiricism
usedagainstDerrida'sreadingofJoyce)thatmarksthefinaleto"TwoWords."ThisrespectfulunderstandingisthreefoldandexpressedintermsofJoyce'scompletion
oftheHegelianlikeprojectthatproduces,inFinnegansWake,"alittlegrandsonofWesterncultureinitscircular,encyclopedic,UlysseanandmorethanUlyssean
totality"(Derrida1984a:149).ItisDerrida'sunderstandingofJoyce'sdeconstructionofthespeech/writinghierarchyinamultilingualtextthatcanbeheardinthe
singularityofoneparticularlanguage,voice,oraccentbutreadsimultaneouslyinseverallanguages.Itis,perhapsaboveall,anadmiringcomprehensionofJoyce's
comedic"revengewithrespecttotheGodofBabel."ReiteratinghisadmirationforJoyce'sdeconstructiveprivilegingofthefemalepositioninlanguage,Derrida
concludes"TwoWords"withhisassessmentoftheWakeasatextthat"says'we'and'yes'intheendtotheFatherortotheLordwhospeaksloud...but...leaves
thelastwordtothewomanwhoinherturnwillhavesaid'we'[Molly'souioryesandALP'syestoHCE]and'yes'.CountersignedGod,Godwhocountersigneth
thyself,Godwhosigneththyselfinus,letuslaugh,amen"(Derrida1984a:158).

"UlyssesGramophone:
HearSayYesinJoyce"

Derrida'sspokenaddresstoJoyceansisacountersignaturetoJoycethatbothaffirmsandexploitsthepowerofJoyce'swriting.InthetermsofDerrida'smetaphorof
Joyceasa"1000thgenerationcomputer,"itexploresthe"paradoxicallogic"ofDerrida'srelationshiptoJoyceasoneof"two

 Page67

programmesortwoliterary'softwares'"(Derrida1984a:148).Simultaneously,itoffersitselfasapositivecounterexampletothenegationofDerrida'sunderstandingof
Joycebyhistoricist,empiricalJoyceancriticswhoattackthereliabilityofDerrida'sworkonJoyce.DerridaaffirmsthepowerofJoyce'stextsbycountersigningthe
doubleaffirmationofUlysses,andwithinthiscountersignaturehesetstoworka"no"totheideaofanexclusive(andexcluding),legitimate,academicJoycean
expertise.Fromacertainangle,theentiretyofDerrida'scountersigningofJoyce'sdoubleyesescanbereadastheattempttoanswerthequestion:"Howcanyou
makeno[the"no"reservedtocountersignastatementsuchas"IamanexpertonJoycewhohasmasteredJoyce'swritings'']heard,whenyoumeanitwithoutsaying
it?"(Derrida1992a:264).Butthis"no"operatesfromwithintheintricatefoldsofDerrida'spowerfulandaffirmative,doublecountersignaturetoJoyce.

Begunasthoughtsspokenintoacassetterecorder,mediatedthroughtelephoneconversationswithJeanMichelRabat,thentranscribedandmodifiedaslanguageon
apagetobespokenbeforetheNinthInternationalJamesJoyceSymposiumatFrankfurtin1984,"UlyssesGramophone"operatesinwhatDerridatermsa
"telegraphicstyle"(Derrida1992a:301).ThisstyleinvokesandfusestogetherthecompositionofDerrida'stalk(involvingrecording,telephoning,speaking,listening,
andwriting)andthetechnicalmetaphorsoperatinginDerrida'sresponsetoawritinghedescribesasa"1000thgenerationcomputer"(Derrida1984a:147).Thechain
oftechnologicalmetaphors(Bloom'sgramophone,thetelephone,thepostalsystem,newspapers,computers)runningthroughout"UlyssesGramophone"(andatwork
inthetitle)aretriggeredoffinthefirstsentenceofthepiecefollowingacitationofthedoubleyesesconcludingMolly'sdiscourse:"Oui,Oui,youarereceivingme,
theseareFrenchwords"(Derrida1992a:256Attridge1992a:253emphasisadded).

Theopeningparagraphsof"UlyssesGramophone"functionasarhetoricalaporia,aknottyingtogetherthevariousthreadsthatDerridaunravelsduringhisaddress.
HisthemesincludetheimpossibilityofreadingJoycewithanysenseofmasterythetechnologicalelementsinJoyce'sworktheelementofchanceorrandomness
producedbyasystemascomplexasthatofJoyce'swritingthedoublebindsoftranslationandcitationandaquestioningoftheauthorityandlegitimacywithwhich
onemightdeclareoneselfanexpertonJoyce.

Whilearticulatingthesethemes,DerridaweavesautobiographicalnarrativetogetherwithhisreadingofJoyceandadoptstherhetoricalstrategyofaddressinghis
audiencedirectlybutasifheweretalkingtothemona

 Page68

telephone.HisrhetoricandnarrativesarethusplayedoutwithinthedoublepatternsofDerrida'scounterexampletoJoyce'sdouble,"doublin'"patternsandbetween
thereignedimmediatepresenceofspeechanditsdistancingthroughasimulacrumoftechnology.TheysustainandenfoldDerrida'sinterrogationoflegitimate,Joycean
expertisewithinthemovementfromhisinitialreaffirmationofJoyceanaffirmationtohisownalterityasarhetoricalcountersignatoryexploringthechanceand
randomnessoperatinginhisreadingsofJoyce.

TheopeningofthisaddressaffordstheopportunityofremarkinghowDerrida'sthemesandstrategiesarewoventogetherinadoubletextualplaythatsimultaneously
remarksitsownother,incorporatinganarrativeofitsowntextualcomposition:
Tobesure[certaintyasopposedtotheunknownandtheelementofchance],andIdonotneedtoreinforcemymessage[selfreferentialandautobiographical,thetransmissionof
amessage]withanotherphrase,allyouneed[directaddresstothelistenerandnecessity,asopposedtochance]istohaveheardthefirstword,oui[areferencetothefactthat
DerridaisspeakingintheFrenchthatisan"other"languageformanyofhisauditorsandareiterationofoneoftheJoyceanyesesDerridacitedearlier],toknow,thatisifyou
understandenoughFrench,that,thankstotheauthorization[authoritywhichDerridawilllaterlinktolegitimacyinordertointerrogateit]graciouslybestowedonmebythe
organizersofthisJamesJoyceSymposium,Ishalladdressyou[directaddress],moreorless,inthelanguagepresumedtobemine[thequestionofone'snativetongueandthus
thepossibilityoftranslation].(Derrida1992a:256)

ThesecondparagraphremarksthetakingupofJoyce'swritingintothealterityofDerrida'slanguage.DerridafocusesontranslationandlinksMolly'syeseswiththose
ofhisown,thusweavingtogetherhisreadingofJoyceandhisownwriting:
Butcanouibetranslated?[translation]ThisisoneofthequestionsIintendtoposeduringthistalk[selfreferential]....TheoneIbeganwith,justasMollybeginsandendswhat
istoolightlyreferredtoashermonologue[combinationofautobiographyandJoyce'stextalongwithahintoftheattackthatDerridalatermakesonJoyceanauthority],thatis,the
repetitionofaoui,isnotcontentjusttomention,itusesinitsownwaythesetwoouis,theonesthatInowquote[translation

 Page69

andrandomness:whichouisarebeingdiscussed?].Inmyopeningyoucouldnotdecide,andyouarestillincapableofdeciding,[selfreferentiality,directaddress,andthechance
thatmakesdecisiondifficult,ifnotimpossible]ifIwassayingouitoyouorifIwasquoting.(Derrida1992a:256)

Muchofthisnegateshisaudience'sabilitytomakeacriticaldecision.Itfeignstorestagethemomentofmadnessthatremarksthemomentofcrisisanddecision.
Derridaaffirmsthepossibilityofthatdecision,openingupthedualmomentofdecisionandmadnessweexaminedinhisreadingofFoucault.Italsopreparesforthe
momentwhenDerridawilltellmembersoftheJoyceFoundationthattherecanbenosuchthingasaJoyceFoundation.

Signingandcountersigningbothentailtakingthesameriskofaffirmationnecessitatedintheuseoftheyesesthataretheobjectoftheencyclopedicexplorationwithin
Derrida'smeditationonUlysses.WehaveseenhowJoyceviewedUlyssesasseparatedfrommadnessbya"transparentsheet."UnlikeFoucault'swriting,which
failedtofollowandaccountforthehyperbolicpathopenedupinthecriticalmoment,Joyce'sdoublecountersigningofHomerandShakespeareopeneduptheriskof
madness,towhichJoyceexposedhimselfintakingaffirmativeresponsibilityforthehyperboliclanguageheassembledintoUlyssesasadouble,positive
counterexampletotheHellenicandHebraictraditions.

Theprocessofquotingorcitingisasimilaractofaffirmation.Thecitationofaword,phrase,sentence,orpassageentailssayingyestothatpassageinaprocessof
countersigning.Inreproducingthewordsofanother,onesaysyestothosewords,andevenifonecountersignsthemwithdisagreementratherthanagreement,onestill
implicitlysaysyes:"Nowiftheactofquotingormentioningalsoundoubtedlypresupposessomesignature,someconfirmationoftheactofmentioning,thisremains
implicitandtheimplicitouiisnottobeconfusedwiththequotedormentionedoui"(Derrida1992a:257).Inotherwords,DerridacitesMolly'syes(ayesalready
signedbyJoyce)inFrench,whichinvolvestranslationand,insodoing,offersanimplicityestoMolly'syes(andtotheyesofJoyce'ssignature),butthisyesisnot
identicaltoMolly's.Thedifferencebetweentheminvolveshistoryandtranslation,aswellasthespacesbetweenfactandfictionandliteratureandphilosophythe
spacesanddifferencesinwhichDerridaconsciouslysituateshimselfinordertoproduce"UlyssesGramophone"asasimultaneouslydoublecountersignaturetoJoyce
(positive)andtheconceptofJoyceanexpertise(negative).

 Page70

DerridabeginshisfirstcirculationthroughUlysseswiththesamemetaphorheusesin"TwoWords"todescribehisreadingsofFinnegansWake:divinginto,or
becomingimmersedin,Joyce'sflowingriveroflanguage.In"TwoWords"hedescribesthe"endlessplunge[that]throwsyoubackontotheriverbank,onthebrinkof
anotherimmersion,adinfinitum''(Derrida1984a:148)in"UlyssesGramophone"hecombinesthesamemetaphorwithanironicassertionthathewillavoida
circulatoryreadingofUlysses:"Toputanend...tocirculationortoaninterminablecircumnavigation,toavoidtheaporia[withwhich"UlyssesGramophone"begins]
withaviewtoabetterbeginning,Ithrewmyselfinthewater...andIdecidedtoopenmyself,togetherwithyou,toachanceencounter"(Derrida1992a:258).

Thisnotionofa"chanceencounter"andtheplayofrandomnessinhisreadingofUlyssesisarhetoricalstrategythatsimultaneouslyremarkstherisksoperatinginthe
playofwriting.Thepositionofthe"I"inlanguagecanoffernomorethanasimulacrumofstabilityandcontrol.Thealterityoflanguageandthe"other"ofthe"I"are
alwaysatworkinawaythatcanunderminetheseeminglyconfidentcontroloflanguageby,andfrom,thepositionofthe"I."Derridaallowstheelementsof
randomnessandchancetocontaminatethereadingsofUlysseswithwhichhepreparedhisaddresstothesymposiumbutasthataddresswaspreparedinadvance,
the"chanceencounter"couldonlyappearaschancetotheaudience.ThisenablesDerridatousechanceandrandomnessasawayofbringinghisaudiencetoan
experienceofhis,andtheirown,indecision.TheycannotdecideifDerrida'sreadingpreprogrammedafeignedchanceencounterordoesinfacttraceaplaythat
chanceproducedashepreparedhisaddress.Atthesametime,randomnessandchancearealwaysnecessarilyapartofanyreading,anditisthisaspectofhisreading
ofUlyssesthatDerridaemphasizesduringhis"aimlesswanderings"throughthetextof"UlyssesGramoPhone."

ReadingUlysseslike"animmensepostcard"(Derrida1992a:260),Derridabeginswith"thecoincidenceofmeeting"passagein"Eumaeus"(U567).(AsDerek
Attridgenotes,Derridareferstothe1968PenguineditionofUlysses[Attridge1992b:256]butusestheFrench1948Gallimardeditioninhiscalculationofthenumber
ofouisinthetext[Derrida1992a:306n.25].)Movingonviareferencestothe"LacusMortis"(U411),Derridaopensupthecomplexnetworkofa"trace"or"relay"
ofpostcardsinUlysses.NotingthatJ.J.sharesJoyce'sinitials"notjustanyinitials"(Derrida1992a:260)DerridatranslatesJ.J.'s"opinion"that"apostcardisa
publication"inwhich"anactionmightlie"(U320),as"therewouldbecauseforacertainactiontobepursuedbefore

 Page71

thelaw,tosue,butalsothattheactionitselfmighttellanuntruth"(Derrida1992a:260).

TherelayofpostcardslinkingBloom,Molly,Gerty,Flynn,ReggyWylie,andBreenconstitutesa"discursive"or"narrativepath"thatDerridausestoreturntoan
"ineluctableproblemofmethod"thathepreviouslyexploredinThePostCard:intheoperationsofhumandesireinsocialgroups,inlanguageandcommunication,and
in''genealogicalfantasies,withtheirgenericcrossoversandchancedisseminations,adreamoflegitimation....wecannevertellwhobelongstowhom,whatto
whom,whattowhat,whotowhat.Thereisnosubjectofbelonging,nomorethanthereisanownerofthepostcard:itremainswithoutanyassigned
addressee"(Derrida1992a:261).

Fromthisrelayofpostcards,Derridaopensuptwomorerelaysthatmoveinoppositebutrelateddirections,eventuallymakingcontactwitheachotheragainasthey
aredoublepartsofthesamesingulartextualeconomy.TheserelaysfollowtwopathssimilartothosewesawDerridamapoutinhisreadingofFoucault.Thefirstcan
bereadasthehyperbolicpaththatcanadmitunexpectedencountersandallowfortheoperationsthatchanceorrandomencountersproduce.Theotheristhepathof
reasonthattreatsthechanceencounteras"other"toproducearationalexplanationforit.Ofcoursethesetwopathsarebothapartofthesameeconomy:the
"relationshipbetweenreason,madness,anddeathisaneconomy,astructureofdeferralwhoseirreducibleoriginalitymustberespected"(Derrida1978:62).

Followingonerelay,DerridamovesfromBloom'stelephoneconversationsandthegramophoneheimaginesasadeviceforlisteningtothevoicesofthedeadtothe
figureofElijah,theunexpectedguestwhoseappearanceisdeterminedbyalogicidentifyingElijahasthe"other"forthosewhoarehishostandwhotreathisarrivalas
chanceandunexpected,eventhoughtheymustbepreparedforthe"chance"ofhisarrival.Derridathenusesthefigureoftheprophetic"circumciser,"Elijah,asa
metaphorforJoyce'sreaders("No,Elijahisyou:youaretheElijahofUlysses,whoispresentedasalargetelephoneexchange...themarshallingyard,thenetwork
throughwhichallinformationmusttransit"[Derrida1992a:28586])asa"synecdocheofUlysseannarration,atoncesmallerandgreaterthanthewhole"(Derrida
1992a:286)andasafigureoftheapocalyptic"operatorofthetelephoneexchange"(Derrida1992a:289)whocouldconnectallthepossiblenarrativeandsignifying
linesofcommunicationcrisscrossingUlyssesaswellastheinnumerablelinesofexchangebetweenthetextanditsreaders.

IdentifyingtheJoyceansheaddresseswiththeprophetreinforcesDer

 Page72

rida'spositionasoneSusanHandelmancalls"hereticalhermeneutic."UsingthishermeneutictoexplorehisownreadingsofJoyce,Derridaallowsthefigureshe
generatesfromElijahtoproliferate,identifyinghimselfwiththeprophet:"Andevenifitweretrue,andevenif,yes,itistrue,youwouldnotbelievemeifItoldyouthat
ItooamcalledElijah:thisnameisnotinscribed,no,onmyofficialdocuments,butitwasgivenmeonmyseventhday"(Derrida1992a:284).Hethenmovesonto
explainthatthe"chaironwhichthenewbornbabyboyisheld[aspartofaritualwithintheHebrewreligion]iscalled'Elijah'schair'"(Derrida1992a:285).Because
theJoyceanswhomheaddressesare"Elijah,"DerridacancounthimselfamongtheirnumberbecausehebearsElijah'sname,heisevenmoreJoyceanthanthey
becausethenamedoesnotappearonhis''officialdocuments,"he,likethey,lackslegitimatesupportforaclaimtoJoyceanexpertise.

Derridalinksthehyperbolicrelaygeneratedfromthepostcard,throughthetelephone,tothefigureofElijahbackintoanotherironicrhetoricalstrategystructuring
"UlyssesGramophone."ThisstrategyprovidesthegroundforhisquestioningoftheauthorityoftheJamesJoyceFoundation.

ThissecondrelaygeneratedfromDerrida'smeditationonthepostcardsinUlyssesandhisreadingofthetextas"animmensepostcard"followsthesameshiftfrom
postcardsthroughtelephonecommunicationsandgramophonestothefigureofElijah.Itoffersitselfasmorerational,accountingforrandomeventsaschance
encounterssubsumablebythelogicoffactual,autobiographicalhistory.Intersectingatcertainpointswiththefirstrelay,thissecondonedetoursthroughDerrida's
personalexperiencesofbuyingpostcardsinTokyoandpreparingtheaddressforthesymposium:"SoIamintheprocessofbuyingpostcardsinTokyo,picturesof
lakes,andapprehensiveabouttheintimidatingtalktobegivenbeforethe'Joycescholars'onthesubjectofyesinUlysses,andontheinstitutionofJoyce
Studies"(Derrida1992a:264).

Movingalongthislogical,autobiographicalrelayfrompostcardstothetelephone,DerridarecordsatelephoneconversationwithhisfriendJeanMichelRabat:"When
JeanMichelRabatphonedme,Ihad,then,alreadydecidedtointerrogate,ifwecanputitlikethat,theyesesofUlyssesaswellastheinstitutionofJoyceanexperts,
andalsotoquestionwhathappenswhenthewordyesiswritten,quoted,repeated,archived,recorded,gramophoned,oristhesubjectoftranslationor
transfer"(Derrida1992a:266).

ThissecondrelaydrawstogethertheyesesinUlyssesandthetitleofDerrida'saddressthroughthetechnical,logicalmetaphors(asopposedtothehyperbolic
metaphorsgeneratedfromElijah)oftelegraphy,transmis

 Page73

sion,and"gramophoning":"atitlecrossedmymindwithakindofirresistiblebrevity,theauthorityofatelegraphicorder:hearsayyesinJoyce....So,youare
receivingme,Joyce'ssayingyesbutalsothesayingoftheyesthatisheard."ExploitingtheFrenchpunon"hearsay[oudire]"and'''hearsayyes,'l'ouidire,"Derrida
turnstotherelationshipbetweenspeechandwritingthatissoimportantinhisdeconstructiveprojects.Explainingthatthis"untranslatablehomonymy[oudireand
l'ouidire]canbeheard...ratherthanreadwiththeeyesthelastword,eyes...givingitselftoareadingofthegraphemeyesratherthanahearingofit,"Derrida
concludes:"YesinUlyssescanonlybeamarkatoncewrittenandspoken,vocalizedasagraphemeandwrittenasaphoneme,yes,inaword,
gramophoned"(Derrida1992a:267).

Like"TwoWords,""UlyssesGramophone"isorganizedbyaseriesofcircularrelaysoperatingaroundthedoublingdivideofafoldorcrease.Thetwointersecting
relays(thereadingofUlyssesasapostcardandtheautobiographicalpreparationoftheaddress,Derrida'sspokenpostcardtohisaudience)bothlinkupwiththe
doublestructurewithwhichDerrida"interrogates"Joycescholarsandthe"institutionofJoyceStudies."Thefirstpartofthisdoublestructuretakestheformofa
confessioninwhichDerridaadmitshisfears,hisintimidation,andhisapprehensionatspeakingonJoycetoanaudienceofexpertsonJoyce'sworkthesecondpart
consistsofadenialofthepossibilityofanykindofJoyceanauthorityorexpertisethatrevealstheironyoftheinitialconfession.Oneofthefoldsorcreaseswithinthis
doublestructureisprovidedbythefigureofElijahwhoalsoactsasalinkbetweenthetworelayswehaveexamined.

ConfessinghisintimidationatspeakinginfrontofJoycescholars,Derridadeclares,"Iamtoointimidated.Nothingintimidatesmemorethanacommunityofexpertsin
Joyceanmatters."Hethenacknowledgesthehonorofbeingaskedtoaddressthese"experts":"WhenIagreedtospeakbeforeyou,beforethemostintimidating
assemblyintheworld,beforethegreatestconcentrationofknowledgeonsuchapolymathicwork,Iwasprimarilyawareofthehonourthatwasbeingpaidme."
Beforethisacknowledgment,however,Derridahasalreadydeclaredhisintentioninquestioningtheconceptsoflegitimacyandcompetencethatheseemstoacceptin
referringtohisaudienceasexperts:"Ihaddecided...toputbeforeyouthequestionofcompetence,oflegitimacy,andoftheJoyceaninstitution.Whohasa
recognizedrighttospeakofJoyce,towriteonJoyce,andwhodoesthiswell?Whatdocompetenceandperformancehereconsistof?"(Derrida1992a:279).

Thefirstexplicitshiftfromthehumbletoneofthisapologiacouldbe

 Page74

Derrida'sexpressionofthesuspicionhefeltwhenheacceptedtheinvitationtospeakbeforethesymposium:"IfIhaveaccepted,itismainlybecauseIsuspectedsome
perversechallengeinalegitimationsogenerouslyoffered."ThisisfollowedbyaSocratic,ironicadmissionofincompetenceaimed,onesuspects,atJoyceanswho
mightdismissDerrida'swork.Shiftingfromthesecondperson(withwhichheaddressestheaudienceformuchoftheaddress)tothemoreneutralthirdperson,
Derridadeclaresthat"Incompetence,asthey(the'other',absentJoyceexperts[emphasisadded])areaware,istheprofoundtruthofmyrelationshiptothiswork
whichIknowafterallonlydirectly[myemphasis],throughhearsay[Derrida'soudireandthesubtitleofhisaddress],throughrumours[Derridaelsewherereveals
hisknowledgeoftheimportanceof"rumours"inJoyce'swritings],throughwhatpeoplesay,secondhandexegeses,readingsthatarealwayspartial[forDerridaall
readingsofJoycearepartial]''(Derrida1992a:280).

EmployingaUlysseanlikecunning,Derridadeclareshisintentionofrevealinga"deception"thatissimultaneouslyhisowndeceptioninusing"incompetence"todescribe
"theprofoundtruthof[his]relationshiptoJoyce"andthedeceptionofthose"experts"whoclaimthatDerridaisincompetent:"Fortheseexperts,Isaidtomyself,the
timehascomeforthedeceptionto[be]madeevident,andhowcoulditbedemonstratedordenouncedbetterthanattheopeningofalargesymposium?"Aftera
lengthydisquisitionontheconceptsofcompetence,legitimacy,andexpertiseinJoycestudies,Derridasetsasidehisirony:"Basically,therecanbenoJoycean
competence,inthecertainandstrictsenseoftheconceptofcompetence,withthecriteriaofevaluationandlegitimationthatareattachedtoit.Therecanbeno
Joyceanfoundation,noJoyceanfamilytherecanbenoJoyceanlegitimacy"(Derrida1992a:282).

Atthesametimethathedeclaresthisimpossibilityofcompetence,Derridaalsoclaimsacertaincompetenceforhimself.Wehaveseenhowheidentifieshimselfwith
Elijah("ItooamcalledElijah").Immediatelyafterthis,hedeclaresthatElijah's"name[andthushisown,"other"name]shouldbegiventoallthe'chairs'ofJoycean
studies,tothe'panels'and'workshops'organizedbyyourfoundation"(Derrida1992a:285).Inotherwords,Derrida's"other"nameofElijahshouldbethenameofthe
studyofJoyceatallthesymposiums.ThoseJoyceanswhomDerridaalsoidentifiesasElijah("youaretheElijahofUlysses")wouldalsogivetheirnamestothechairs
ofthesymposiums,butDerridaidentifieshimselfastheoutsiderwhoisboththe"guest"ofthesymposiumandtheElijahwhose"secondcoming"and"passingthrough"
Joyceans"areawaiting"(Derrida1992a:284).

ThroughoutthisplayfulcombinationofhisreadingofUlysses,thenar

 Page75

rativeofhisautobiography,andhisinterrogationofJoycestudies,DerridaexpressesthesametoneofcomiccelebrationandadmirationforJoycethatconcludes"Two
Words."HeagainconsidersJoyceinrelationshiptoHegel,whoislisted(albeitintheironicphrase"withoutmentioningHegel")withothermajorWesternwritersas
beingincapableofcalculatingthescopeandachievementsofJoyce's"feat"ofan''archivizationandconsultationofdataunheardof...forallthegrandfathers[Plato,
Shakespeare,Dante,Vico,andHegel]whomIhavejustnamed,omittingHomer"(Derrida1992a:280).

InvokingHegel'sphilosophical,encyclopedicproject,Derridaallowsthatthe"Joycescholarhastherighttodisposeofthetotalityofcompetenceintheencyclopedic
fieldoftheuniversitas."InhavingathandJoyce's"computerofallmemory,"thescholar"playswiththeentirearchiveofcultureatleastofwhatiscalledWestern
culture,and,init,ofthatwhichreturnstoitselfaccordingtotheUlysseancircleoftheencyclopedia"(Derrida1992a:281).

Theconclusionof"UlyssesGramophone"reiteratesthequotationofMolly'syesesandemphasizesthecomedic,laughterproducing,andcommunallysharedliftingof
repressionofUlyssesthatDerridastressesinmuchoftheaddress:"Yes,yes,thisiswhatarouseslaughter,andweneverlaughalone,asFreudrightlysaid,never
withoutsharingsomethingofthesamerepression.Or,rather,thisiswhatleadstolaughter,justasit,andtheid,leadtothought.Andjustasit,andtheid,givequite
simply,beyondlaughterandbeyondtheyes,beyondtheyes/no/yesoftheme/notme,ego/notegowhichcanalwaysturntowardsthedialectic"(Derrida
1992a:308).

 Page76

Chapter7
SpeakingofJoyce(II):
Joyce,Deconstruction,andFeminism
ThethirdtimederridaspokeextensivelyonJoycewasduringaninterviewwithDerekAttridge"inLagunaBeachovertwodaysinApril1989"(Attridge1992a:33).
Asthetitleimplies,"'ThisStrangeInstitutionCalledLiterature':AnInterviewwithJacquesDerrida"ismoreconcernedwithDerrida'sideasonliteraturethanhis
specificideasonJoycebutDerridacitesJoyce'sworktoexpresssomeofhisspecificconcernsaboutliterature'salterity.Pointingtowardapossible"logic"forthe
singularityofatext,DerridaoutlineshisresponsetoJoyceastheresponseofan"other"inthe"particular,quitesinglemoment''ofhisownattemptstoaccountfor,and
countersign,Joyce'swriting(Derrida1992a:70).

ThesingularityofJoyce'swritingisdoubledbyDerrida'sresponsetoit.Linkingthesedoublesingularitieswiththerepetitionnecessarytolanguage'siterability,Derrida
reiteratesUlysses'doubleyesesasthecoun

 Page77

tersignatureofhisownreadingandwritinginresponsetoJoyce'stext(andthatexternaltextisthe"other"ofDerrida's),explaininghowthiscountersigningentailsa
doubleresponsibilityforthattext:"[t]hiscountersigningresponse...whichisresponsible(foritselfandfortheother),says'yes'tothework,andagain'yes,thiswork
wastherebeforeme,withoutme,Itestify',evenifitbeginsbycallingforthecorespondentcountersignature"(Derrida1992a:70emphasisadded).

InadditiontoprovidingDerridawithexemplarsforsomeofthespecificstructuralandtextualoperationsheusesindeconstructingwritingandallowingliteratureto
contaminatephilosophy,Joyce'stextsalsoprovideDerridawithaseriesofimportanttouchstonesonwhichhetestshisideasaboutliteraryandphilosophicalwriting
andthenatureoftherelationshipsbetweenthetwo.

Derrida'sgeneralviewsonthesetopicsspecifyhowJoyce'swritinghascontributedtothedevelopmentofdeconstructivetheory.Coveringadiverserangeoftopics
includingthenatureofphilosophyandliterature,therelationshipsbetweenthetwo,thepurposesofhisownwriting,andthemuchoverlookedhistoricalbasisfor
deconstruction,Derrida'sdiscussioncitesJoyceonanumberofoccasionsasameasureforevaluatinghisconcernsaboutbothliteratureandphilosophy.

Derridaconsciouslypositionshiswritingonthebordersbetweenphilosophyandliterature,markingthispositioningasautobiographical.Discussinghis
"autobiographical"and"adolescentdesire"towrite,heexplainsthatthisdesire"wasasobscureasitwascompulsive,bothpowerlessandauthoritarian."It"directed
[him]towardsomethinginwritingwhichwasneither"literaturenorphilosophy(Derrida1992b:34).Derridakeepswritingbecauseofa"totalizationorgatheringup,''
anditisclearfrommanyofhisstatementsaboutJoycethatwehavealreadyexaminedthatJoyce'ssingularityconsistsinpartofjustsuchatotalizingandgathering.
JoyceisclearlyapartofDerrida's"internalpolylogue,"andDerridawasinitiallyledtoreadandexploreJoyce'swritingbyan"adolescentdreamofkeepingatraceof
allthevoiceswhichweretraversing[him]"(Derrida1992b:3435).

Joyce'sfigureinDerrida's"internalpolylogue"playsamajorroleinDerrida'sspecificwritingstrategiesbyprovidingamodeloftheliteraryandphilosophical
consolidationofhistory,whichDerridaseesasasimultaneousculminationoftheempiricalpastandaprescriptivemodelofwritingforthefutureofa"neworder."
WhileUlysses"arriveslikeonenovelamongothersthatyouplaceonyourbookshelfandinscribeinagenealogy,"and,

 Page78

likeotherworksofliterature,"hasitsancestryanditsdescendants,"itisuniqueforDerridainhavingenabledJoycetoachievehisdreamofa"specialinstitutionforhis
oeuvre,inauguratedbyitlikeaneworder."Derridaseeshimselfashaving"tounderstandandshare[Joyce's]dream"bymakingithisown,"recognizing[hisown
dream]init''and"shar[ing]itinbelongingtothedreamofJoyce,intakingapartinit...walkingaroundinhisspace."Joycehasauniversalimpactontheliterary
institutionandaconstitutionaleffectonhisreaders:"Aren'twe,today,"Derridaasks,"peopleorcharactersinpartconstituted(asreaders,writers,critics,teachers)in
andthroughJoyce'sdream?Aren'tweJoyce'sdream,hisdreamreaders,theoneshedreamedofandwhomwedreamofbeinginourturn?"(Derrida1992b:74).

AfeatureofJoyce'swritingthatmostconcernsDerridaisitsproductionofthedoublespaceswehavealreadyexploredandwillexploreinmoredetailinthenext
chapters.Thesespaces,whichDerridareinscribesinthedouble,textual,andautobiographicalspacesofhisownwriting,are"notonly[those]ofaninstitutedfiction
butalso[of]afictiveinstitutionwhichinprincipleallowsonetosayeverything."Joyce's"sayingeverything"isaspecificandpreciseexampleoftheHegelianlike
encyclopedicproject"togather,bytranslating,allfiguresintooneanother,tototalizebyformalizing."This"sayingeverything""isalso[themovement]tobreakout
of...prohibitions.Toaffranchiseoneself...ineveryfieldwherelawcanlaydownlaw."ForDerrida,literaturepossessesapotentiallyliberatingpowerthat"in
principle,""tends...todefyorliftthelaw"(Derrida1992b:36).

In"UlyssesGramophone"Joyce'ssignatureandtheyesoccupying,andoccupiedby,Joyce'sreadershavethe"destination"of"destroyingtheveryrootof[the]
competence"thattheymakepossible.Theyarealsocapableof"deconstructingtheuniversityinstitution,itsinternalorinterdepartmentaldivisions,aswellasits
contractwiththeextrauniversityworld"(Derrida1992a:283).WhatDerridasaysoftheinstitutionofliteratureingeneralisthereforeclearlyapplicabletotheJoyce
institution:"itisaninstitutionwhichtendstooverflowtheinstitution"(Derrida1992b:36).

"ThisStrangeInstitutionCalledLiterature"revealsDerrida'sreservationsabout,andmistrustof,certainpopularviewsofdeconstruction,andthesearerelevanttohis
readingofJoyceasawriterwithoutwhomdeconstructionwouldnothavebeenpossible.ThesereservationsincludetheviewwehavealreadyseenofDerridaas"very
muchahistorian,veryhistoricist."Derridadoesnottrustthose"people[who]believeorhaveaninterestinmakingbelieve"thatdeconstructionisnotconcernedwith
history(Derrida

 Page79

1992b:54).Aswehavenotedseveraltimes,DerridaclearlyviewsJoyce'swritingasperformingahistoricaltaskinitsgatheringtogetherandencyclopedictotalizingof
Westernculture,evenifitdoessobyfictionalizingitwithinthe"fictive"institutionofliterature.ThereasonDerridausedJoyceasacounterexampletotheviewsof
HusserlandLevinasisthathistextsofferamodelofhistoryattemptingtofreeitselffromtheempiricalandhistoricistideasofhistorythatwesawdeconstructedby
Derrida'sreadingsofthosephilosophers.

Thereisa"sortofparadoxicalhistoricityintheexperienceofwriting"thatmayhelpexplainwhysomepeopleviewDerrida'sworkasunhistoricalorevenantihistorical.
Theparadoxisproducedbytheoppositionbetweenhistoryasaseriesofempirical,objectivepastevents,whichitisthehistorian'sdutytorecord,andthevital,fictive
recreationofthoseeventswithinthepresenceofanarrativethatsetsthemtoworkintherecreationofanecessarybutunmotivatedaccountofhistoryasthesource
forfictivenarratives.A"writercanbeignorantornaiveinrelationtothehistoricaltraditionwhichbearshimorher,orwhichs/hetransforms,invents[or]
displaces"(Derrida1992b:54),butthesamewriter'sexperiencemaybeavitalhistoricalexperience:"Iwonderwhether,evenintheabsenceofhistoricalawarenessor
knowledges/hedoesn't'treat'historyinthecourseofanexperiencewhichismoresignificant,morealive,morenecessary...thanthatofsomeprofessional
'historians'naivelyconcernedto'objectify'thecontentofascience."

This"alive"and"necessary"treatmentofhistoryisbynomeanslimitedtoawritersuchasJoyce,althoughDerridaobviouslyseesJoyce'streatmentofhistoryinthis
light:"WhatIhavejustsuggestedisasvalidforJoyce,thatimmenseallegoryofhistoricalmemory,asforFaulkner,whodoesn'twriteinsuchawaythathegathers
togetherateverysentence,andinseverallanguagesatonce,thewholeofWesternculture"(Derrida1992b:55).

WhatreassuresDerridathathelikesJoyceisthelaughterandjouissanceJoyce'swritingsreleaseinhisreaders.Laughterisameansofawakingfromthenightmareof
historybylooseningtherepressive,historical,andempirical,linearsuppressionoftheplayoflanguage'sinherentpolysemy.TheliftingofrepressionmarkedbyJoyce's
laughterisanimportantdeconstructiveeffectofJoyce'swritinganddeconstructioningeneral:"Effectivedeconstruction.Deconstructionperhapshastheeffect,ifnot
themission,ofliberatingforbiddenjouissance"(Derrida1992b:56).

Derrida'smistrustofthosewhoviewdeconstructionasunhistoricalislinkedtotheirlackofhumorandtheirroleaswhatDerridaterms"masters

 Page80

of'kettlelogic',"whoarethe"alloutadversariesof'deconstruction'."Itisn'tdifficulttoimaginethatanumberoftheseadversarieswouldalsodislikeJoyceforthe
laughterheprovokes,becausethey"blamethosetheycallthe'deconstructionists'fordeprivingthemoftheirhabitualdelectationinthereadingofgreatworksorthe
richtreasuresoftradition,andsimultaneouslyforbeingtooplayful,fortakingtoomuchpleasure,forsayingwhattheylikefortheirownpleasure,etc."

FromDerrida'sperspective,readersofJoycewhoappreciatethegiftoflaughterthathiswritingsofferappreciatedeconstructioneveniftheychoosetoavoidusingthe
term.Ontheotherhand,thosewhousethe"ridiculousvocabulary"of"deconstructionism"and"deconstructionists"(termswhichrecentlyhavebeenfurthercomically
transformedinto"deconstructionalism''and"deconstructionalists")"understandinsomeobscurewaythatthe'deconstructionists'...arenotthosewhomostdeprive
themselvesofpleasure"(Derrida1992b:56).

ThelaughterandplayfulnessDerridaadmiresinJoyce'swritinglackneitherseriousnessnorlogic.BothareatworkinJoyce'swritingevenasitoverturnsthehierarchy
privilegingseriousnessandlogicoverplayfulnessandthelogic(s)oftheother("other"logicssuchasthoseoftheunconscious,ofanagramsandparonomasia).The
Wake'sseriousmindedprofessor,whoaccidentallypuncturesamanuscriptwithhisforkwhileeatinghisbreakfastandthendevoteshistimetoestablishingthe
significanceoftheholesinthemanuscript,notonlyoffersasatiricviewofacademicsandtheirprojectsbutalsobringslowasterileselfimportantsenseofseriousness,
doingsowithinanetworkofplay.

UlyssesandFinnegansWakearethetextsDerridamostadmiresfortheirdeconstructiveeffects(includingthejouissanceandrepressionliftinglaughtertheyprovoke
andunleash).WehavealreadylookedatwhyDerridarespectstheuniquenessandhistoricalsingularityofbothtexts,recognizingthateach"worktakesplacejust
once"andthatitsuniquenessis"historicalthroughandthrough"(Derrida1992b:67).Atthesametime,thereisaparadoxtothesingularityofJoyce'swritingthatisat
workinthesingularityofalltheliterarytextsDerridaadmires.Thesingularityofthe"dateandthesignature....whichconstituteorinstitutetheverybodyofthework,
ontheedgebetweenthe'inside'andthe'outside',ofthework,...necessitatesanattentiontohistory,contextandgenre"(Derrida1992b:6768).Joyce's
"condensationofhistory,oflanguage,oftheencyclopedia,remainshereindissociablefromanabsolutelysingularsignature,andthereforealsoofadate,ofalanguage,
ofanautobiographicalinscription"(Derrida1992b:43).

 Page81

Atthesametime,the"absolutesingularity"ofJoyce'stexts(andofthosebywriterslikePonge,Bataille,Artaud)is"nevergivenasafact,anobjectorexistingthing...
initself,itisannouncedinaparadoxicalexperience."Theparadoxisthatan"absolute,absolutelypuresingularity,iftherewereone,wouldnotevenshowup,orat
leastwouldnotbeavailableforreading.Tobecomereadable,ithastobedivided,toparticipateandbelong"(Derrida1992b:68).Thissameparadoxisatworkin
theequivocityofJoyce'swritingweconsideredwhilelookingatDerrida'scomparisonofJoyceandHusserl.Joyce'sencyclopedicprojectofabsorbingandarchiving
asmanyfragmentsashecouldfromWesternculture,fromitsclassicalandreligiousinstitutions,itslanguages,epistemes,mythemes,andnarratives,requiredsome
formofunivocitythatwouldmakethesefragmentsreiterableinacommunicableform.

ForDerrida,Joycesuccessfullysubsumesinnumerablemetaphysicalconceptssuchasplatonicidealforms,theChristian,paternalcreator,theunityofthesubject(of
theself,ofdivinebeings,andsoon)andthecleardistinctionsbetweenasuperiorgoodandinferiorevil(aswellasthechainsofothersignifiersattachedtothesetwo).
Paradoxically(andthisparadoxisrelatedtothatofJoyce's"singularity"),hiswritingis"ladenwithobviousandcanonical'metaphysical'theses,"but"theoperationof
[this]writing"has"morepowerful'deconstructive'effectsthanatextproclaimingitselfradicallyrevolutionarywithoutinanywayaffectingthenormsormodesof
traditionalwriting''(Derrida1992b:50).

WehaveseenasimpleexampleofthisparadoxasitisfoundintheWake'srepetitionofthemetaphysicalproclamation"IamAlphaandOmega...saiththeLord,
whichis,andwhichwas,andwhichistocome"(Rev.1.8)in"Annawas,Liviais,Plurabelle'stobe"(FW215.24).ThewordsoftheBible'smalegodandcreatorare
deconstructivelyoverturnedastheyareassignedtoJoyce'smaternalwordandwife.Thetraditional,historicalprivilegingofthemaleoverthefemaleiscontinually
overturnedinJoyce'swritingasthedissonantvoicesofthemales(Bloom,Boylan,Stephen,HCE,Shem,andShaun)emergefromwithinalanguageidentifiedas
female(Molly'ssoliloquy,Issy's"gramma'sgrammar,"ALP's"languoofflows,"Anna'sgrammes).

WhentheWakeisreadasthedreamofthemaleHCEandanarrativeofhisphallic"phall"(FW4.15)andsubsequentresurrection(andreerection),celebratingthe
retumescenceofhis"Hotandhairy,hugon["hugeone"]...wherethefalskinbegins.Smoosasaninfams"(FW621.2425),itobviouslyoperatesinaphallocentric
mode.In"thinkingofJoyce,"however,DerridaidentifiesJoyce'sworkasoneofthose"whicharehighly

 Page82

'phallocentric'intheirsemantics,theirintendedmeaning,eventheirtheses"but"produceparadoxicaleffects,paradoxicallyantiphallocentricthroughtheaudacityofa
writingwhichinfactdisturbstheorderorthelogicofphallocentrismortouchesonlimitswherethingsarereversed"(Derrida1992b:50).

TheparadoxescreatedinthedeconstructiveeffectsofJoyce'swritingmayhelpanswerthequestionofifhiswritingcanbereadasfeminist.Theargumentsforand
againstJoyceasfeministaretoonumerousandcomplextorestatehere,asistheevidence(historical,political,contextual,biographical,textual)usedtosupportthem.
ThereislittledoubtmanyfeministswouldseeJoyce'spersonalviewsonthedifficultiesoflivingwithwomen,ontheir"amorality,"theirsupposedlackofphilosophical
skills,aswellashisantifeministstatements(Ellmann1983:435,529,168,634)asconclusiveproofthatJoycewasantifeministormisogynistic.Theimportantquestion
fromDerrida'sperspective,however,ishowJoyce'swritingsproduceacriticismofphallocentrismanddeconstructtheirownphallocentriceffects.

Notingthatmuchacademic,feministcriticismis"anidentifiableinstitutionalphenomenoncontemporarywiththeappearanceofwhatiscalleddeconstructioninthe
modernsense,"Derridapointsoutthatthiscontemporaneitydoesnotmeanfeministcriticism"necessarilyoralways...depend[s]onit."Feminismdoes,however,
''belongtothesameconfigurationandparticipateinthesamemovement,thesamemotivation,"eventhoughthe"strategiescan...bedifferent,beopposedhereand
there,andinequalitiescanappear"(Derrida1992b:5758).Themostobvioussharedmovementbetweenfeministcriticismanddeconstructionisthattowardacritique
ofphallocentrism.

ForDerrida,"thereisnotextbeforeandoutsidereading,"andintheDerridaafterandinsideJoyce'stextwehaveexaminedsofar,hepaysconsiderableattentionto
thepositionsofthefemale.Muchof"UlyssesGramophone"drawsonMolly'sdiscoursetostressthevaluableliftingofrepressionprovokedbyheraffirmative,
laughterreleasingyeses.TheyesesaresignedbyMollyandcountersignedbyJoyce.ForDerrida,the"yeswouldthenbethatofwomanandnotjustthatofthe
mother,theflesh,theearth,asis...saidofMolly'syesesinthemajorityofreadingsdevotedtoher:'Penelope,bed,flesh,earth,monologue'[DerridacitesGilbert
1963:328]...andhereJoyceisnomorecompetentthananyoneelse"(Derrida1992a:287).Settingasidethisquestionofcompetence,DerridavaluesJoyce's
creationofMolly'sfemaleyesforexpressing"thetruthofacertain

 Page83

truth,"butheseesthe"lawofgender"as"overdeterminedandinfinitelymorecomplicated,whetherwearedealingwithsexualorgrammaticalgender,oragainwith
rhetoricaltechnique."TocallMolly'ssoliloquyamonologue(inthesenseofoneword,onesetofwordsorevenonelogic)is,forDerrida,''todisplayasomnambulistic
carelessness"(Derrida1992a:288).

Deconstructionrevealstheinadequacyoftraditional,phallocentric,literarytaxonomyindealingwiththecomplex,doubleparadoxicaljouissanceofliterarydiscourse.
Molly'ssoliloquyismuchmorecomplexthanthegenerictermmonologue(andallthattermimplies)canreveal.Itisnotregulatedbyasingularormonologic,andits
effectsextendwelloutsidethelimitsofitsborders.InitsrecuperationofeventsinMolly'slifethattakeplacebeforeJune16,thesignifyingplayofMolly'snight
thoughtsextendsbeyondthelimitsofUlysses'narrationofthatday(this,ofcourse,isalsotrueofmanyothersectionsofthetext).Theshiftingperspectivesonthe
myriadsubjects(includingBloom,home,strangeness,music,trains,men,women,menstruation,ejaculation,clothing,Howth,Gibraltar,oysters,Stephen,Italian)of
Molly'sdiscourseproducemanymoreeffectsthanthoseofthesortofsingularthematicdevelopmentsooftenassociatedwithmonologues.

DerridadescribeshisattemptsatcountingalltheyesesoccurringinUlyssesandrecordsthathefound"morethan222inall,ofwhichmorethanaquarter,atleast79,
areinMolly'ssocalledmonologue"(Derrida1992a:306).Fromoneperspective,hereadsUlyssesasavast,complexnetworkofaffirmationsustainedandregulated
bytheseyesesandtheireffects.HeasksisitpossibletoreadtheyesescirculatingthroughMolly'ssoliloquy"withoutmakingthemresonatewithalltheyesesthat
preparethewayforthem,correspondtothem,andkeepthemhangingonattheotherendofthelinethroughoutthewholebook?"(Derrida1992a:288).

Hisansweristhatsuchareadingisnotpossible.EventhoughMolly"isnotJoyce...heryescircumnavigatesandcircumcises,encirclingthelastchapterofUlysses,
sinceitisatonceherfirstandherlastword,hersendoff...andherclosingfall:'Yesbecauseheneverdid'andfinally'andyesIsaidyesIwillYes'"(Derrida
1992a:288).Molly'sfinalyesoperatesasasignaturetothetextinitstypographicalplacement(the"eschatologicalfinal'Yes'occupiestheplaceofthesignatureatthe
bottomrightofthetext"[Derrida1992a:288])andasacountersignaturetothesignatureofthetextitselfandJoyce'ssignature:"Evenifonedistinguishes,asonemust,
Molly's'yes'fromthatofUlysses,ofwhichsheisbutafigureandamoment,evenifonedistinguishes...thesetwosignatures...fromthatofJoyce,theyread

 Page84

eachotherandcallouttoeachother.Tobeprecise,theycalltoeachotheracrossayes,whichalwaysinauguratesasceneofcallandrequest:itconfirmsand
countersigns."TheaffirmationofUlysses,likeallaffirmation,"demandsapriorconfirmation,repetition,safekeeping,andthememoryoftheyes"(Derrida1992a:288).

Derrida'sreadingofJoyce'syesessupportsafeministcritiqueofphallogocentrismbyidentifyingthelimitsofitscriticism.Derrida'sattemptatcountingalltheyesesin
Ulyssescanbereadasahumorousparodyofalinear,empirical,andhistoricistattemptatprovidingobjectivestatisticalproofforthethesisthateachyesoperates
onlywithintheimmediatecontextinwhichitappears.Ineffect,suchcatalogingand"proving"mustsay"no"tothepossibilitythateachyescalls,confirms,and
countersignsitscounterpartsacrossthebordersofthecontextsinwhicheachyesissituated.Thephallogocentricgoalofdismantlingpunsinordertoidentifytheir
componentpartsandexplainwhytheymayproducelaughterisaserioustaskworthyoftheWake's"graveBrofsor,"butitcannotaccountfor,orexplain,thelaughter
orjouissancethatcancomefromreadingthepun.Itmustfirstforgetandthendenythattheprimarypurposeofthepunistoprovokelaughterinanaffirmationof
language'scommunicativevitality.Derrida'sattempttoaffirmthepowerofJoyce'syesesdemandsapracticeofwritingtocountersign,affirm,andrememberthe
laughterthatin''thebuginning"wastheJoycean"woid"(FW378.29).Suchawritingpracticeentailslooseningthecontroloflanguage'spolysemybythemodelofthe
lineandawillingnesstorisknegationanddenialforthepossibilityofpositiveaffirmation.Itisawritingpracticeseekingtoremovethebarsustainingthelogical
distinctionoftheeither/orinfavorofaffirmativelyconjoiningeither/orwithand.

InexploringtherelayofyesesinUlysses,Derridaopensupthedoublespaceofwritingmadepossibleandsustainedbythisrelay.ThereisMolly'sfemaleyes
countersigningJoyce'syes,andbothareatworkintheaffirmativeyesofthetextitself.Whileaphallogocentric,contextualizingtaxonomymighttrytoattachgenderto
theyesesofJoyceandMolly,Derridasuggeststhattheyesoperatesbeyondgender:"Beforeaskingwhosigns,ifJoyceisorisnotMolly...beforechatteringabout
sexualdifferenceasdualityandexpressingone'sconvictionsasto...Mollyas'onesidedlywomanlywoman'...Molly,thebeautifulplant,theherborpharmakon
orthe'onesidedlymasculine'characterofJamesJoyce...onewillaskoneselfwhatasignatureis"(Derrida1992a:29596).Theanswertothisquestionisinvolved
withthe"Whatis?"thatisthefoundingquestionofphilosophy.Thesignature"requiresayesmore'ancient'thanthequestion

 Page85

'whatis?'sincethisquestionpresupposesit,ayesmoreancientthanknowledge[andknowledgeevenofbeingandgender].""Onewillaskoneselfforwhatreasonthe
yesalwaysappearsasa[doubled]yes,yes.Isaytheyesandnottheword'yes,'becausetherecanbeayeswithoutaword"(Derrida1992a:296).

LikeMolly'saffirmativeyeses,thelanguageofFinnegansWakesupportsaviewofJoyce'swritingassharingthefeministcritiqueofphallocentrism.Wehavealready
seenthatitscircularnarrativestellthetaleofHCE'sphallic"phall"andcelebratehisequallyphallicresurrection,butthisisonlyoneoftheWake'smultiplenarratives
andallofthesenarrativesarearticulatedinalanguagethatidentifiesitselfasALP's"languoofflows"(FW621.22),afemalelanguageoperatingatthemarginsofthe
"limpidymarge"onwhichALPhas"mademehoom"(FW624.14).Therearenumerousnarrativesmarkedorsignedbyfiguresofmasculinegender,buttheseare
enfoldedinametalanguageidentifiedwiththemetaphoricfemalecycleofwater(andblood)inwhichtheLiffeyflowsouttoseaonlytoreturnthroughthenaturalcycle
ofevaporation,condensation,andprecipitationthatfeedsthesmallbrookoftheLiffeyasitflowsfrommountainssouthofDublin.WehaveseenAnnaLivia
Plurabelle'snameconfirmthefemalenatureofthetext'smetalanguageintracingtheevolutionofWesternlanguagesfromtheClassicalGreek,Ana,through,or''via,"
theLatin,Livia,tothemodernFrench,plu,belle,andelle.

ThebabbleofALP'sbrookpunswiththeWake'suseofthestoryofBabel,andthelastJoyceanpassageDerridaconsidersinhis"TwoWordsforJoyce,"endswith
twowords(an"other""twowords"forJoyce)thatareadoubleinscriptionofthesameinthefamiliar,maternalname"Mummum"(Anna'snameisalsoahomonymof
theTurkishwordformother[McHugh1980:104]).Thisdoubleinscriptionofsingularity(mumissingulartheinfantlikerepetitiondoublesitssingularity)concludesa
passageinwhichthephallogocentricsubjectofthepaternalcreatorisconvertedinthetraversalthroughlaughterintothisdoublesignifierofmaternityandsilence:
"Loud,heapmiseriesuponusyetentwineourartswithlaughterslow!Hahehihohu.Mummum"(FW259.710).

Derridareadsthe"Hahehihohu"sequenceasthefinal,expiringarticulationsofthe"Loud,"orLord,the"He"whodeclares"war,"andconfoundsthelanguagesof
thoseattemptingtobuildthetowerofBabel.This"lastvocalization,theseriesofexpiringvowels,voicesoutofbreath,"marksthefinalcadenceofthe"Loud,"who
"resounds...giveshimselftobeheard...articulateshimselfandmakeshimselfheardrightuptotheend"(Derrida1984a:157).

 Page86

Inhisreadingofthispassage,Derridaaffirmsthematernalvoicemarkingandcountersigningtheexpiring,finalarticulationsofthe"He"whoisat"war,"andthis
maternalvoicecanbereadasanechoofMolly'sultimate"Yes'':"Thefinal'Mummum,'maternalsyllablerightneartheend,could,ifonesowished,bemadeto
resoundwiththefeminine'yes'inthelastlineofUlysses,theyesofMrsBloom,ofALP,orofany'wee'girl,ashasbeennoted,Eve,Mary,Isis,etc.TheGreat
Motheronthesideofthecreationandthefall"(Derrida1984a:157).

DerridafollowsWilliamYorkTindall'stracingofthefemalerelayinwhich"theword'hill'playsmoreorlessinnocentlywiththeFrenchpersonalpronoun'il',tosay
nothingofthe'le':'Ashe[HCE]isthehillinJoyce'sfamilialgeography,sosheistheriver[...].This'wee'(oroui)girlisEve,Mary,Isis,anywomanyoucanthink
of,andapouleatonceariverpool,awhore,andalittlehen'"(Tindall1969:4Derrida1984a:157).

Fromthe"Mummum"concludingthissectionDerridadrawsourattentiontothebeginningofthelessonssectionfollowingit:"Andifthepageisturned,afterabroad
blank,thereisthebeginningofBookII,Chapter2(Icontentmyselfherewithlettingreadandresound)"(Derrida1984a:157):

Aswetherearewherearewearewethere UNDEETUBI.
fromtomtittottoteetootomtotalitarian.Tea
teatoooo.(FW260.13andrighthandmargin)

Derridadoesnotpursueareadingofthissection,buthehasalreadytaughthislistenershowto.Usingsomeofthedeconstructive"nonconcepts"Derridauncoversat
workinJoyce'swriting,wecanreadtheseopeninglinesasapreciserestagingofthewaysinwhichthefemale"Mummum"ensheathestheexpiringvoiceofthemale
"Hahehihohu."Theletter"t"thatislinkedtothemaleelementsintheWakedominatesandregulatestherhythmofthepredicative"tomtittottoteetootomtotalitarian,"
anditsdominanceofthephraseismarkedas"totalitarian."Inthefollowingphrase,"Teateatoooo,"theplayofthe"t"islimitedandthentruncatedbythetechniqueof
"capsever"ing(FW260.4).

This"capsever"ing,orseveringofthecap,orcapital(theoperationtakesplaceintheseveringofthe"s"from"sever"anditsgraftingontotheendof"cap"),isa
processofdecapitalizationDerridaelsewherediscusseswithinthecontextofthegeneraleconomyofwriting.Capitalizationisaprocessbywhichcapital(inbothits
economicandlinguisticsense)canbestoredupwithintheeconomyofwriting.Itguaranteesthepowerofthepropername(ofthebook,theauthor,and,in
phallocentricterms,oftheFather)anditsabilitytodominatethateconomy.Theprocessofde

 Page87

capitalizingisinvolvedinwriting'sabilitytoruinthepropernameandlimititspower.

Thisremarkingoftheantiphallocentricprocesstakesplaceasthecapitalof"Tea"isreducedtothelowercaseof"tea"andthelowercase"t"of"too"isseveredto
producethefemale"oo''thatengagesinaplaywithALP'sdouble,overlappingcircles(293).Itisamovementfromthemasculinepropername"tom"("tomtittot,"
"teetootomtotalitarian"[emphasisadded])tothefemale"oo."Thissimultaneouslimitationandtruncationofthemasculineandthesubsequentshifttothefemininemirror
theshiftthroughlaughterfromthemasculine"Hahehihohu"(emphasisadded),inwhichadecapitalizingalsotakesplace,tothefemale"Mummum"ofthelastsection.
Atthesametime,thepassagealsorestagesthesubversionofthephallocentriccentralcolumnoftextinthelessonssection.Thismovementagainstthepowerofthe
phallocentricisalsoechoedinthecentralcolumn'sexclamation,"Amshot,saysthebigguard"(FW260.67).

AsMargotNorris'spioneeringTheDecenteredUniverseofFinnegansWake(Norris1974)firstmadeclear,Joyce'swritingoperatesaccordingtotheFreudian
principlesofcondensation,displacement,andsubstitution.Italsoarticulatesthe"either/or"grammaticalconstruction(signifyingachoiceofalternativesattheconscious
level)becoming(attheleveloftheunconscious)asignifierofconjunction.Attheleveloftheunconscious,theformula"either/or=and"operates.Thisformulaissetto
workinthelessonspassage,"Enteneller,eitheror.And!"(FW281.2628).EmployingFreud'sprincipleofnegation,Joyce'swritingtakesthisformulaonestep
furtherbynegatingthe"And"with"Nay"andthenprivilegingpleasureand/orpreferencewith"rather!":

Enteneller,

eitheror.
And! INTERROGATION.

Nay,rather! EXCLAMATION.

(FW281.2528)

Thiscritiqueofphallogocentrismarticulatesamovementfromthelogocentricdivisionbetween"either"and"or"totheconjunctionof"and,"andthen,throughthe
operationof"nay,"rearticulatestheprincipleofnegationwithwhichtheconsciousdeniesthosepleasuresthataretheobjectofunconsciousdesire.

Removingtheeither/ordistinctionmakesanyfinalidentificationofgenderextremelydifficult,ifnotimpossible,whichissomethingJoyce'stextalreadyknowswhenit
tellsusthat"inthisscherzaradeofone'sthousand

 Page88

onenightinessesthatswordofcertaintywhichwouldindentifidethebodyneverfalls"(FW51.45).WhilewecanidentifyALPasfemaleandHCEasmale,wehave
torememberthatHCEisidentifiedwithamountainandALPwithan"alp."WhiletheWakecelebratesHCEandhiserectionslikethe"waalworthofa
skyerscape"(FW4.3536)builtby"BygmesterFinnegan"(4.18),italsoarticulatesALP'sfemalelanguageandthe"gramma'sgrammar"(FW268.17)withwhichIssy
writesherletter.

Derridaidentifiesaparadoxthatexplainsthisapparent(con)fusionofthemasculineandfeminineandthephallocentricandantiphallocentricintheWake:"sometimes
thetextswhicharethemostphallocentricorphallogocentricintheirthemes...canalsobe,insomecases,themostdeconstructive...Therearesometimesmore
deconstructiveresources...insometextbyJoyceorPonge,whoareoftenphallocentricinappearance,thaninsometextswhich,thematically,aretheatrically
'feminist'or'antiphallocentric,'betheysignedbythenamesofmenorwomen"(Derrida1992b:58).

TheWakeclearlyhasbothphallocentricandantiphallocentricimpulses.Thereadercanattempttoseparatethetwo,butinsodoing,hemaybeproducingtheresults
ofacriticaloperationcarriedoutundertherestrictionsofthelogicoftheeither/orratherthanremarkingtheWake's(con)fusionofthetwo.Joyce'swritingalready
saysanythingthatwecouldpossiblysayaboutit.Anydecisionsthatwemakeattheconsciouslevelabouteitherthephallocentrismortheantiphallocentrismofthat
writingwillalwaysalreadyhavebeenmadeandthensettoworkinthatwritingaccordingtotheformulaofeither/or=and.AskJoyce'swriting"Why?"anditgives
answerstothatquestioninacondensationof"Idon'tknow,""becauseIamsuch,"and"searchme":"Why?Suchme''(FW597.22).

ThepowerfulmasculinevoicesthatemergeinmanyplacesintheWake'scomplexcircularnarrativesarefrequentlyphallocentric.DerridanoteshowtheWake"says
'we'and'yes'...totheFatherortotheLordwhospeaksloud,thereisscarcelyanyonebutHim,butitleavesthelastwordtothewomanwhoinherturnwillhave
said'we'and'yes'"(Derrida1984a:158).ThemovementofthispassagecountersignstheantiphallocentricmovementsoccurringelsewherethroughJoyce'swriting.
ThesingularityofJoyce'sfeminineyesisdoubledintherepetitionof"mum,"butthisrepetitionismarkedbyadifference.Thefirst"Mum"iscapitalizedthesecondis
decapitalizedintherepetition,"mum."These"two[other]wordsforJoyce"completetheaphallocentricconversionfromthemaletothefemalethroughthelaughterof
"Hahehihohu."TheyalsocountersignJoyceasan

 Page89

exemplarofDerrida'sdesiretoallowthedissonanceofspeechtoemergefromwithintheplayofwriting.AfterspeakingthesewrittenwordsofJoyceinhis
"impromptu"discussion,DerridaallowedJoyce'swritinganditshauntingofhisspeechtobecommittedtotheprintedpageandthesafekeepingofthedouble,
maternal,andsilentpositionssignifiedbytheEnglishidiomof"keepingmum."

 Page90

Chapter8
Derrida's"Undecidables"(I):
A"GreeterGlossary"forJoyce'sCodes
Joyce'swritingsareapowerfulrevelationoftheforceofthedoubles(writing,marks,binds,strategies,andsoon)continuallyexploredbyDerrida.Theypractice
deconstructionwhilesimultaneouslyremarkingthatpracticetheoretically.AttheNinthInternationalJamesJoyceSymposium,Derridasaid,"Deconstructioncouldnot
havebeenpossiblewithoutJoyce"(Jones1988:77).Wehaveconsideredmanyofthesites,relays,andtracesinDerrida'swritingsandtalksthatdemonstrateDerrida
hasdevelopedandmaintainedastronginterestinJoyce'swritings,particularlyinhislasttwoworks,andthisevidenceshowsthatDerridaseestheunrepeatable
singularityofJoyce'sworkasoneofthemostpowerfuleffectsofhiswritings.ThissingularityissustainedbythedoubleofJoyce'swritingasliteraryandphilosophical.

Althoughtheword"perhaps"stillhangsoverDerrida'sassessmentofJoyceasthe"mostHegelianofnovelists,"thereismuchtosupportthe

 Page91

argumentthatDerridafindsHegel'sencyclopedicandtotalizingphilosophicalprojectparalleled(or"completed")byJoyce's"mostpowerfulprojectfor
programming...thetotalityofresearchintheontologicoencyclopedicfield."ForDerrida,readersandscholarswhoengagewithJoyce'swritingsfindthemselves
playing''withtheentirearchiveofcultureatleastofwhatiscalledWesternculture,and,init,ofthatwhichreturnstoitselfaccordingtotheUlysseancircleofthe
encyclopedia"(Derrida1992a:281emphasisadded).

LikeUlyssesandFinnegansWake,Derrida'swritingsonJoyce(aswellashisotherwritings)arestructuredbycircularityandthenotionofreturn.Inthemost
straightforwardstatementonhisdeconstructiveprojectswehaveexamined,Derridastates,"Youknow,infact,thataboveallitisnecessarytoreadandrereadthose
inwhosewakeIwrite,the'books'inwhosemarginsandbetweenwhoselinesImarkoutandreadatextsimultaneouslyalmostidenticalandentirelyother"(Derrida
1987b:4emphasisadded).Thisprocessofrereadingisaprocessofreturn.Derrida'sreturningtoJoyce'sworkformorethanthirtyyearsrevealshowstrongboththe
returnandtheworkareinDerrida'sdeconstructiveprojectasaprocessof"interminableanalysis"(Derrida1987a:42).

DerridausestheWake'smetaphorofitslanguageasarivertoremarkthecontinualreturninvolvedinsucharereadingandtosignifyhowreturningtoJoyce'swork
producestheeffectofencounteringthatworkaneweachtime.Discussinghownaiveand"irresistiblycomical"itistoclaimtohave"readJoyce,"Derridaexplainsthat
"youstayontheedgeofreadingJoyce...andtheendlessplungethrowsyoubackontotheriverbank,onthebrinkofanotherpossibleimmersion,adinfinitum.Is
thistruetothesameextentofallworks?Inanycase,IhavethefeelingthatIhaven'tyetbeguntoreadJoyce,andthis'nothavingbeguntoread'issometimesthemost
singularandactiverelationshipIhavewiththiswork"(Derrida1984a:148).

WehaveseenhowasignificantpartofDerrida'sprojecthasbeentheproductionoftextsthatquestionanddisturbtraditionalphilosophicallogicandthesystemsof
binaryoppositionthatgoverntheoperationsofthatlogic.Withinhisreadingsofbothphilosophicalandliterarytexts,Derridahasdevelopednumerous"certain
marks"(forexample,"diffrance,""gram,""trace,""spacing,""margin,""archewriting,""thedouble,""incision,""blank")that"cannolongerbeincludedwithin
philosophical(binary)opposition,butwhich...inhabitphilosophicalopposition,resistinganddisorganizingit"(Derrida1987b:43).

 Page92

ThefollowingselectiveinterrogationofDerrida's"undecidables"exploreshowtheycanbeusedtoremarkthedeconstructiveeffectsofJoyce'swritingandtheir
hauntingofDerrida'swork.Derridausesthewordsundecidableandnonconcepttostressthatthetermshelistsunderthesenamescannotbefullyexplained,nor
theirsignifyingplaycontrolled,withtraditionalphilosophicalandliteraryconceptsworkingunderthelawsofbinaryopposition.Theyoperateinthesamewayasthe
wordpharmakosinPlato'sretellingofthemythofTheuthandAmmonRa.Theuth"turnsthewordonitsstrangeandvisiblepivot"(Derrida1981:97).

Derridaemphasizes"turns"toopenupadouble,tropicplay:pharmakoscanbeturnedsothatitsignifieseithermedicineorpoison.Atthesametimethatturn
emphasizestheambivalenceofthisterm,italsotriggersthephysicalmetaphorofthetropeasamechanicaldevicethatturnsonapivot.Inthisway,Derridaexceeds
thebinarismofsimpleambiguityanddrawsattentiontowaysinwhichturnopensupafurtherchainofsignificationslinkedtohisnotionofawordasa
"trigger"(Derrida1981:29096)thatcansetothersignifyingchains(andsignifyingchainsofthetext's"other")inmotion.

Atermlikegram(whichDerridalistsasoneofhisundecidablesanddesignates"themostgeneralconceptofsemiologywhichthusbecomes
grammatology"[Derrida1987b:26])isputtoworksothatitexceedsbinaryoppositionthroughtheplayofitsmultiplepolysemousvalues.Wehaveseenthat,ata
basicphysicallevel,thetermsignifiestheveryprocessofinscriptionthatleavesaninscribedmarkonthepage.Thisprocessnotonlycreatesanddefinesthegrambut
alsobringsintoplaytheoperationsoftheblank(anotherofDerrida'sundecidables)spacesoneithersideofthemark.Thesewhite(blanc)spacesaredoublemarks
(anotherundecidable)thathelpdefinethegramatthesametimetheyarecreatedandbroughtintoplaybyit.Gramcanalsosignifylettersandwords,theWake's
anagrams(orAnna'sgrams),aswellasoperateinsomeofthevarioustechnicalterms(phonogram,telegram,gramophone)whosemetaphoricvalueswehaveseen
Derridaexplore.

FinnegansWakefrequentlyforegroundsthetextualoperationssignifiedbyDerrida'sundecidablesandnonconcepts.RemarkingtheseoperationsinJoyce'swriting
withDerrida'stermsalsoremarksthereturnthatHaroldBloomsignifieswiththeuseoftheGreekwordapophrades(Bloom1973:141).Thistermreferstothe
returnofthedead,andBloomusesittodescribethewaysinwhichawriter'sprecursorscanreturntohaunthiswork.Itisthereforeanappropriatetermfortheways
inwhichthespectralpowerofJoyce'swritingsreturnstohauntDerrida'swork.Derrida'sformu

 Page93

lationofhisnonconceptshasbeengreatlyinfluencedbyhisreadingofJoyceandhisremarkingofsomeofthetextualeffectsofJoyce'swriting.UsingDerrida'sterms
toallowforarecognitionofthoseeffectsastheyoperatewithinJoyceislittlemorethanremarkingJoyce'stextswiththeirownoperations,orrenderinguntoJoyce's
writingofwhatalwaysalreadybelongedtoit.

AlthoughtheinstitutionalizeddeconstructionthatRodolpheGaschdescribesasaformofNewCriticismattemptsasystematictextualanalysis,Derrida'sproject
cannotbesummarizedor"booked"intoaformulaormethod(althoughthisisfrequently"done"inmanystudiesofhiswork)anymorethanJoyce'swritingscanbefully
explainedbysubsumingthemunderthetaxonomiccategoriesofplot,character,theme,motif,structure,diction,rhetoric,grammarorlexicon,andsoon.Derrida
consciouslyworks"tobringthecriticaloperationtobearagainsttheunceasingreappropriationofthisworkofthesimulacrum[anotherundecidable]byadialecticsof
theHegeliantype...forHegelianidealismconsistspreciselyofarelveofthebinaryoppositionsofclassicalidealism...whileinterningdifferenceinaself
presence."The"undecideables"resistsuchreappropriationwhile"inhabit[ing]philosophicalopposition.''Theyresistanddisorganizethisoppositionanditspossible
relvebynever"constitutingathirdterm"or"leavingroomforasolutionintheformofspeculativedialectics(thepharmakonisneitherremedynorpoison...the
gramisneitherasignifiernorasignified,neitherasignnorathing,neitherapresencenoranabsence....Neither/nor,thatis,simultaneouslyeitheror...)"(Derrida
1987b:43).

TheassertionthatallwritingisstructuredbydiffranceisageneralizationworthyofBlake'sidiot.Yeteveninwritingthatworkstostifleandsuppressthe
multisymbolicplayoflanguageinthedreamofachievingaselfpresent,fullnessofmeaning,Derridahasdetectedandmarkedtheeffectsofhisanalogous
"undecidables."Joyce'swritingsenacttheplayofinnumerabledifferences,andhiswritings,particularlyFinnegansWake,worktowardrevealingthemselvesasan
ultimatelyundefinableprocessofbecoming(in)languagethatwillcontinuallydefeatourattemptsatanalyzing,defining,andappropriatingitasastablebeing,subjector
object.Derridashowshowtheseanalytictoolscanbesetasideasweaponsofmasteryinordertoattendtosomeoftheirotherfunctions(andtheirfunctionsasthe
"other"inthelinearmodelofthealterityofwritingcreatedbyalimitingempiricalhistoricism).

StephenDedaluswantedtoescapethenetsthathesawthrownuptopreventhisflightfromIreland,butwecannotescapefromorfinishareadingofJoyce.Wecan,
however,learntodwellmorecomfortablyinhiswrit

 Page94

ingbyusingthelessonsonplurivocityandassociativelogicthatitteaches.Wecan,forexample,usethesimpleprocessofturning"nets"onits"invisiblepole"tosignify
thetoolswecandipintotheriverofJoyce'slanguageinordertotryandcatchaglimpseofHCEas"erstcraftyhakemouth"(FW263.2),and,whenwe"have
snakkedmid[this]fish"(FW597.36),wecanreturnhimsafelyintothewateroftheWake,wherehebelongs.

AsDerridadoesinhiswriting,Joyceprogramstheelementofchanceintothe"being"ofhislinguistic,encyclopedicproject.Inthetermsofadivisiveanddefining
analyticlogic,itseemsthatnomatterhow"practical"or"predicable"weare,Joyce'swritingasa"kindofbeingwithadifference"willforeverliebeyondtheabilitiesof
ouranalyticandinterpretativestrategiestomaster.ThechanceprogrammedintoJoyce'swriting,however,createspreciselythe''propersortofaccident"wecanand
"musthave"inorderto"meet"(butnotmaster)"thatkindofbeing"(FW269.1415)thatdisappearsinitsownappearancewithinJoyce'scontinualplayofdifference
anddeferral.

WiththesenseofaJoyceanmissionimpossible,thefollowingglossaryisofferedasachanceforadeconstructiveencounterwithsomeselectedsamplesfromJoyce's
writings.Thechoiceof"undecidables"israndomandnecessarilyincompletebecause"bydefinitionthelisthasnotaxonomicclosure,andevenlessdoesitconstitutea
lexicon"(Derrida1987b:40).IntheWake'sradiobroadcast,the"Ellers"(Da."other"),or"others"forthe"greeterglossaryofcode"(FW324.21),existbothforthe
"greatergloryofgod"whichremarkstheJesuitmottowithwhichbothJoyceandStephenDedalusweresofamiliaraswellasforthe"greeter,"whousesthe
glossaryofradiocodesto"callenhom"(FW324.21),or"callhome."ThefollowingglossaryofDerrida'stermsisawayof"greeting"Joyce'stextswithsomeofthe
textualoperationsthatarealreadyat"home"there.

ManyoftheexamplesofJoyce'swritingarefromFinnegansWake,becausethattext,morethananyofJoyce'searliertexts,foregroundsitselfasapracticeofwriting
andfrequentlyremindsusofitslinguisticstatusasawritingpractice.TheexamplesofthisforegroundingarewellknownandincludetheWake'sreminderofthe
unusualnatureofitslanguage("natlanguageatanysinseoftheworld"[FW83.12])thesignificationofthelinesandgraphicinscriptionsofthetext(the"ruledbarriers
alongwhichthetracedwords,run,march,halt,walk,stumbleatdoubtfulpoints"[FW114.79])andthereminderthatlanguageanditsgraphicelementsarein
themselvessignatures("Sowhy,pray,signanythingaslongaseveryword,letter,penstroke,paperspaceisaperfectsignatureofitsown?"[FW115.68]).

 Page95

Archewriting

Archewritingisnotonlyan"undecidable"liketheWake,itisalsoultimatelyundefinable.Thereislittledoubt,however,thatDerridaseesthewritingofFinnegans
Wakeasapowerfulpracticeofarchewriting.Thetermsuggestsanancientor"originary"writing,awritingthatisalreadyinvolvedin,ornecessaryto,thatnatural,
original(spoken)languagethatissupposedtoprecedeandgiveitsmeaningtowriting.Atstakeinthenonconceptofarchewritingisthepriorityandprivilegeof
speech(presence)overwriting(absence)inWesternmetaphysics.Archewritingresistsanddisorganizessuchpriorityandprivilege,thusputtinginquestionthenotion
of''origin"itself,andthephenomenologicalconceptofanoriginuntouchedbynonorigin,whichconstitutesit.Archewritingis"thatverythingwhichcannotletitselfbe
reducedtotheformofpresence"(Derrida1976:57).

Ingeneralterms,theoperationsofarchewritingcanbeequatedwiththeplayofdiffranceandtheoperationsofthetrace.AlthoughDerridausesthetermtosignifya
forcethatisatwork"notonlyintheformandsubstanceofgraphicexpression,butalsointhoseofnongraphicexpression"(Derrida1976:60),hedoesnotseeitasa
transcendentalform.Thedifficultyofapprehendingtheoperationsofarchewritingisthedifficultyofapprehendingtheoperationsofthetrace:itonlyappearsinthe
processofitsowndisappearing.

OnewayofengagingwiththeoperationsofarchewritinginJoyce'stextsistoattendtothewaysinwhichhiswritingobliteratesthepropernameinaprocessof
constitutiveerasure.Thisisbecausearchewritingiscontinuallyinvolvedintheproductionandobliterationofthepropername:"thepropernamewasneverpossible
exceptthroughitsfunctioningwithinaclassificationandthereforewithinasystemofdifferences,withinawritingretainingthetracesofdifference"(Derrida1976:109).
AsearlyasDubliners,Joyceoffersusprocessesofconstitutiveerasure.In"Clay,"forexample,the"propername"ortitleofthestory,whichsignifiesthesubstance
Mariaisgivenbythe"nextdoorgirls,"neverappearsinthestoryitself.InUlysseswehavetheconstitutiveerasuresofthepropernameinthenumerousvariationson
"Bloom":"Bloo....Me?No.BloodoftheLamb"(U124)"Blew.Bluebloomisonthe....Jingle.Bloo....Ifeelsosad.P.S.Solonelyblooming"(U210)
"Bloowho"(U212)"benBloomElijah"(U283)"thenewBloomusalem"(U395).

FinnegansWakeofferscountlessexamplesofarchewritingruiningthepropername.EvenJoyce'swellknowndesiretooutwriteShakespearepro

 Page96

videsexamplesofhowJoycewasabletoattemptthisimpossibleprojectbyruiningthepropernameofhispotentialrival.Shakespeare'snameneverappearsinits
"proper"formwithintheWakeandthevariousdeformationsthatsignifytheplaywright("Shapesphere"[FW295.4],''shaggspick"[FW177.32],"Shakefork"[FW
274.L4],"shakespill"[FW161.31],"Shakhisbeard"[FW177.32])simultaneouslyeraseandruinhispropernameevenastheyconstituteasignifierofit.Joyceof
coursewasquitewillingtoallowhiswritingtoruinhisownpropername,andalthoughhisnameappearsonthespineandthetitlepageoftheWake,withinthetextit
appearsonlyassimultaneouslyerasingandconstitutivepuns.

TheBlank(andWhitesandtheHymen)

ThetheoriesoftheblankaredevelopedmostfullyinDissemination's"TheDoubleSession,"whereDerridaexploresMallarm'sMimique.Hisexplorationofthe
blankisgroundedinthewhite(blanc)pagesofthebookonwhichwritingtakesplace,butitquicklyunfoldsintoaseriesofanalogiesandmetaphorsfortheoperations
ofwriting.Besidestheblank,whitepagewaitingforinscription,theblankisalsothe"whiteface"ofthemimewhosefaceislikeablankpageinscribedonlywiththe
traceofatear.Atthesametime,theblankisanalogouswiththehymen,andtheinscriptionofthepen"proceedswithoutapastupon[this]virginsheet"(Derrida
1981:223).Undertheheadingofageneralconceptofwritinginclusiveofotherformsofart,Derridacontends,"literature,theatre,drama,ballet,dance,fableand
mimicryareformsofwritingthataresubjecttothelawofthehymen"(Derrida1981:242).

Thislawofthehymendeterminesthatrepresentationandmimesiswillbenomorethanonevalueamongstaseriesofvalences.Theblankisthesceneofwritingbut
whileitismorethantheblankpageonwhichwritingisinscribed,italsohasitslimits:althoughthe"blankorthewhiteness(is)thetotality,howeverinfinite,ofthe
polysemicseries,plusthecarefullyspacedoutsplittingofthewhole,...itisnotTheblankproper,[ora]transcendentaloriginoftheseries."Asoneexampleofthe
blank(amongstmanyothers),the"whitenessofthepageofwriting"cannotandshouldnotbeerected"intothefundamentalsignifiedorsignifieroftheseries."Thisisa
"commonlaw,"andevery"signifierintheseriesisfoldedalongtheangleof[its]remark"(Derrida1981:252).

"Thesignifiers'writing,''hymen,''fold,''tissue,''text,'etc.,donotescapethiscommonlaw,andonlyacommonconceptualstrategyofsomesortcantemporarily
privilegethemasdeterminatesignifiersorevenassignifiers

 Page97

atall,whichstrictlyspeakingtheynolongerare"(Derrida1981:252).Theendlessplayoftheblanksandthewhitespacesforcesthematiccriticismtoitslimits.The
themeandmeaningsoftheblanksandwhitespaces"cannot...bemastered,"andwhenwerealize"itiswithinthefoldsandblanknessofacertainhymenthatthevery
textualityofthetextisremarked,thenwewillpreciselyhavedeterminedthelimitsofthematiccriticismitself''(Derrida1981:24546).

AnanalysisoftheblankasitunfoldsinJoyce'swriting(whileitsimultaneouslyremarkstheplayandrhythmofthatwriting)mightbeginwiththeWake'ssignificationof
the"paperspace"asa"perfectsignatureofitsown"(FW115.78)andthencontinuebyanalyzingtheotherplacesinwhichtheblankisremarked.Thesewould
includetheblankpage(s)uponwhichIssywritesherletterandthetwinsinscribethediagramofthematernalvaginaintheirlessons.Wehaveseenhowtheblancof
Joyce's"paperspace"operatesasthemarginalspacesfromwhichtheassaultislauncheduponthecentral,phalliccolumnoftextinthatsection.Onthefinalpageofthe
lessonssection,thecentralcolumnislimitedanddemarcatedpreciselybythewhitespacesbetweentheleftandrighthandmarginsanditself.Derrida'stheoryofthe
blanksalsoprovidesawaytoexplorethenumerousplacesinwhichtheWakedrawsattentiontoitsownspacinginpassagessuchas"Bybr's"(FW81.26)or
"A..........!?.........O!"(FW94.2122),thelatterremarkingthelimitsofboththeGreekalphabetandtheChristianGodasthealphaandomega,or
beginningandend,withinphilosophicalandtheologicaltheoriesofexistence.

TheabilityoftypographicblankstoregulatetheplayofmeaningisevidentintheeffectofthespacesmarkingtheomissionsinOldCotter'sspeechin"TheSisters."
Theseblankshintatataboo,somethingthatmustremainoutsidetheboundariesofspeechandsomethingthattheadultsconsiderasinappropriateknowledgeforthe
boy.Theysimultaneouslysignifyboththeboy'slackofunderstandingofwhathashappenedtohimandthenatureofthepriest'sunspeakable(andundefinable)
transgression.

Atametaphoriclevel,theblankallowsforananalysisoftheboy'sinterestinthe"lightedsquareofwindow"(D1),wherehelooksforsomesignofthepriest'sdeath.
Thetextualfunctionsoftheblanksimultaneouslyconcealandrevealtheactionsofthepervertwhomtheboysmeetin"AnEncounter":whatthemandoesbetweenhis
doublespeechesofseductionandchastisementaresignifiedbyagapinthetextthatismarkedbyMahoney's"Isay!Lookwhathe'sdoing"(D18).Wecanguessthat
themanmightbemasturbating,buttheblankconcealshisactionsfromuswhilesimultaneouslymakingourguesspossible.

 Page98

ThemetaphoricandmetonymicplayoftheblankisatworkinthewindowcurtainsagainstwhichEvelinelaysherheadaswellasinthe"indistinct"andindecipherable
"whiteoftwolettersinherlap"(D32).OnecouldexploretheconstellationoftheblanksastheyregulatethepolysemyofDubliners.Thiswouldallowforthe
gatheringtogetherofthenamelesscharacters(asin"TheSisters,"''AnEncounter,""Araby,"orthewomanin"TwoGallants")andananalysisofwhatissignifiedbythe
lackofidentityasalackcreatedbytheruiningofthepropernameinJoyce'swriting.Thelackofanyclearidentificationofthecentraleventsinsomeofthestoriesalso
createsaseriesoftextualblanks:Whatdoesthepriestdototheboyin"TheSisters"?Whatdoesthemandoin"AnEncounter"?Whydoesthequestfailin"Araby"?
DoesBobDoranremainacelibate?Whatisthe"mystery"behindRichardTierney'sreligiousandfinancialstatusin"IvyDayintheCommitteeRoom"?Theoperations
ofsuchblanksregulatetherhythmic,textualplayofDublinersfromthemissinghope("Therewasnohopeforhimthistime"[D1])thatopensthecollectiontothe
uncertainfutureand"lastend"(D225)ofGrettaandGabriel,whichliesburiedwithintheplayofthewhites,asMichaelFurey,andallofIreland,liesburiedbeneath
thesnow.

Withinthetextualblankorhymen,Derridadiscoversa"fold"remarkingthelimitsoflanguage'smimeticplay.Thisfoldisconstitutedbythesupplementaryrelationof
the"blank,"which"markseverythingwhite"(likethesnowattheendof"TheDead"),andthe"blanknessthatallowsforthemarkinthefirstplace."Thelatterisa
supplementinthatit"comesneitherbeforenorafter"theformerandcanbesubtractedfromtheseriesofblanksmarkingeverythingwhite"(inwhichcaseitis
determinedasalacktobesilentlypassedover)"oradded"asanextranumbertotheseries"(Derrida1981:253).The(supplementary)foldpreventstheplayof
languagefrombeinglimitedbyitsmimeticfunction:"Ifthereisnosuchthingasatotalorpropermeaning,itisbecausetheblankfoldsover"(Derrida1981:258).
"Accordingtothestructureofsupplementarity,whatisaddedisthusalwaysablankorafold:thefactofadditiongiveswaytoakindofmultipledivisionorsubtraction
thatenrichesitselfwithzerosasitracesbreathlesslytowardtheinfinite"(Derrida1981:262).Therecanbenototalmeaning,nototalrepresentationormimesisinthis
playofpossiblyinfinitesubstitutionsandsupplementationsoftheblank.

InUlysses,thelimitationsoflanguage'smimeticfunctionaremarkedwithinjustsuchfoldedandenfoldingblanks.Thiscanbeseenintheoperationsoftheadvertising
sloganforPlumtree'spottedmeat,placedonone

 Page99

sideoftheblankspacebeneaththedeathnoticesintheFreeman'sJournal,whichwefirstencounterwhen,duringhismeetingwithM'Coy,Bloom"unrolledthe
newspaperbatonidlyandreadidly:WhatishomewithoutPlumtree'sPottedMeat?Incomplete.Withitanabodeofbliss"(U61).Thissloganremainsin
Bloom'smindashewalksthroughDublin,and,whenheentersDaveyByrne's,Bloom'smeditationsproduceaseriesof"pottedmeats"linkingthesloganwith
necrophagy:"Pottedmeats.WhatishomewithoutPlumtree'spottedmeat?Incomplete.Whatastupidad!Undertheobituarynoticestheystuckit.Allupaplumtree.
Dignam'spottedmeat.Cannibalswouldwithlemonandrice"(U140).Thisseriesissustainedbya"blank''fortheconstitutinglink,whichwouldbetheverbtoeat,is
lacking,passedover:"Cannibalswould[blank]withlemonandrice."

Whenwefirstencounterajarofpottedmeat(asopposedtoits"representation"intheslogan),itisasablank,andwedonotknowexactlywhattheobjectis.While
Boylanispurchasingthephallicpresentofthebottleofport,"fatpears"and"ripeshamefacedpeaches"inthe"bedded"wickerbasketthathewillhavesenttoMolly,
hegivestheshopassistantinThornton'sthebottleofport"swathedinpinktissuepaperandasmalljar"(U187emphasisadded).Wecanguessattheidentityof
this"smalljar"onlyafterthetextualdetectiveworkmadepossiblebyaretroactiverereadingofthepassage.The"Ithaca"sectionprovidesaseriesoftheitemsthat"lay
underexposure"onthe"shelvesofthekitchendresser,openedbyBloom"(U551).Listedamongtheitemsinthisseriesare"anemptypotofPlumtree'spottedmeat,
anovalwickerbasketbeddedwithfibreandcontainingoneJerseypear,ahalfemptybottleofWilliamGilbeyandCo'swhiteinvalidport,halfdisrobedofitsswatheof
coralpinktissuepaper"(U552).Theeffectofthisexposure,viatheblank,isthatpottedmeatnowalsooperatesinanotherseriesofsigns,thistimetheseriessignifying
sexualactivity.

ThesexualsignificationofpottedmeatisconfirmedwhenBloomclimbsintobednexttoMolly:"hislimbs,whengraduallyextended,encounter....Newclean
bedlinen,additionalodours,thepresenceofahumanform,female,hers,theimprintofahumanform,male,nothis,somecrumbs,someflakesofpottedmeat,
recooked,whichheremoved"(U601).These"flakes"aretracessignifyingthatBoylanandMollyhavesharedtheir"pottedmeat"inbed,andtheyconfirmtheidentity
ofthesmalljarBoylanasksthegirlinThornton'stoputinthebasketwiththeportandpeaches.Atthesametime,thecrumbsandflakesthatBloomdiscoversonthe
whitesofthe"cleanbedlinen"aresignifiersbearingwitnessto,andremarking,the

 Page100

sexualactivitiesthatmayhavetranspiredthatafternoonintheBlooms'sbed.Theseeventsthemselvesarethenenteredintoanothersupplementaryseries.Bloom's
subsequentreflection,afterhehas"removed"thetracesfromthesheets(whichheisnowremarkinghimself),isanarticulationofsupplementarityitself:"Toreflectthat
eachonewhoentersimagineshimselftobethefirsttoenterwhereasheisalwaysthelasttermofaprecedingseriesevenifthefirsttermofasucceedingone,each
imagininghimselftobefirst,last,onlyandalonewhereasheisneitherfirstnorlastnoronlynoraloneinaseriesoriginatinginandrepeatedtoinfinity"(U601).

Beforethisfinalappearanceofthepottedmeat,atextualblankopensupspacesbetweenthejarofpottedmeat,itsrepresentationinthelanguageoftheadvertising
sloganandtheinsertionofthesloganinthenewspaper.Earlierinthe"Ithaca"section,thenarratorironicallyaskswhatthingshad"never"(U560)"stimulated"Bloom
"inhiscogitations"(U559).Theresponseistheadvertisingsloganandapottedhistoryofthemeat'sproduction:"WhatishomewithoutPlumtree'sPottedMeat?
Incomplete.Withitanabodeofbliss.ManufacturedbyGeorgePlumtree,23Merchants'quay,Dublin,putupin4ozpots,andinsertedbyCouncillorJosephP.
Nannetti,M.P.,RotundaWard,19Hardwickestreet,undertheobituarynoticesandanniversariesofdeceases''(U560).Thehistoryoftheproductionofpotted
meat,whichfollowstheslogan,foldsbacktoremarkboththemeatandthepotinwhichitiscontained,aswellasthesloganwithwhichitisrepresented.Atthispoint
inthetext,anotherspace,orblank,opensupbetweentheobjectsofthemeat,thepotsandtheirrepresentationinthesloganthatis"inserted"inthenewspaper.

Theparallelphrasesbeginningwith"Manufactured"and"inserted"should,butdonot,sharethesamereferent.Thedistancebetweenthemproducesaspacethatre
marksthelimitationsofmimesis,orrepresentation.Thesharedgrammaticalreferentsfor"Manufactured"and"inserted"arethemeatandthepots(andthemovement
fromthesingularmeattothepluralpotsremarksanotherdoubling),butthepotcanbe"inserted"inthenewspaperonlythroughmimesis.Joyce'stextknowsthisfact,
and,followingthesummaryoftheproductionofthepottedmeat,itexploitsacopyrightclichinordertomarkthelimitationsofnamingandmimesis:"Thenameonthe
labelisPlumtree.Aplumtreeinameatpot,registeredtrademark.Bewareofimitations"(U560emphasisadded).Followingthiswarningaboutthelimitationsof
imitation,thetextrevealshowwritingcanruinthepropernameandmimesiscanfail:"Peatmot.Trumplee.Moutpat.Plamtroo"(U560).

 Page101

TheBookasanIdeologicalStructure

ThestoriesfromDublinersareclearlyanalyzablewiththetraditional,tripartiteAristotelianplotstructure.Theirnarrativescanbedividedinthisway,but,alongwitha
considerablenumberofothermodernisttexts,theychallengethenotionthataliterarystoryshouldhaveaplotleadingtowardaclimaxthatwillbringtheaction(s)toa
headandasubsequentdenouementofferingsomekindofresolution.Joyce'sstorieslackacenterandofferavisionofanexistencethatisdecentered.In"The
BoardingHouse,"forexample,theeventthatwouldfunctionasthecenterofatraditionalplotismissing.WeseeBobDoranlightingPolly'scandle,butthetwotimes
DoranisdescribedasacelibatemakeitunclearifDoranactuallydidwhatMrs.Mooneywillaccusehimof.(Heraccusationsareclearlyhintedat,butwedonot
witnessherdiscussionwithDoran.)

ThestructuresofAPortraitoftheArtistasaYoungManhavebeenexploredindepthbymanycritics,yetitisstillworthconsideringhowsomeoftheirconclusions
canbereconsideredwithinthecontextofJoyce'sdeconstructionoftheideologyofthemodeloftheliterarybook.Thereisthewellknownambiguitymakingit
impossibletodecideifStephenisbeingdepictedasanartistoronlyasayoungmanwhohasyettobecomeone.Althoughhisoneadolescentpoemsuggeststhe
latter,thetitleremainsambiguous,andareadingofthetextmustworkbetweentheundecidabledoublecreatedbythetwochoices.

Byincludingamixtureofthirdpersonandomniscientperspectiveinthenarrativeandcombiningthisinabricolagethatgathersasimulacrumofbabytalk,dialogue,
catechism,poetry,asermon,andaphilosophicdisquisitiononaesthetics,Joycebreakswiththetraditionalliteraryconceptofaunifiedandtotalizingstyle.Theirregular
diaryentriesinthepresenttenseattheendofthebookcompletethatbreak,and,insteadofconcludingthenovel,theyoffertheinvocationtotheDedalusofGreek
mythafterStephenmarkshisfutureinthecontinuouspresenttense:"Igotoencounterforthemillionthtimetherealityofexperience"(PA27576).

FromDerrida'sperspective,whatJoyceachievesinPortraitisthecreationofa"groupedtextualfield"thatistheonlysitefromwhichdeconstructioncantakeplace
(Derrida1987b:42).Insteadofaregularand"punctualposition"affordedbyasinglenarrator,Portraitoffersashiftingseriesoftextssignedbydifferentnarrators:the
storiesbySimonDedalus,Dante,andUncleCharlesthepoembyDantethesermonbytherectorthenarrativebyDavinthedisquisitiononthetundishbythedean
ofstudies

 Page102

andStephen'slectureonappliedAquinas.Joycecountersignsallthesenarratives,buttheyaresignedwithinthetextbythecharacterstowhomtheyareattributed.

Joyceisofcoursenotaloneinparticipatinginthedestructionoftheformofthebookasthatformwasunderstoodbymanyofhispredecessors.AsDerridanotes,this
destructiongets"underwayinalldomains."Itis,nevertheless,adestructionthatJoycecontinuestopursueinhislaterworks.Itisnotanegativedestruction,butone
thatpositively"denudesthesurfaceofthetext"andallowstheoperationsofthetexttobeforegrounded(Derrida1976:18).

WehaveconsideredhowtheWakeunderminestheideologyofthebook,andthenextchapterconsidershowbothUlyssesandtheWakeparticipateinthis
subversion.ThedeconstructivecontextforJoyce'sassaultontraditionalliteraryformsandtheideologyofthebookisapositiveonethatallowsforaliftingofthe
linearityinvolvedinthe"repressionofpluridimensionalsymbolicthought"(Derrida1976:86).UlyssesandFinnegansWakearebothepics,buttheyareepicswitha
difference.Theyaretwoofthemany"shocksthataregraduallydestroyingthelinearmodel[ofthebook,ofthinking,ofwriting,etc.].Whichistosaytheepicmodel."
WhatDerridasaysoftheattempttowritewhatisthoughtbydeconstructionappliesequallytotheattemptatunderstandingJoycewithlinearconceptsaboutbooks,
literature,andwriting:itcannotbedone"exceptbyimitatingtheoperationimplicitinteachingmodernmathematicswithanabacus"(Derrida1976:87).

 Page103

Chapter9
Undecidables(II):
DeconstructionandtheDiffranceofJoyce
DiffranceisperhapsthemostwellknownofDerrida'sundecidables.Wehaveexaminedhowthisneologismisa(con)fusionofdeferanddifferthatsignifiesthe
waysinwhichmeaningismadepossiblebytheverydifferences(of,andbetween,letters,spaces,punctuation,sounds,andsilences)thatsustaindesirewhiledeferring
itsultimateobject.Derridafindsdiffranceoperatingatalllevelsofwriting:inthedifferentgraphicmarks(letters,spacing,punctuationmarks,accentmarks)thatmake
writingintelligibleinthedifferencesbetweenwords(withinonelanguagebutalsobetweenthedifferentwordsforthesameobjectsandconceptsfromdifferent
languages)inthedifferencesbetweensignifiersandtheirsignifiedsinthespacesbetweenthetermsofbinaryoppositionthatgovernandcontroltheoperationsof
philosophicallogicintheoperationsofarchewritingandintheoperationsofthetrace.Thetermsignifiesnotonlythedifferencesthatstructurelanguageandmakeits
operationspossible,butalso(andsimultaneously)thedeferralofmeaningthataccompaniesalllinguisticoperations.

 Page104

Eventheselfpresenceofinteriorthoughtisstructuredbydifferenceandadeferralofmeaning.Derridaquestionsandsolicitstheclassicalhierarchythatprivileges
thoughtoverspeechandspeechoverwritingonthebasisofpresence.Thenotionthattheinteriorityofthoughtcanguaranteeapresence(ofmeaning,ofideasand
concepts)thatspeechcannotguaranteeisforDerridaanillusorynotion,andtheideathatspeechcanprovideapresence(ofthespeakerandthelistener,ofmeaning,
ofintention)thatwritingcannotismisleading.

Ifitwerepossibletospeakofthestructureofdeconstruction,itwouldbetemptingtosaythatdiffranceisatthecenterofDerrida'sproject.Asthisisnotpossible,it
maybesufficienttonotehowpowerfulthis"nonconcept"isinthedeconstructionofthebinaryoppositionsDerridaseesasoneoftheprominentfeaturesoflogocentric
andphallogocentricthought.Derridahassaidthat"iftherewereadefinitionofdiffrance,itwouldbepreciselythelimit,theinterruption,thedestructionofthe
Hegelianrelvewhereveritoperates"(Derrida1987b:40).ThisrelvesignifiesthatpartoftheHegeliandialecticalaufhebung,orsublation,bywhichtheantithesis
isliftedupintotheinteriorityofthethesisandremarkedwithitsownnegativity.

Itisimportanttorecallhowtheprojectofdeconstructiongetsunderwaybymarkingthedifferenceanddeferralthatexistbetweenthetermsofbinaryoppositionand
makepossibletheprivilegingofonetermovertheother.Itisimperativeto"recognizethatinaclassicalphilosophicaloppositionwearenotdealingwiththepeaceful
coexistenceofavisvis,butratherwithaviolenthierarchy."Withintheopposition,"oneofthetwotermsgovernstheother(axiologically,logically,etc.),orhasthe
upperhand"(Derrida1987b:41).Afterthedifferenceanddeferralstructuringtheoppositionareremarked,thenthetermsareoverturnedinaphasethatmustbepart
ofan"interminableanalysis"because"thehierarchyofdualoppositionsalwaysreestablishesitself''(Derrida1987:42).

Thesecondpartofdeconstruction's"doublewriting"and"doublescience""must...marktheintervalbetween[the]inversion[theoverturning],whichbringslowwhat
washigh,andtheirruptiveemergenceofanew'concept,'aconceptthatcannolongerbe,andnevercouldbe,includedinthepreviousregime."Thisintervalisa
"bifaceorbiphase"andcanonly"beinscribed...inabifurcatedwriting,"orwhatDerridaalsotermsa"groupedtextualfield"(Derrida1987b:42).Theexamplethat
Derridausesforthisdeconstructive,doubleoverturningrevealstheimportanceofdiffranceasasignifierofthedeconstructionoftheclassicalhierarchythatprivileges
speechoverwriting.Thebifurcatedwritingthatmakesdecon

 Page105

structionpossible"holdsfirstofallforanewconceptofwriting,thatsimultaneouslyprovokestheoverturningofthehierarchyspeech/writing,andtheentiresystem
attachedtoit,andreleasesthedissonanceofawritingwithinspeech,therebydisorganizingtheentireinheritedorderandinvadingtheentirefield"(Derrida1987b:42).

TheawithwhichDerridareplacesthesecondeindifferenceisagraphicdistinction,andinFrenchdiffrenceispronouncedthesameasdiffrance.Derridapoints
outthat"thisgraphicdifference(ainsteadofe),thismarkeddifferencebetweentwoapparentlyvocalnotations,betweentwovowels,remainspurelygraphic:itis
read,oritiswritten,butitcannotbeheard.Itcannotbeapprehendedinspeech"(Derrida1982:3).Derridathusrevealsthatwrittenlanguageiscapableofasubtle
distinctionthatcannotbedetectedinspeech.ThisconcernwiththerelationshipsbetweenspeechandwritingisapowerfulforceinDerrida'scontinuinginterestin
JoyceandhisadmirationforJoyce'sachievements.Joyce'sowninterestinthewaysinwhichwritingoperatesasarecordofwrittenspeechisreflectedbyhisdecision
nottousetheinverted,doublecommaswithwhichspeechistraditionallyrepresentedinwriting,andinFinnegansWake,Joycesetswritingtoworkinawaythat
makesmuchofitunspeakable.

OneoftheeffectsoftheWake'swritingiswhatStephenHeathtermsan"opticallisten."OftheperceptionthattheWake"isabooktobeheardratherthanread,"
Heathsays"nothingcouldbemorefalse."Usingthepunon''forinstance"("forinkstands"[FW173.34])asanexample,Heathexplainsthat"noreadingaloudcould
possiblypass'forinkstands'and'forinstance'together"andthat"thereadingmustchoose."Atthesametime,any"readingofthetextonthepage"mustconsiderall
possiblepronunciationsavailablethroughthetermsofthepun.Inareadingof"forinkstands,"thepronunciationof"forinstance"mustbeconsideredandtakeninto
accountasapartofthewritten"forinkstands"(Heath1984:58).Inthisway,thepossiblevocalization,the"speechform,"ofthepunissettowork,butonlyasa
secondaryforceintheplayofthepun'swrittenorprintedform.LikeDerrida'sdiffrance,thepunsoftheWakemakewrittenorprintedlanguagecapableofagreater
linguisticpowertosignifythanthespokenformsitincorporateswithinitself.AgreatdealofDerrida'sinterestintheWakeisaresultofthefactthatJoyce'stextisa
written"beingwithadifference"(FW269.15)thatcanalsobereadasadeconstructingbeingofdiffrance,whoselanguageconstrainsandlimitsthevocalelementsof
languageinordertosetthemtoworkwithinwriting.

 Page106

Double("Doublin")Marks

Derridasetstheconceptsofthedoublemarkandthedoublebindtoworkthroughouthiswriting,andwehaveseenhowDerrida'sadmirationofJoyceislinkedto
Joyce'sstatusasamajorcreatorandpractitionerofthedoubleinwriting.ForDerrida,doublemarksincludethegraphicmarksthatpunctuatecitationand"spoken"
languageinthewrittentextthedoublemarksofparenthesesandbracketsandthedoubledashespunctuatingparentheticalphrasesandclauses.Onanotherlevel
(whichisalsothelevelofthe"other"),Derridausesthedoubletoinvestigatetherelationshipbetweentheoriginal,ormodel,anditsimitationasthatimitationis
producedbytheprocessofmimesisdefinedbyPlato.

Mimesisproducesthedoubleofan(original)modelthatfunctionsasasupplementthatcanstandnexttotheoriginalandthreatentotakeitsplace.Thespacecreated
bythedoubleofthecopyandtheoriginalisaspaceinwhichDerridaconsciouslysituatesmuchofhisownwriting,and,aswehavealreadyseen,itisaspacethat
Ulyssesopensupandexploresasthespacebetweenmeat,thepotthatcontainsit,andtheirinsertioninlanguagethroughmimesisorimitation.

AsmanycriticsofJoycehavenoted,Ulyssesisabookofdoubles,andmanyofthecharactersplayatleastadoublerole.HaroldBloomshowshowUlyssesis
founded"simultaneouslyupontheOdysseyandHamlet"(Bloom1994:414).StephenDedalusisawouldbewriter,Hamlet,Telemachus,andatwentiethcentury
youthinsearchofasymbolicfatherBloomsymbolicallyplaysthatfather,theghostofoldHamlet,theroleofOdysseus,andtheadvertisingsalesmanwhoismarried
toMolly.MollyistheDublinsingerandspousetoBloomaswellasPenelopeandBoylan'slover.TheplotisthatofthestoryofTheOdysseyandofadayinthelives
ofasinger,afailedwriter,andanadvertisingsalesman.ThediscourseofMolly'snarrativemakesitispossibletoreadUlyssesasatextwithdoubleendings.Thefirst
endcomeswithBloomfallingasleepandispunctuatedwiththeenlargeddotthatoperatesasafullstoptotheadventuresofBloomandDedalusaswellastothe
consciousnessofBloomthesecond,withMolly'sultimate"Yes."

ItistheWakeinwhichJoyceachievesmostfullyhismasteryofthedouble,anditisthattextwhichcomesclosesttoamodelforDerrida'sdeconstructing,bifurcated
writing.OnewayofreadingtheWakeistofollowitschainofsignificationsastheyenactandsustainaseeminglyendlessprocessofbifurcation.Thiswouldbeasimilar
processtothatmappedoutbyUmbertoEcoin"TheSemanticsofMetaphor,"butinsteadoftracingthe

 Page107

networkof"subjacentmetonymies"(Eco1979:7476)supportingthetext'smetaphorsandpuns,itwouldattendtothesubtlechangesbywhichaparticularwordis
alteredinordertoextendtheplayofitssignificationwhilesimultaneouslymaintainingasignifyingplaywithitsunalteredform.

Joyce'swritingoperatesinthedoubledanddoublingtextualspacesbetweenmimesisandthedisruptionofit.Onamimeticlevel,muchoftheWakeisaboutevents
takingplaceinDublinevenasJoyceturnsthatcityintohisversionofauniversalcity.OneofthewaysinwhichJoyceturnsDublinintoauniversalcityisthrougha
processsignifiedinthetextbyaminimalalterationtothecity'spropername(aprocessthatdisruptsand"ruins"thatpropernameandrevealstheoperationsofthe
Wake'sarchewriting).AshislettertoHarrietShawWeaverreveals,Joyce"doubles"Dublin,Ireland,withtheDublinofLaurensCo.,Georgia,thecityfoundedbythe
exDublinerPeterSawyer(McHugh1980:3).Thisprocessisaninitialstepintriggeringachainofbifurcation,anditisremarkedinthetextbythedecapitalizationof
"Dublin"to"dublin''andtheinsertionofan"o"intothewordsothatitgainsthesignificationof"doublin,"or"doubling":likethe"topsawyer'srocksbythestream
Oconee"(FW3.7),certainwords,orpartsofthem,becometextualparticlesor"etyms"thatcanbeseen"doublintheirmumperallthetime"(FW3.89)and
"doubling"their"number""allthetime."

Thewellknownpundescribingthetextasthe"bookofDoublendsJined"(FW20.1516)marksanotherstepinthisprocessofbifurcating,doubling(andDublin)
writing,andoneselfreflectivelyremarkingthefundamentaldoublestructureofthetext'sdoubleendsthatcanbelinkedbythereader.Thissamedoublingprocess
identifiesHCEasthe"doublejoyntedjanitor"(FW27.23)whoisthe"janitor"andprogenitorofKevinandJerry(whoaredoublesofShemandShaun)itbrings
LondonintoplayasanegativedoubleofDublinthroughthetaleofDickWhittington("lodemereofDoubtlynn"[FW248.7])itdescribesHCE'scodpiece(andshirt)
asthe"peascoddoublet"(FW578.8)thatmusthavebeenremovedwhenthephallic"phall"(FW415)tookplaceanditdrawsourattentiontothedoublelives,or
"doublinexistents"(FW578.14),thatHCEleadsasaninhabitantofDublinandatextualfigureaswellasa"daysent"(FW578.14),or"decent,"manandonewho
encountershisnotsodecenttransgressionsinhisdreams.

Thisforegroundeddoublingprocessisinvolvedinthetwin'sdrawingofALP's"doublingbicirculars"(FW295.31)andthesubsequenturinationthatcouldtakeplacein
the"doubleviewedseeds"(FW296.1),orWCs.Atanypointinthetext'sbifurcatingnetwork,theassociativelogicgoverning

 Page108

thesimultaneoussimilaritiesanddifferencesofJoyce'sphoneticand/orgraphicsignifiersmakesitpossibletotraversethechainsofmetonymysupportingtheWake's
metaphorsandpunstoanothersectionoftext.FromALP's"bicirculars"onecanfollowtheWake's"bifurking"(FW302.1516)networkthroughthemetonymic
linksbetween''bi,"ordividedintotwo,and"bisect"inordertoarriveatthetopographyofPhoenixParkandthe"straightroad"that"bisexesthepark"(FW564.10
11emphasisadded).Onecouldjustaseasilytakethesamestartingpointandfollowthemetonymicchainof"bi,""dividedintotwo,""two,""double,"andrearrive
backat"DoublendsJined,"whichisitselfanothertropefor"bicirculars."ItistherapiditywithwhichtheWakemakessuchconnectionsthatDerridaemphasizesinhis
comparisonof"thecurrenttechnologyofourcomputers"as"abricolageofaprehistoricchild'stoy"withthe"quasiinfinitespeedandmovementsonJoyce'scables."
"How,"heasks,"couldyoucalculatethespeedwithwhichamark,amarkedpieceofinformation,isplacedincontactwithanotherinthesamewordorfromoneend
ofthebooktotheother?"(Derrida1984a:147).

ThesedoubleanddoublingstrategiesDerridaexplores(butwhicharealwaysalreadysettoworkbyJoyce)affordtheopportunityofattendingtothewaysinwhich
translationproducesan(imperfect)doubleofawordorconceptasthatwordorconceptistranslatedfromonelanguagetoanother.Withitsraidingofthenumerous
languagesthatJoyceplundered,theWakeisamodelandpracticalexerciseinworkingwithinwhatDerridacallsthe"doublebind"oftranslation.OneofDerrida's
questionsaboutJoyceis"HowmanylanguagescanbelodgedintwowordsbyJoyce,lodgedorinscribed,keptorburned,celebratedorviolated?"(Derrida
1984a:145).Translation,aswesawearlier,isadoublebindbecauseanidealtranslationisnotpossible.Atbest,translationcanproduceonlyanapproximationofthe
meaningrenderedbytheoriginallanguage.Manyoftheidiomsandnuancesofonelanguagewillalwaysbelostinthetranslationintoanotherlanguage.

Derridaexplorestheimpossiblenecessityoftranslationinnumerousplaces.InDisseminationhefocuses,aswehaveseen,ontranslationsfromGreektoLatinand
fromLatinintomodernEuropeanlanguages.Thesetwomajortranslationsconstitutetwo"crucialhingesofWesternphilosophy:thetextualriftsanddriftsproduced
bytheprocessoftranslationoftheGreekphilosophers,precisely,intoLatin"(Derrida1981:182n.10)andthetranslationofGreekandLatinthoughtintomodern
languages.In"OfanApocalypticToneRecentlyAdoptedinPhilosophy,"Derridaexploresthedoublebindoftranslationinacontextmorerelevanttohisinterestin
Joyce.

 Page109

ThisisthetranslationthathumanityisforcedtopracticeaftertheattempttobuildtheTowerofBabelisconfoundedbytheOldTestamentGod.Derridaexplainsthis
doublebindasthis:"Wemusttranslateandwemustnottranslate.IamthinkingofthedoublebindofYHWHwhen,withthenameofhischoice,withthenameone
couldsay,Babel,hegivesustotranslateandnottotranslate.Andnoone,forever,sincethen,eludesthedoublepostulation"(Derrida1984b:3).

ThemythemesoftheTowerofBabelareinterwovenwiththeWake'saccountofthefallsofFinneganandHCEthroughoutthetext,andwehavealreadyseenhow
Joyce'suseofthemisapowerfulattractionforDerrida.Atthesametime,theWakealsochallengesitsreadersbyforcingthemtooccupythedoublebindof
translationevenwhendealingonlywiththetext'sbaselanguageofEnglish.TocomprehendthevarioussemanticvaluesthatJoyce(con)fusesinhispuns,itisnecessary
to"translate"thosevaluesbackintotheiroriginalforms.IntranslatingoneofthepunsgeneratedbytheDublin/doublingpun,forexample,itisnecessarytoidentifythe
basicsemanticelementsthatJoycehasfusedtogether.Oneofthepunsgeneratedfromthatchainis"Dyoublong,"andthetextposesthequestion"Sothisis
Dyoublong?"(FW13.4).AsthetextismappingoutavisittoDublinatthispoint,''Dublin"isobviouslyoneoftheprimarysemanticvaluesatworkinthepun.Atthe
sametime,thetextisposingaquestionthatoneofthenarrativevoicesisaskingofanotherand,simultaneously,askingthesamequestionofthereader.

Tounderstandthequestion,itisnecessarytotranslate"Dyoublong?"backinto"Doyoubelong?"Thedoublebindisthatoncethereaderhastranslatedthequestion
intoamorereadilycomprehensibleform,thenheisnolongerreadingJoyce'stextbuttheresultsofanoperationthathehasperformeduponit.Theproblemismore
evidentinacomplexpunlike"themaymeaminningofmaimoomeining"(FW267.3).RolandMcHughexplicatesthispunonthetitleofOgdenandRichard'sbook,The
MeaningofMeaning,andteasesoutthesemanticvaluesof"opinion"(Ger."meinung"),"love"(Ger."minne"),andstuttering(I.meann,minne),andidentifiesthesong
title,"TheYoungMayMoon"(McHugh1980:267).Therealsomaybetheadditionalsemanticvaluesof"may,""me,""am,""mine"(L."mea"),and"wound"("maim")
atworkinthepun,aswellastheonomatopoeic"moo"thatwouldtriggerapunonthechildren'snurseryrhymeaboutthecowthat"jumpedoverthemoon."

Thenumberofpossiblesemanticvaluesthereadercandemonstrateasoperatingwithinthispunwillhavenoeffectonthepunasitisdefinedbythetermprecedingitin
thetext:itisasceneofmultipleimitations,ora

 Page110

"multimimetica"(FW267.23)site,andinordertotestifthepossiblesemanticvaluesareatworkinthepun,thereadermustagaintranslateeach"etym"(FW
353.22)ofthepunintoacomprehensibleform.Insodoing,however,thereaderwillbeforcedtooccupythedoublebindthatdeterminestranslationasanecessary
impossibility.Joyce'scarefulandpainstakingconstructionofhispunscanoffersomehintsabouttheoperationofthosepuns(asasceneofmultiplemimesis,or
"multimimetica,''forexample),butitalsoforcesthereadertorealizethatinordertounderstandmanyofthepuns,itisnecessarytogooutsideoftheWaketouncover
thesemanticvaluesatworkinthepunswithinit.Thisrequiresanerasure,oratleastatemporarysuspension,oftheboundariesbetweentheinsideandtheoutsideof
theWaketodiscovertheexternalsemanticvaluesandsoundplaysJoycehasgraftedintohiswriting.

Grafting

The"graft"isoneoftheeleventextualmechanismsDerridaexploresin"Dissemination,"wherehelinksgraftingwithwritinginaradicalandfundamentalway:"Thatis
howthethingiswritten.Towritemeanstograft.It'sthesameword"(Derrida1981:355).Theprocessofwritingentailsanincision(ofaletter,aword,aphrase,ora
largersequenceofwords)fromonetext(thealphabet,adictionary,atextthatawriterwishesto"cite")andasubsequentgraftingofthelinguisticscionontothenew
text.Itcanrefertotheprocessesofquotingandcitingandallowsforcloseattentiontothematerial,physicalprocesses(aswellasthementalprocesses)entailedin
inscriptionandthetransferofinscribed(orprinted)marksfromonetextualsitetoanother.

Derrida'sreadingofJamesJoyce'sScribbledehobble.TheUrWorkbookforFinnegansWake(Connolly1961)atteststohisinterestinJoyce'sprocessesof
grafting:thecitations,combinations,andaccretionsbywhichJoycemadeentriesinhisnotebooksandthentransferredtheseentries,combiningthemandbuildingupa
palimpsest,intoasubsequentdraftforaparticularpassageoftheWake.DerridaexplainsthatScribble,his"partialtranslation"andintroductiontoWarburton'sessay
onhieroglyphics(book4,section4ofTheDivineLegationofMosesDemonstrated)"constantlyrefer[s],...beyondeventhetitleandthequotations"toJames
Joyce'sScribbledehobble"(Derrida1984a:150).Derrida'stitleexemplifiesthisprocessofgraftingbywhichthescion,"Scribble,"iscutfromitsoriginalsiteand
graftedontothetitleofDerrida'sessayinsuchawaythatit"con

 Page111

tinuestoradiatebacktowardthesiteofitsremoval,transformingthat,too,asitaffectsthenewterritory"(Derrida1981:355).

ShortlyafterthevisittothemuseyroominFinnegansWake,Biddyappearsas"aparody'sbird"(FW11.9),andthepunon"parody"and"paradise"makeshertitle
signifyandradiatebacktowardthenumerousnarrativesitesoftheprelapsarianparadisefromwhichHCEand"Humptyshellfallfrumptytimes"(FW12.1213),or
''shallfallumpteentimes."Thisnarrativeloopincludestheexplanationthatthereare"twosights[aswellas"sites"and"cites"]foreverapicture"(FW11.36)andevery
picture.These"sights,""sites,"and"cites"arecreatedbytheprocessofcitinginawritten,mimetic(andmiming)languagewherein"Englishmightbeseen"but"silence
speaksthescene"(FW13.1,3).Itcreatesthelinguisticworldofa"cellforcitterstocitin"(FW12.2),andoneofthewaystofeelathomeinthisstrangeworldisto
learnsittingascitingandcitingassighting,orseeing(whichisalso"theorizing"),tolearn,inotherwords,howtorecite,resite,andresight,orlookagain,atthe
complexsitesandscenesofthisvastlycomplex,Dublin(and"doublin")cityofa"citie"(FW17.21).

TheGram(andGrammatology)

RelatedtotheEnglishtermsgrammarandgrave(asinengrave),gramderivesfromaclassicalGreektermforscratchandisusedinformssuchas"having
scratchedmarksorfiguresonatable""todrawlineswithapencil,tosketch,draw,paint"and"towrite"(LiddellandScott).Thetermisalsoapplicabletotherules
ofgrammarandoperatesintheGreekphrase"towritedownalaw"(LiddellandScott).InthepreviouschapterwesawhowDerridausesthistermasoneofhis
undecidables.Atvarioustimes,hesetseachofitssemanticvaluestoworkinhiswriting.

Atafundamentalphysicallevel,eventhesimpleinscriptionofagram,ormark,onablankpagetriggerstheoperationsofthedoubleofwriting.Inscribingthemark,or
gram,allowsittosignifyandsimultaneouslysetsofftheoperationsoftheblankspacesthathelptobothdefineandlimittheplayofthemarkthatisinturndefinedby
them.OfGrammatologyisDerrida'sattempttoinvestigatethepossibilityofestablishingapositivescienceofwriting.Itanalyzessomeofthegeneraleffectsofthe
gram.Theseeffectsincludethatoftheinitialincisionwithwhichanymarkisinscribedorengraved(includingtheinitialletterofwordsorphrases)aswellasthe
signifyingoperationstriggeredbysuchinscriptionandtherulesandprinciplesofsuchsignification.

 Page112

OfGrammatologyinvestigatesWesternsystemsofphoneticwritingwiththeirsupposedonetoonerelationshipsbetweentheinscribedmarkanditsphonetic
realization.TheserelationshipsareincontrasttothoseofEastern,ideogrammaticsystemsofwritingwhereintheprimaryrelationshipisbetweentheinscribedmarkand
theidea(ratherthanthesound)thatitrepresents.TheWesternstressontheinscribedmark,letter,orwordandthesoundthatitrepresentsissignifiedbytheterm
phonocentrism,whichisrelatedto(butnotidenticalwith)thetermsoflogocentrismandphallocentrism,aswellastothecompoundtermphallogocentrism.These
are,ofcourse,termsthathavebecomeafamiliarpartofacademicdiscoursepreciselybecauseofthedisseminationofDerrida'stheoriesofdeconstruction.

Wehavealreadyconsideredtheforceandplayofthegram'soperationsinUlyssesandparticularlytheplayofthe"techne"ofthegram,ortheoperationsofthe
grammewithinatechnologicalmode(thetelegram,thegram(s)inscribedonthepostcardsandtransportedthroughthepostalsystem,theprintedmarksof
newspapers,themarksBloomscratchesinthesand,thetelephoneasasortofphonegram,and,ofcourse,thegramophone).FinnegansWaketellsusthateventhe
gramofasimple"penstroke"(aswellastheblankofthe"paperspace''thathelpsdefineitandregulateitsplay)is"aperfectsignatureallofitsown"(FW115.78),
andoneoftheWake'snumerouscircularpatternstracestheoperationsofthescratch,theinscribedmark,penstrokes,andotherformsofthegram.

WeconsideredsomeofthesetracingsbylookingattheWake'sreferencestoitsletters,words,andphrases,andthetext'smetonymicdescriptionofitselfasaletter
"utteredforAlp"(FW420.18)allowsustoreadthevariousspecificanagramsJoycecreatedtosupporttheidentificationofhistextasAlp'sletter,oras"Anna's
grams."ThetextisboththeletterdiscoveredbyBiddyasshescratchesinthemiddenheapandthemiddenheapitself.ThelinkbetweenBiddyandthegramasa
scratchedmarkismadebythefactthat"whatshewasscratchingatthehourofklokkingtwelvelookedforallthiszogzagworldlikeagoodishsizedsheetof
letterpaper"(FW111.79emphasisadded).Biddyisliterallymarkinggrams,orscratchingmarks,onthepaper.

Ofcourse,allwritingstartsfromoneinitialscratch,orgram,andtheWakelinksthiswritingwithreading.Bothstart"fromscratch."Whenwefirststartreading,we
"areonceamoreasbabesawonderinginawoldmadefreshwherewiththeheninthestoryabootwestartfromscratch(FW336.1618emphasisadded).Thisisone
ofthemanymultipleentrypointsintothetextforthereader,and,asoneofthewanderingbabesinthewood/world/text,wewilleventuallystart"feelinglike[we]was
lostinthebush"

 Page113

(FW112.3).Thewayinwhichtofindourplaceagainistopersevereinfollowingour"poultriestnotion[s]"(FW112.56)aboutthewood/worldofthetextandlet
Biddybethe"kindlyfowl"whosescratchingwill"[1]ead"(FW112.9)usalongoneoftheWake'smanycircular,bifurcating,andinterconnectedpaths.

Inthelessonssectiontheidentificationofthewordsofthetextwithawoodisstrengthenedbythefemaleversionoftheletter"[b]yherfreewritten"(FW280.2):"Isit
inthenowwoodwordingsofoursweetplantationwherethebranchingsthenwillsingingsingtomorrowsgoneandyestersoutcome"(FW280.47emphasisadded).
Thegramsoftheindividuallettersaredividedintomaleandfemalepenstrokes:"ThosepothooksmostlyshehawksfromPoppaVereFosterbutthesecurly
mequeuesareofMippa'smoulding"(FW280.1618).ShemandShaunas"jemmijohns"argue,or''cudgel,"overarithmetic,or"arhythmatick"(FW268.78),but
Issyhaslearnedafemalegrammarforwritingfromher"gramma'sgrammar"(FW268.17).Theforegroundingofthisfemalegrammarisapartofthecircularpattern
drawingattentiontotheoperationsofthegramandidentifyingmuchofthetext'slanguageasfemale.ItisthusapartoftheWake'santiphallocentricmovementandan
importantpartofJoyce's"workingover"ofphallogocentrismfromthesideofthefemale.

Besidesforegroundingsuchoperationsofthegram,theWakealsoemploysthegramsofindividuallettersandothersymbolsinawaythatdisruptsanddeconstructs
thetraditionalphonocentricfunctionsoftheletters.InOfGrammatology,Derridaexploressomeofthewaysinwhich"[n]onphoneticwritingbreaksthenounapart"
andparticipatesinthedeconstructionofalogocentrismthatprivileges"substantiality,thatothermetaphysicalnameofpresenceandousia"(Derrida1976:26).Hesees
thelinkbetweenthe"nounandtheword"intermsofthe"unitiesofbreathandconcept"operatinginphonocentrism.Inusingphoneticsignifiersinanonphonetic
manner,theWakemovestowardthesortof"purewriting"Derridaseeseffacingthenounandtheword(Derrida1976:26).Italsoproducesanother(and"other")
doublingeffectinsettingphoneticsignifierstoworkideogrammatically.

WhatDerridauncoversinhisinvestigationofthetraceofarchewritingandwhattheWakeputsintopracticewithitsnonphoneticusesofphoneticsymbolsisthe
"indefinitely""becomingunmotivated"ofthetrace.AsDerridastatesitin"Saussarianlanguage,""thereisneithersymbolnorsignbutabecomingsignofthe
symbol"(Derrida1976:47).Thetraditionalphoneticfunctionoftheletter"E,"forexample,istosymbolizethesoundthatisrealizedinthevoicingofthatletter.When
theWakeplacesthatgram

 Page114

onitsside(FW6.32)todepict"HCEinterredinthelandscape"(Joyce,citedinMcHugh1980:6),theletterceasestobeaphoneticsymbolandbecomesan
ideogrammaticsignifierofHCE'sdeathandinterment.ThisisalsothecaseforthereversedE(FW36.17)thatlosesitsmotivationasaphoneticsymbolandbecomes
theideogramforaphysicalgestureHCEmakesby"placing[his]rightfistin[his]bentleftelbow"(McHugh1980:36).

Thisdeconstructive"becomingunmotivated"ofthephoneticsymbolsisdescribedintheWakeasa"certainchangeofstateofgraceofnature"(FW119.20)bywhich
the"trilithonsign"(FW119.17)oftheE(placedsothatitsnormallyhorizontallinesareprintedverticallylikeanM)ceasestobemotivatedasasymbolofsoundand
becomesa"sign"ofHCE's''titleinsigla"(FW119.19).Thesame"becomingunmotivated"canbetracedintheWake'suseoftheGreek ,whichbecomes"fontly
called...alp"(FW119.1920),therebylosingitsfunctionasaphoneticsymbol,aswellasintheoperationsoftheothersiglausedtoidentifytherestofthe
Earwickerfamily,thefouroldmen,andFinnegansWakeitself.

Theprocessofthesiglasbecomingunmotivatedisatleastadoubleprocessthatoperatesaccordingtothesamedoubling(and"Dublin")logicthatwehavealready
traced.RolandMcHughnotesthatthesiglasignifynotonly"personages"butalso"fluidcomposites"and"nonhumanelements"(McHugh1976:10).TheWakeasks
"whynottakethe[Eonitsside]foravillageinn"the "foranupsidownbridge"thexofthefouroldmenas"amultiplicationmarkingforcrossroadsahead"the
invertedvofthe"pothookforthefamilygibbet"thesquaresignifyingthetext"forthebucker'sfield"theTonitsside"foratrystsomeday"andthesquarewithits
"onesidemissingforanallblindalleyleadingtoanIrishplotintheChampdeMors"(FW119.2732).

ThevarioussiglathuslosetheirmotivationaseithersymbolsofsoundorassymbolsoftheEarwickerfamily,thefouroldmenandthetextwhentheybecome
ideogrammaticsignifiersofaninn,abridge,amultiplicationmarkandacrossroads,agibbet,afield,andatryst.Theythenlosethismotivationwhentheybecome
signifiersofthegrams,orinscribedmarks,ofdrawingorwritingitselfandareidentifiedasthescribbledor"doodled"marksofthe"Doodlesfamily,
.Hoodledoodle,fam.?"(FW299F4).

Logocentrism,Phonocentrism,andPhallocentrism

Whilethereareobviouslyspecificlinksbetweenthesethreeterms,theyarenotidenticalanddonotsignifythesameoperationsinthephilosophicaland

 Page115

literaryusesoflanguageuponwhichDerridafocusesinhisinvestigationsoftheWesternmetaphysicaltradition.Ingeneralterms,logocentrismsignifiestextual
operationsthataregovernedbytraditionalformsofphilosophicallogic(predicatelogic,syllogisticlogic,thelogicofthedialectic,anavoidanceofthevariousformsof
fallaciousreasoning,andsoon)andarestructuredteleologically.Insofarasalogocentrictextattendstotheoperationsofthelogosaslinguisticoperationsofthe
word,itcanalsobeinvolvedwiththephonocentricoperationsoftextsthatviewtheprimaryfunctionofwrittenlanguageastherepresentationofthespokenformsof
thatlanguage.

DerridaisawareoftheimportanceofthespokenformofthecreativelogosintheJudeoChristiantradition(anawarenesswehaveseeninbothhistheoriesof
translationaswellasinhisreadingsofFinnegansWake),butitisonthebasisofPlato'swritingsthatheelaboratesmanyofhisideasaboutclassicalphilosophical
phonocentrism.In"Plato'sPharmacy,"aswehaveseen,heexplorestheprivilegingofspeechoverwritingthatPlatoestablishesthroughhisuseoftheEgyptianmythof
thecontestbetweenAmmonRaandThoth.In"TheDoubleSession,"hereturnstoPlato'swritingsandexamineshowSocratesprivilegesinteriorthoughtoverspeech
andspeechoverwriting.Thoughtissuperiortospeechbecauseitisinternalandseemsmorecapableofguaranteeinganinteriorselfpresenceofthethinkerwithinthe
immediatepresenceofhisorherthought.Speechislessdesirablebecauseitrequiresthatmeaningbeexteriorizedthroughphoneticarticulation,butitisstillmore
desirablethanthedeadletterofwriting,whichrequiresneitherthepresenceofthespeakerorlistenerdemandedbyspeechnortheimmediatepresenceofthereader
inthecompanyofthewriter.Ineachcase,thedesirabilityoftheparticularlinguisticform(thought,spokenorwritten)isdeterminedbythephilosophicalconceptof
presence.

Phallocentrismisinvolvedwithlogocentrism,andDerridahasstatedthatthey"areindissociable,"although"thestressescanliemorehereorthereaccordingtothe
casetheforceandthetrajectoryofthemediationscanbedifferent."Ultimately,however,a"radicaldissociationbetweenthetwomotifscannotbemadeinallrigour."
PhallogocentrismisthetermwithwhichDerridaunitesphallocentrismandlogocentrism.ItworkslikeoneofJoyce'spunsasitcombinesthetermsforthephallus(the
penisbutalsothemodeloftheline),logos(thought,spokenandwrittenwordsaswellasclassicformsoflogic),andcentrism.Phallogocentrismcenterstheoperations
oflanguagearoundthelogicalandlinearizingrulesandmodelsthatgovernthem.Phallogocentrismisnot,however,amonolithicedifice.Eventhoughitis"onesingle
thing,...itisanarticulatedthing"withinnumer

 Page116

ableformsofarticulationthatbreakitdownintovariousspecificarticulationscalling"fordifferentstrategies"(Derrida1992b:5960).

WesawDerridadescribedoublestructureslikethoseofJoyce'stextsas"violentlyphallocentric"yetsimultaneously"produc[ing]deconstructiveeffects,...precisely
againstphallocentrism,whoselogicisalwaysreadytoreverseitself"(Derrida1992b:59).AlthoughitisFinnegansWakethatmostclearlyforegroundsitsown
deconstructiveeffects(includingthosethatworkagainstitsphallocentricstoryofHCE's"Phall"),thedouble,simultaneouslyphallocentricanddeconstructiveeffects
arediscernibleinmuchofJoyce'swriting.

ThelogicgoverningtheAristotelianteleologybywhichaunifiedplotmovesfromitsbeginningthroughitsmiddletoitsendisdisruptedbythestructuresofmanyofthe
storiesinDubliners.Thecentral,climacticeventsthatshouldcenterthestoriesareabsent:thedeathofFatherFlynnthepossiblemasturbationin"AnEncounter"Bob
Doran'sseductionofPollyEveline'sromancewithFrankCorley'sextractionofthecoinfromtheyoungwoman.Theseandtheothergapsinthestoriesareinparta
resultofJoyce'sdepictionofthedespair,theloneliness,andtheparalysisofhischaracters,butthisdoesnotnegatethewaysinwhichtheydecenteranddeconstruct
thestructuresofthesestoriesinsuchawaythatthestoriescouldallmoreorlessbedescribedbythephrasefrom"APainfulCase":"adventurelesstale[s]"(D105).

IntheirownwaysmanyofthestoriesofDublinersprivilegephallocentrismintheirattentiontothephallusand/ortheoperationsofthemodeloftheline.Theworldof
Dublinersisapatriarchalworld,adomesticandsocialnetworkwhoseeconomyissustainedbyacapitalshoredupwithphallicpowerandpreciselyregulated
accordingtothelawsofthemodeloftheline.Itisaworldinwhichthemales,whoarefathers,husbands,uncles,priests,politicians,andeventhephallicmaternal
figureslikeMrs.MooneyandMrs.Kearney,divide,controlandrulethefamilialandsocialstructuresofthestoriesthroughaphallicpower.Ineachcasesuch
dominationoperatesaccordingtothemodelofthelineasatoolofdivision,control,andregulation.

OldCotter'shintsaboutthesexualdimensiontoFatherFlynn'sinterestintheboyFlynn'stonguerestingonhislowerlipthepervertwithhisphallicwalkingstickand
Eveline'sfatherwithhis"blackthornstick"(D29)thetrainthatcarriestheboytoArabyandtheonethatkillsEmilySinicothestickwithwhichFarringtonbeatshis
sonthecandleBobDoranlightsforPollyandevenGabriel'simpulsetoshieldGrettafromthepossibleobscenitiesofthebottlemaker:allofthesearesymbolicofthe
phallic

 Page117

powerthathelpstoshoreupthecapitalregulatingthephallocentricandlineartextualeconomyofDubliners.

Atthesametimeastheyproducethisphallocentriceffect,thestoriesdeconstructit.Thepervert'spossiblemasturbationisliterallyleftobscene,or"offstage"theboy's
phallicquestin"Araby"endswithhispainfulrecognitionofhisownvanityBobDoranmaylightPolly'scandle,butweneverseehimlightherfireFarrington'sbeating
ofhissonisrenderedasanundesirable,condemnablecrueltytheactionsofMrs.MooneyandMrs.KearneyarethoseofunpleasantanddomineeringbulliesEveline
isavictimofherfather'scruelandthreateningbehaviorandGabrielcomestorecognizehisfoolishnessandvanity.Thephallocentriceffectsofthestoriesarethus
deconstructedinsuchawaythattheycanbeaccuratelyremarkedwithLily'sdescriptionofthemensheknows:theyareallsomuch"palaver"(178).

Phallogocentrismiscloselylinkedtotheconceptofthebookasanideologicalstructure.Thephallicmodelofthelinethatregulatesandrepressesthe"pluri
dimensionalsymbolic"playofthoughtandlanguageisalso"structurallyboundup"withthepossibilityof"economy,oftechnics,andofideology."Derridadescribesa
"solidarity"betweentheseforcesandtheoperationsofthemodeloftheline,andthissolidaritymanifestsitselfinvariousformsoftheideologicalmodelofthebook.It
''appearsintheprocessofthesaurization,capitalization,sedentarization,hierarchization,oftheformationofideologybytheclassthatwritesorrathercommandsthe
scribes"(Derrida1976:86).

WehavealreadyseenhowJoyce'sAPortraitoftheArtistasaYoungMancanbereadasakindof"groupedtextualfield"fromwhichdeconstructioncanget
underway,andthetextoffersnumerousexamplesofthe"enigmaticmodeloftheline"operatingasit"relaxesitsoppression"ofwriting.Thenumerousshiftsbetween
thevariousnarrativestyles(achild'sstorytheinfantStephen'spoemtherhythmofthedanceStephen'smotherplaysonthepianothethirdperson,pasttense
narrativethedialoguesthetheologicalsermonthephilosophicaltheoryofaestheticstheconfessionthefirstperson,presenttensediaryfragments)constitute
interruptionstoanysinglelinearityofstyleandpreventanyfull,phallogocentricregulationofthetextbyonesinglelinearmodel.

Atthesametime,thetextpresentsapositivedeconstructiveassaultonthetraditionalideologicalstructureofthebookinitslackofaconclusiontothestoryofStephen
Dedalus.TofollowStephen'sstory,thereadermustreadbeyondthebordersofPortraitandfollowthedevelopmentofStephenacrossthetextualbordersof
Ulysses.Thetwotextsthuscreateadouble

 Page118

patternthatrepeatsthegeneraldoubleofwritingwehaveseenelsewhereatworkinbothJoyceandDerrida.Whileitisclearlypossibletotreatthisdoublepatternin
thetraditionaltermsofanovelsequenceinwhichthesamecharactersreappear,thisdoublestructurestillworkstowardsuspendingtheeffectsofclosuretraditionally
establishedwiththeendingandbeginningofthebookasanideologicalstructure.

Insimpleterms,Stephenoccupiesaseriesofdoublepositions,andhischaracterinUlyssescannotbeunderstoodfullywithoutareadingofPortraitanymorethan
thecausaleffectsofhisactionsinPortraitcanbeconsideredinisolationfromthoseeffectsinthelaterwork.Stephen'srefusaltoprayforhismotherinUlysses,for
example,cannotbeunderstoodwithoutsomeknowledgeofhisrefusalto"make[his]easterduty"inPortrait(PA25960)anymorethanhisbanishmentofherghost
inUlysses(U47475)canbecomprehendedwithoutsomeknowledgeofhisrejectionofCatholicisminPortrait.Stephen'sbrandishingofhisashplant/swordto
banishhismother'sghostin"Circe"isaphallocentricaction,but,astheculminationofhisstruggleagainstCatholicisminPortrait,itissimultaneouslyantiphallocentric.

Inotherwords,theteleologicaltrajectoryofStephen'sdevelopmentcrossesthebordersofthetwotextsanddisruptstheideologicalclosuresofboth.Furthermore,
whileStephenisclearlythecentralfigureofPortrait(aswellasoftheearlierStephenHero),hispositioninUlyssesismarginalizedtosuchanextentthathe
eventuallybecomeslittlemorethanafigureinMolly'snocturnalmeditationsasJoyce'swritingfollowsthelargertrajectoryinwhichtheprivilegingofamaledominated
phallogocentrismbecomesdisplacedbytheWake's"languoofflows"thatisALP'smaternallanguage.

StephenandBloomarebothvehiclesforthephallocentricimpulsesofJoyce'swriting.Stephen'sJesuiteducationandBloom'sdesiretomakealivinginthe
commercialworldofadvertisingarebothexpressionsofthisphallocentrism.Stephen'seducationenableshimtoappreciateAquinasandpoetry,butitcandolittle
morethantemporarilyinhibitthephallicsexualdrivesthatmanifestthemselvesinhisvoyeurism,masturbation,andcopulationwithprostitutes.Bloomalsoderives
pleasurefromvoyeurismandmasturbation,andthe"Circe"episoderevealshisphalliccentered,sadomasochism.Bloommaythinktemporarilythat"[a]ll[is]gone.All
fallen"(U234)andtemporarily"feelsolonelyBloom''(U235)whenhemeditatesonBoylanandMollyin"Sirens,"buthesoonrecoversinordertofightwiththe
citizenandthengoontomasturbatewhilstlookingatGerryandpeepingather"nainsookknickers"(U300).

 Page119

Chapter10
AFinalFrame(UpBeyondtheEither)orDesirebetweenJoyceandDerrida
Inthefirstfivewordsappearingonpage3ofFinnegansWake,Joyce'swritingremarksitsowndeconstructive,antiphallocentrictendencies,eventhoughitdoesso
withinawritingthatsimultaneouslyoperatesaccordingtomarkedphallocentricimpulses.Thedoubleeffectscreatedbythesimultaneouslyphallocentricand
deconstructiveforcesofJoyce'searlierwritingaremoremarkedintheWakebecauseofJoyce'sconsciousdecisiontomakehiswritingoperateaccordingtothe
unconsciousprinciplesandalogicalpatternsofthedream.FinnegansWakeisamuchmoredelinearizedwritingthanJoyce'searlierwork,andthisdelinearization
helpslifttherepressionof"pluridimensionalsymbolicthought"(Derrida1976:86).

 Page120

TheTrigger

RestagingareleaseofDerrida'sdisseminativetriggerseemsasgoodawayasanytoconcludethisnecessarilyfragmentaryreadingofDerrida'sreadingofJoyce.No
readingofJoyce,orDerrida,couldeverbecomplete(andareadingofJoyceandDerridaisnecessarilytwiceasincompleteasortofdoubleincompleteness),but
pullingatriggerisonewaytoputanendtothings(aswell,ofcourse,asinitiatingthem),ifonlytemporarily.Themetaphorofthetriggerisamechanicalone,and
Derridawarns:"Nooneisallowedonthesepremisesifheisafraidofmachinesandifhestillbelievesthatliterature,andperhapseventhought,oughttoexorcisethe
machine,thetwohavingnothingtodowitheachother"(Derrida1981:292).

ExploitingLittr,Derridacitesseveralsemanticvaluesforthetriggeror"Ledclenchment."Theseinclude:"n.1.Theautomaticreleaseofamechanism.2.Any
deviceinapositiontoengageortostopthemovingpartsofamachine.3.Theactoftriggeringthemotionofamachinebymeansofsuchadevice"(Derrida
1981:290).Whetherasa"clappercouplingsmeltingworks"(FW614.3031),an''autokinaton"(FW235.27),a"bairdboardbombardmentscreen"(FW349.8),or
an"airishchauntingcar"(FW55.24),FinnegansWakeoffersnumerousmetaphorswithwhichitidentifiesitselfassomekindofmachine.Thevariousaccountsofthe
eventintheparkalsobringintoplaythespecifickillingmachineoftherevolverthatHCEhas"placedtohisface"(FW62.32).

Atthelevelofthetext'snarrativeconcerningtheeventsthattakeplaceinthepark,itisunclearifHCEisshotormerelythreatenedwiththerevolver,oriftheshotfrom
therevolverisHCE'ssexualejaculation.Issy'scommentsinthelessonssectionsuggestthelatter."Amshot,saysthebigguard"(FW260.67),andIssy'sremarkson
thisexclamationrevealherknowledgethatbeingshotbyHCEinthiswaywouldresultinherpregnancy:"IfoldHerodwiththeCormwell'seczemawastogoforme
likehedoesSnufflerwhateverabouthisbluecanariesI'ddoninemonthsforhisbeaverbeard"(FW260F1emphasisadded).

AttheleveloftheWake'sforegroundingofitsownwritingandtheoperationsofitsgrammar,thetriggerisboththatofasimultaneouslyphallicandmechanicalrevolver
andthekindoftextualmechanismthatDerridaseesputtingtextualoperationsinmotion.Thistriggerfiresoffanotherdoubleoperation.Itsetswritingtoworkatthe
levelofthenarrativeandinthesimultaneousdeconstructiveremarkingofitsowntextuality:"Thestorythatseemstobethustriggeredoff...thenbeginstofunction
accordingtomodalitiesinwhichdeathisaffiliatedwiththe(metaphorofthe)textual

 Page121

machine"(Derrida1981:292).IntheWake,thetriggeroftherevolverthatthreatensHCEandsymbolizeshisphallusisalsothetriggerthatallowswritingtooperate.

Followingthequestion"Howusedyoulearnme,brather...?"(FW468.34),theWakeoffersacatalogofgrammaticalandpoeticterms,includingadeconstructed
passagegraftedfromKennedy'sLatinPrimer(McHugh1980:468)thatconstitutesa"trigger"settingthegrammaticaloperationsofthetextinmotion:''Thouthefirst
personshingeller.Art,animperfectsubjunctive....MissSmithonamatterpoetic.Hammisandivisaxescolleswaxeswarmaslikesodullas[thegraftfromthePrimer].
Sopickyourstopswithfondnessnow.Andmindyoutwinethetwosnoodsofyournicenames.Andpullupyourfurbelovsasfaraboveasyou'refarthingales.That'll
hinthimhowtoclickthetrigger"(FW468.815emphasisadded).Thistriggerisalsothetriggerofarevolverpulledbya"finger"(Gk.daktyliz):"Sodactylisehim
uptoblankpoint"(FW468.1617).To"dactylise"repeatstheprocessofputtingwritingtoworkaccordingtotherhythmofametricalpatternandthatofusinga
fingertopullthetriggerofagunat"blankpoint,"or"pointblank,"range.Derridaremarksthiskindofdoubleoperationbywhichwritingissimultaneouslyinvolved
withrepetitionanddeath:"Bornofrepetition...eveninitsfirstoccurrence,thetextmechanically,mortallyreproduces...theprocessofitsowntriggering"(Derrida
1981:292).

Firsttriggerrelease:"riverrun,pastEveandAdam's"(FW3.1):RolandMcHughidentifiesboththepunonerinnerung(G."remembrance")andthenameofDublin's
AdamandEve'sChurchaswellasthetavernofthesamename.WhenthereaderreachesALP'splaintivecry"mememormee"(FW628.14),hecanrecognizethe
repetitionofthiscryforremembranceinthe"riverrun"/erinnerungpun."[R]iverrun"functionsasadeconstructivetrigger:itsetsthetextinmotionbyproclaimingthe
simultaneousflowoftheriverLiffeyandtheWake's"languoofflows"whilecompletingthecyclicalpatternoftheWakebyrepeatingALP'sclosingpleatobe
remembered.ItalsopunsontheAngloIrishpronunciationof"reverend,"triggeringthemechanismoftheletter,or"epistolear,"(FW38.23)whichALPas"[o]urcad's
bitofstrife"(FW38.9)whispersas"gossiple"(FW38.23)intotheearof"herparticularreverend,thedirector"(FW38.1819emphasisadded).Thisversionofthe
letterrepeatstheeventsthattranspireinthepark,includingtheinvolvementoftherevolverorpistol,and"epistolear"triggerstherepetitionoftheletter,(epistle),the
revolver(pistol),andALP'swordstoHCEasshespeaksthemtohisear("epistolear"emphasisadded).

Secondtriggerrelease:"pastEveandAdam's"interruptsthelinearityof

 Page122

"AdamandEve's."ItdoessobyreversingthepositionsofAdamandEveandputtingEveinaninitialand,accordingtothelogicoflinearity,primaryposition.Thefirst
malehumanisthusdisplaced,andthefirstfemalehumantakeshisplace.Thisantiphallocentricmovementrepeatstheonewehaveseeninwhich"theLordGod,who
isandwasandwhoistocome"(Rev.1.8)isreplacedbythewordsof"Annawas,Liviais,Plurabelle'stobe"(FW215.24)and"Mammywas,Mimmyis,
Minuscoline'stobe"(FW226.145).Becauseitslanguageissignedasafemalelanguage,theWakedeclares,''ThewordismyWife"(FW167.29).

With"pastEveandAdam's,"Joyce'swritingcompletesatrajectorythatbeganwithStephenDedalusasaHero,thenmovedthroughthemalepositionsofDedalus
andBloom(withthefrequentlyphallocentriceffectsofthosepositions)inordertoarriveatthedoublefemalepositionthatsimultaneouslyclosesUlyssesandbrings
writingintothenightlanguagethatisthe"nat"languageoftheWake."PastEveandAdam's"bidsfarewelltothemalepositionasthedominantpositioninlanguage.
The"riverrun"isnotaboutStephenandtellsussointhepun"pas(Fr.'not')Stephen"("pastEveand"/"pas"Stephen).AthirdpunmayalsoidentifyALP,orAnna,
withthehistorical,or"past,"Eve("pastEveandAdam's"/"pastEveAnn").AccordingtotheWake'spunsanddouble(Dublinand"doublin")logic,eventhemale
name,Adam,canbereadasaremarkingofthisfarewelltothedominantmasculineposition.Usingtheantiphallocentrictechniqueof"capsever[ing]"taughtinthe
lessonssection,thepropername"Adam"canalsobereadandheardas"adam,"remarkingthematernalstatusofALPandher"riverrun."

Thirdtriggerrelease:"riverrun"setsinmotionthetext'snetworkofliquidmetaphors.ThemostextensiveanalysisofthevariousliquidsintheWakeisprovidedby
MargaretSolomon'sEternalGeomater:TheSexualUniverseofFinnegansWake(Solomon1969).Solomondoesnotforegroundauseofdeconstruction,buther
readingmapsoutmanyofthesimultaneouslyphallocentricandantiphallocentricmovementsinJoyce'stext.Tracingtheassociativechainsofliquidsinthetext(water,
river,rain,whiskey,beer,porter,tea,ink,urine,semen,andsoon),herstudyallowsustorecognizethatHCEisAdamandEve'stavern(the"villageinn"[FW
119.27]the"MullingcanInn"[FW64.9]thelessonssection'sdouble"Inninn!"[FW262.26]),whereporterisdispensedaswellthecharacterwhomicturatesinthe
park.Hisurineisassociatedwiththeink,semen,andteafoundinShem's"teatimestainedterminal"(FW114.2930),andtea(whichpunsonthephallicT)is"notonly
feminineurine[liketheprankquean's]butalsomalesemen"(Solomon1969:78).

 Page123

This(con)fusionofliquidssustainsthemetaphoroftheliquidityoftheWake'slanguage,makingitultimatelyimpossibletodistinguish,withanyprecision,betweenthe
phallocentricandantiphallocentricimpulsesofJoyce'swriting.HCE'sfallasaphallic"Phall"(FW4.15),forexample,simultaneouslymarksbothHCE'suseofthe
creativeandsexualpowersthatleadtohisfallandthefailurethattheuseofthemproduces.Whentheprankqueanrains(andreigns)over"Woeman'sLand"(FW
22.8),sheoccupiesthephallogocentricpositionofonewhorules,butthethirdtimethatsheurinatesatJarlvonHoother'sdoorandinfameshisdesire(sheagain"pull
[s]arosyone....andfirelandwasablaze"[FW21.1517]),Jarlbecomeserect''tothewholelongthofthestrongthofhisbowman'sbill"(FW23.23).Heenters
thedoor,or"port,"oftheprankquean,andashe"ports""her,"orpenetratesher,theycreate"thefirstpeaceofilliterativeportheryinalltheflamendfloodyflatuous
world"(FW23.910emphasisadded).

Fourthtriggerrelease:"Assoonaswriting,whichentailsmakingaliquidflowoutofatubeontoapieceofwhitepaperassumesthesignificanceofcopulation...
writing...[is]stoppedbecause[it]represent[s]theperformanceofaforbiddensexualact"(FreudcitedinDerrida1976:xlviiiii).Derrida'sworkrevealsastrong
awarenessofFreud'sunderstandingofthethinking,speaking,andwritingofliteratureandphilosophyasprocessesmadepossiblebythesublimationofthedrives,and
muchofhisinterestinJoyceremarksthewaysinwhichJoycemapsouttherelationshipsbetweentheoperationsofdesireanditsobjectsasthedoublestructureofa
writingthatremarkstheoperationsofitsown"other"withinitself.Insimpleterms,itisthedistancebetweenthedesiringsubjectanditsdesiredobject(s)thatallows
desiretooperate.

OneofthetropesforthedoubleofwritingtracedbytheWake'sprankqueanepisodeisthatinwhichdesireissimultaneouslyinvolveditsownfailure.Itis
simultaneouslyadesiringandadedesiring(ordesireing)process.Whentheprankqueanarrivesatthecastle,Jarlisontwooccasionsmasturbating(first"layingcold
handsonhimself"[FW21.11]andthen"shakingwarmhandswithhimself"[FW21.36]).Hisdesireisobviouslyforsexualgratification,butitisnotadesiretosirea
childwiththe"other"oftheprankquean.HerdesirerepelsJarlsomuchthathetwiceshutsthedoorinherface.

Onlyontheprankquean'sthirdvisitdoesJarldecidetocomeintoher"likethecampbellsacomingwithaforklanceoflightning"(FW22.3031).Atthispoint,the
forcesofhumandesirearesetinmotioninasimultaneousactofspecificcopulationbetweenJarlandtheprankqueanandasublima

 Page124

tionofuniversalhumandesireinthesynthesisofthefourClassical,primalelementsoffire,water,earth,andwindwiththereligiousmythsoftheritualisticfloodingand
apocalypticburningoftheworld:"thatwasthefirstpeaceofilliterativeportheryinalltheflamendfloodyflatuousworld"(FW23.910).Epicinitsscope(itcatalogs
the"flame,""water,''"wind,"and"earth"ofClassicalthoughtandsynthesizesthesewiththebiblical"flood"andtheapocalyptic"flamend"oftheearth),thissynthesisis
alsoantiepicinitscondensationoftheseeventswithinasinglesentence.Whatthissinglesentenceunderminesisthelinearityandhistoricityofthenumerous,
temporallystructured,historicalnarrativesofClassicalthoughtandJudeoChristianmythsthatJoycefusestogetherthroughouthis"collideorscape."

(In)conclusions

TheprefacetothisstudycitesStephenHeath'sargumentthat"[t]hereisnoconclusiontobereachedinareadingofJoyce'stext"(Heath1984:61).Oneviablewayof
temporarilyfinishingorsuspendingareadingofJoyce'stextistolearnJoyce'sowntechniqueofreadingas"raiding"(FW482.32),andthisHeathdoesinraidingthe
WakeandEpiphaniesforappropriatepassageswithwhichtoclosehisownreading:"Theend?Sayitwithmissilesthenandthusarabesquethepage"(FW115.23
Heath1984:61).

Eventhisisunsatisfactory,however,asHeathpointsout:"anambiviolentextensionof[Joyce's]textinanewpracticeofwritingisbeyondthescopeofthepresent
simpleintroduction"(Heath1984:61).HeathendshisstudywithapassagefromEpiphaniesinwhichheseesJoyce"resuming...intheaccountofadream,in
relationtooriginandlanguageandsubject,thecloudingofthe'Cartesianspring'."ThepassageHeathcitesprovidesananalogyforreadingabeastofatextthatis
writteninalanguagethatcannotbeunderstood:"Somethingismovinginthepoolitisanarcticbeastwitharoughyellowcoat.Ithrustinmystickandasherisesout
ofthewaterIseethathisbackslopestowardsthecroupandthatheisverysluggish.Iamnotafraidbut,thrustingathimoftenwithmystickdrivehimbeforeme.He
moveshispawsheavilyandmutterswordsofsomelanguagewhichIdonotunderstand"(Heath1984:6162).

InthesameyearthatHeathattemptedtodealwiththeproblemofclosureinareadingofJoyce,PatrickParrinderconsideredtheproblemfromamorehistorical
perspective.HisviewisthatsomeofJoyce'slinguisticexperimentsintheWake"may,atsomepoints,havegoneastray"(Parrinder1984:237).Parrindersharesthe
ratherpessimisticviewexpressedearlierby

 Page125

BernardBenstockinJoyceAgain'sWake:"Time,whichwasexpectedtobringallevidenceeventuallytothesurfaceinanorderedpattern,sofarhashadthe
oppositeeffect"(Benstock1965:40).ParrinderseesthedifficultiesofunderstandingtheWakeincreasingastheperiodofJoyce'slifebecomesmorehistoricallydistant:
"AsJoyce'slifetimerecedesfromus,andwithitthelikelihoodofrecoveringthoseofhismorefugitiveandephemeralallusionswhichhaveyettobedetected,the
Wakeisinsomewaysgettingmoredifficult,evenasscholarshiprendersiteasiertomaster"(Parrinder1984:236).

BothBenstockandParrinderviewJoyce'sachievementsfromtheperspectivesaffordedbytheirpositionsaseminentscholars.Theseperspectivesarenecessarily
groundedin,andgovernedby,thehistoricalandteleologicalmodelsofresearchanddevelopmentthatdetermineandregulateacademic,scholarlyresearch.Derrida's
readingsofJoyceofferanalternativetosuchaperspective.WheremanytraditionalscholarsseethediscoveryandcatalogingofJoyce'sallusionsandreferencesas
oneofthemostessential(ifnotthemostessentialtask)ofstudyingJoyce,eventraditionalscholarslikeParrinderrecognizethatmanytraditionalformsofscholarship
(breakingdownJoyce'spunsintotheircomponent"etym[s],"trackingdownhisallusions,establishingtheconcordances,lexicons,catalogs,andothertaxonomiesfor
hiswriting)maynotbetheonlyways(oreventhemostdesirableways)ofreadingJoyce.Thisisbecausethe"encyclopaedicnatureof[the]knowledge"withwhich
JoycemadetheWakea"historyoftheworld''isarrangedinwaysthatshowJoyce"hadutterlyabandonedanypreconceivedideasofacanonorhierarchyof
knowledge"(Parrinder1984:237).

Thephilosophyuponwhichmuchliteraryscholarshipisgroundedisthetraditional,logical,andteleologicalphilosophythatDerridatermsphallogocentrism.Itisa
philosophythatrarelyconsidersthemodelofthelinewithwhichitproducesitsownlogicalandrhetoricalcategoriesandcreatesitstaxonomicsystems.Discussingthe
operationsofthismodelofthelinewithinthecontextofthehistoryofphilosophy,Derridaarguesthatthe"enigmaticmodelofthelineis...theverythingthat
philosophycouldnotseewhenithaditseyesopenontheinteriorityofitsownhistory"(Derrida1976:86).Thismodelofthelinealsowouldenablethosewhom
Parrinderterms"orthodoxhistorians"todrawalinebetweenacceptableelementsinJoyce's"historyoftheworld"andthosethey"wouldseeastrivialand
ephemeral"(Parrinder1984:237).

TherearefewcriticswhowoulddenythatJoyceisinsomewaysanepicwriter,butDerrida'sreadingofJoycerevealsanotherorderatworkin

 Page126

Joyce'swritings.Thisisthe"order"that,theWaketellsus,"[o]nlyis...othered"inJoyce'stext(FW613.1314).TheAristotelianmodeloftemporallinearityby
whichpast,present,andfutureareconceivedintermsofapastpresent,apresentpresent,andafuturepresentis"othered''inthesimulacrumofatemporalsequence
withwhichtheWakeinterrogatesthepresentationofcharacterinlanguage:"Yetisnobodypresentherewhichwasnottherebefore"(613.13).Thedoublepresentof
Joyce'swritingthatenablesabodytobepresent"here"atthesametimethatitwas"therebefore"simultaneouslyassaultstheconceptofrepresentationandthelinear
andtemporalmodelthatcanbeexploredwithinthecontextofthose"revolutions"in"philosophy,inscience[and]inliterature"that"canbeinterpretedasshocksthat
aregraduallydestroyingthelinearmodel.Whichistosaytheepicmodel"(Derrida1976:87).

WithinthecontextofDerrida'sdeconstructiveproject(whichisinmanyplacesaremarkingofJoyce'sachievementsandhishauntingofDerrida's),theaccesstothe
symbolicaspectsofpluridimensionalwritingmadepossiblebyJoyceismuchmorethana"simpleregressiontowardthe'mythogram'"(Derrida1976:87).Joyce's
writingfrequentlyuses"mythograms,"buttheseareoftenoverdeterminedsothatStephenDedaluscanbeHamletandTelemachus,andBloomcanbebothOdysseus
andOldHamlet.HCEcanbefallenhumanity,HumptyDumpty,andHumphreyChimpdenEarwicker,andALPcanbeamother,alover,awife,abridge,analp,and
thehistoryofWesternlanguage.FinnegansWakeissimultaneouslyanepicandanantiepic.DuringtheelevenorsoyearsthatittooktowriteUlyssesandthe
seventeenyearsittooktowriteFinnegansWake,Joycelearnedtoimitateinnumerablewritersandstyles.Theseheforgedintoauniquestylethathasnoequalinthis
century.The"epicalforgedcheque"thatJoyceas"Vulgariano...utter[ed]...onthepublicforhisownprivateprofit"(FW181.1416)"makesalltherationality
subjectedtothelinearmodelappearasanotherformandanotherageofmythography."Derridamarksoutthisappearingashereadsitwritingitselfinitsown
disappearance"betweenthelines"ofJoyce(Derrida1976:87,86).

 Page127

Bibliography
Attridge,Derek.1992a."ThisStrangeInstitutionCalledLiterature:AnInterviewwithJacquesDerrida."InActsofLiterature,editedbyDerekAttridge,3375.
NewYork:Routledge.

.1992b.Editor'sintroduction."UlyssesGramophone:HearSayYesinJoyce."InActsofLiterature,editedbyDerekAttridge,25356.NewYork:
Routledge.

Bass,Alan.1978."Introduction."InWritingandDifference,byJacquesDerrida,ixxx.Trans.AlanBass.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Bennington,Geoffrey.1984."Translator'sNotes.""TwoWordsforJoyce."InPoststructuralistJoyce:EssaysfromtheFrench,editedbyDerekAttridgeand
DanielFerrer,15859.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

.1994.Legislations:ThePoliticsofDeconstruction.LondonandNewYork:Verso.

Bennington,Geoffrey,andJacquesDerrida.1993.JacquesDerrida.Trans.G.Bennington.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Benstock,Bernard.1965.JoyceAgain'sWake.SeattleandLondon:UniversityofWashingtonPress.

Benstock,Shari.1983."AttheMarginofDiscourse:FootnotesintheFictionalText."PMLA98(2):20424.

.1984."TheLetteroftheLaw:LaCartePostaleinFinnegansWake."PhilologicalQuarterly63(spring):16385.

Blake,William.1982.TheCompletePoetryandProseofWilliamBlake.Ed.DavidV.Erdman.NewYork:AnchorBooks.

Bloom,Harold.1973.TheAnxietyofInfluence:ATheoryofPoetics.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

.1994.TheWesternCanon:TheBooksandSchooloftheAges.London:Papermac.

 Page128

Connolly,ThomasE.,ed.1961.JamesJoyce'sScribbledehobble:TheUrWorkbookforFinnegansWake.Evanston,Ill.:NorthwesternUniversityPress.

Derrida,Jacques.1976.OfGrammatology.Trans.GayatriChakravortySpivak.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.

.1978.WritingandDifference.Trans.AlanBass.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

.1979."Scribble(writingpower)."Trans.CaryPlotkin.YaleFrenchStudies58:11647.

.1981.Dissemination.Trans.BarbaraJohnson.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

.1982."Diffrance."InMarginsofPhilosophy,trans.AlanBass,127.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

.1984a."TwoWordsforJoyce."Trans.G.Bennington.PoststructuralistJoyce:EssaysfromtheFrench,editedbyDerekAttridgeandDanielFerrer.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

.1984b."OfanApocalypticToneRecentlyAdoptedinPhilosophy."T.O.L.R.6(2):337.

.1986a.Glas.Trans.JohnP.LeaveyJr.andRichardRand.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

.1986b."Proverb:'Hethatwouldpun...'."Glassary,byJohnP.LeaveyJr.,1720.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

.1987a.ThePostCard:FromSocratestoFreudandBeyond.Trans.AlanBass.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

.1987b.Positions.Trans.AlanBass.London:AthlonePress.

.1987c.Ulyssegramophone:DeuxmotspourJoyce.Paris:Galile.

.1989.EdmundHusserl'sOriginofGeometry:AnIntroduction.Trans.J.P.LeavyJr.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

.1992a."UlyssesGramophone:HearSayYesinJoyce."InActsofLiterature,editedbyDerekAttridge,253309.NewYork:Routledge.

.1992b."'ThisStrangeInstitutionCalledLiterature':AnInterviewwithJacquesDerrida."WithDerekAttridge.InActsofLiterature,editedbyDerek
Attridge,3375.NewYork:Routledge.

.1994.SpectersofMarx:TheStateoftheDebt,theWorkofMourning,andtheNewInternational.Trans.PeggyKamuf.Ed.BerndMagnusand
StephenCullenberg.NewYork:Routledge.

Eco,Umbero.1979."TheSemanticsofMetaphor."InTheRoleoftheReader:ExplorationsintheSemioticsofTexts,6789.Bloomington:IndianaUniversity
Press.

Ellmann,Richard.1983.JamesJoyce.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Eysteinsson,Astradur.1990.TheConceptofModernism.Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress.

Gasch,Rodolphe.1986.TheTainoftheMirror:DerridaandthePhilosophyofReflection.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.

 Page129

Gilbert,Stuart.1963.JamesJoyce'sUlysses.Harmondsworth:Penguin.

Handelman,Susan.1982.TheSlayersofMoses:TheEmergenceofRabbinicInterpretationinModernLiteraryTheory.NewYork:NewYorkStateUniversity
Press.

Hart,Clive.1963.AConcordancetoFinnegansWake.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

Hartman,Geoffrey.1981.SavingtheText:Literature/Derrida/Philosophy.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.

Heath,Stephen.1984."Ambiviolences:NotesforReadingJoyce."InPoststructuralistJoyce:EssaysfromtheFrench,editedbyDerekAttridgeandDaniel
Ferrer,3168.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Hegel,G.W.F.1977.PhenomenologyofSpirit.Trans.A.V.Miller.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Johnson,Barbara.1981."Introduction"and"Notes."InDissemination,byJacquesDerrida.Trans.BJohnson.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Jones,EllenCarol.1988."Introduction.""DeconstructiveCriticismofJoyce."InJamesJoyce:TheAugmentedNinth,editedbyBernardBenstock.Syracuse:
SyracuseUniversityPress.

Joyce,James.1982.FinnegansWake.NewYork:VikingPressandPenguin.

.1983.GiacomoJoyce.London:FaberandFaber.

.1986.Ulysses.Ed.HansWalterGabler.Harmondsworth:Penguin.

.1992a.APortraitoftheArtistasaYoungMan.London:Penguin.

.1992b.Dubliners.London:Penguin.

Lacan,Jacques.1978.TheFourFundamentalConceptsofPsychoAnalysis.Trans.AlanSheridan.NewYork:W.W.Norton.

Leavey,J.P.,Jr.1986.Glassary.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

.1989."Preface"and"Coda."InEdmundHusserl'sOriginofGeometry:AnIntroduction,byJacquesDerrida,121,18192.Trans.J.P.LeaveyJr.
Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

Lernout,Geert.1990.TheFrenchJoyce.AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress.

Loesberg,Jonathan.1991.AestheticismandDeconstruction:Pater,Derrida,andDeMan.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

McArthur,Murray.1995."TheExampleofJoyce:DerridaReadingJoyce."JJQ32(winter):22741.

McHugh,Roland.1976.TheSiglaofFinnegansWake.London:EdwardArnold.

.1980.AnnotationstoFinnegansWake.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.

Norris,Christopher.1987.Derrida.London:Fontana.

Norris,Margot.1974.TheDecenteredUniverseofFinnegansWake:AStructuralistAnalysis.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.

Parrinder,Patrick.1984.JamesJoyce.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Plato.1961."Philebus."Trans.R.Hackforth.InTheCollectedDialoguesofPlato,editedbyEdithHamiltonandHuntingtonCairns,10861150.BollingenSeries
71.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

 Page130

Solomon,MargaretC.1969.EternalGeomater:TheSexualUniverseofFinnegansWake.Carbondale:SouthernIllinoisUniversityPress.

Spivak,GayatriChakravorty.1976."Translator'sPreface."InOfGrammatology,byJacquesDerrida,ixxc.Trans.G.C.Spivak.Baltimore:JohnsHopkins
UniversityPress.

Storey,John.1993.AnIntroductoryGuidetoCulturalTheoryandPopularCulture.HemelHempstead:HarvesterWheatsheaf.

Tindall,WilliamYork.1969.AReader'sGuidetoFinnegansWake.London:ThamesandHudson.

vanBoheemen,Christine.1988."DeconstructionafterJoyce."InNewAlliancesinJoyceStudies:"WhenIt'sApedtoFoulaDelfian,"editedbyBonnieKime
Scott,2936.Newark:UniversityofDelawarePress.

 Page131

Index

Aristotle:

plotstructureof,xvii,26,101,116

temporalmodelof,126

Arnold,Matthew,16,17,19

Artaud,Antonin,81

Attridge,Derek,41,60,61,70,76

Aubert,Jacques,11

Augustine,Saint,18

Babel,37,38,40,53,62,6366,85,109

Bataille,Georges,2627,81

being,xiiixiv,910,12,13,94,105

Bennington,Geoffrey,1,18,44,46,60

Benstock,Bernard,125

Benstock,Shari,xviiixix,33,38,40

"AttheMarginsofDiscourse,"55

"TheLetteroftheLaw:LaCartePostaleinFinnegansWake,"3438

binaryopposition,xviii,59,91,92,103,104

Blake,William,xx,93

Bloom,Harold,92,106

book,asideologicalstructure,xvi,2027,32,42,57,1012,11718

Bruno,Giordano,66

cogito:

Cartesian,1216,3334

Cohn,RobertGreer,65

culturalstudies,xi

culturaltheory,xivxv

culture,4,6,22,49,56,79,91

David,Alain,11

deMan,Paul,43

Descartes,Ren,1213.Seealsocogito:Cartesian

Derrida,Jacques:

archewritingin,91,9596,103

blankin,91,92,96100

contaminationin,25,28,52

deconstructionin,xixvi,21,5455,58,59,62,65,7679,81,83,9094,1012,1045,116,119

diffrancein,91,95,1035

doublebindin,38,49,62,90

doublemarksin,xiii,xvi,25,62,90,91,92,10610

erasurein,xiii,10,95

fold,98

graft,11011

gram,91,92,11114

logocentrismin,104,112,11416

phallocentrismin,14,82,8388,112,113,11418,119,122

phallogocentrismin,55,84,85,87,88,104,112,11518,125

phonocentrismin,11415

tracein,91,96,103

triggerin,92,12023

undecidablesof,19,22,90118

Works:

"Circumfessions,"53

"CogitoandtheHistoryofMadness,"1216

Dissemination,xviii,2031,33,37,65,108,110

"DoubleSession,The,"21,54,64,96,115

EdmundHusserl's'OriginofGeometry':AnIntroduction,18

"ForceandSignification,"1012

Glas,xviii,18,20,26,4457

"Implications,"

 Page132

(continued)

Works

xix

JacquesDerrida,18

"OfanApocalypticToneRecentlyAdoptedinPhilosophy,"108

OfGrammatology,111,112,113

"Plato'sPharmacy,"22,23,2631,33,115

PostCard,The,20,3243,59,61,64,65,71

"Proverb:Hethatwouldpun,"4647

"Scribble(writingpower),"110

SpectersofMarx,xvi,10,13,14

"ThisStrangeInstitutionCalledLiterature,"58,7682

"TwoWordsforJoyce,"27,28,44,45,53,60,6266,73,75,8586

"UlyssesGramophone:HearSayYesinJoyce,"6062,6675,78,82

"ViolenceandMetaphysics,"1619

WritingandDifference,1019

doublestructures,24,25,32,37,40,42,47,61,62,67,90,10610,118.SeealsoDerrida,Jacques,doublemarksmimesis

Eco,Umberto,106

EgyptianBookoftheDead,The,29

empiricism,17,22,23,25,57,79,93

Eysteinsson,Astradur,xx

Faulkner,William,11,79

feminism,58,8285

Flaubert,Gustave,10

formalism,22,25

Foucault,Michel,1216,33,69,71

Freud,Sigmund,xii,32,39,41,75,87,123

Gasch,Rodolphe,xii,xiii,xiv,93

Genet,Jean,44,45,52,54,55

Maids,The,50

MiracleoftheRose,48,49

ghost,xvxvi,911,12,13,14,20,23,25,118.Seealsospecter

Gilbert,Stuart,82

Handelman,Susan,45,53,72

Hartman,Geoffrey,11

"EpiphonyinEcholand,"46

Heath,Stephen,xvii,29,105,124

Hebraism(Judaism),45,47,53,55,61,72

andHellenism,1619,69

Hegel,G.W.F.,xvi,5,11,19,2122,2326,31,44,45,50,54,55,69,75,9091

dialecticof,17,25,93,104

encyclopedicformof,xvii,5,66,75,7879,80,91

idealismof,93

PhenomenologyofSpirit,21

onprefacetothephilosophicaltext,21,26

Heidegger,Martin,xiii,10,11,16,17

historicalcriticism,xiv

history,24,5,23,52,63,7879,80,125

historicism,xiv,6,1112,16,23,55,66,67

Homer,32,69

Odyssey,The,106

Husserl,Edmund,18,12,16,17,23,52,57,63,79,81

andidealobjectivity,23

linguisticmodelof,23,67

andunivocity,1,47,13

JamesJoyceFoundation,International,42,69,72

JamesJoyceLiterarySupplement,42

JamesJoyceQuarterly,42

JamesJoyceSummerSchool,TheAnnualBailey's,42

JamesJoyceSymposium,TheNinthInternational,5960,67,68,90

Johnson,Barbara,56

Joyce,James:

antihistoricismof,5,12

commentby,onpuns,45

encyclopedicformof,xvii,66,125(seealsoHegel,G.W.E)

linguisticequivocityof,58,13,38,52,57,63

onUlyssesandmadness,12,15

onuniversallanguage,7

onwomen,82

Works:

Dubliners,6,98,101,11617

("Araby,"98,117

"BoardingHouse,The,"101

"Clay,"95

"Dead,The,"98

"Encounter,An,"98,116

"Eveline,"98

"IvyDayintheCommitteeRoom,"98

"PainfulCase,A,"116

"Sisters,The,"97

"TwoGallants,"98)

Epiphanies,124

FinnegansWake,xvii,xviii,5,7,8,12,14,21,2231,32,33,3440,4457,61,6266,70,80,81,8489,91,92,93,94,9596,102,105,10616,119,
12026(andideologicalstructureofthebook,2426,siglaof,114)

GiacomoJoyce,4142

PortraitoftheArtistasaYoungMan,A,27,1012,11718

Stephen

 Page133

Hero,118,122

Ulysses,xix,xx,5,12,14,15,17,18,19,22,60,61,62,6675,76,77,80,8286,91,95,98100,102,106,112,11718,122

Judaism.SeeHebraism

Kierkegaard,Sren,12,13,1415,16

Lacan,Jacques,xii

Leavey,J.P.,Jr.,46,57

Lernout,Geert,11,23,2627,60

Levinas,Emmanuel,1619,45,53,63,79

Loesberg,Jonathan,xi,xiv,4

Mallarm,Stphane,11,55

Mimique,21,54,96

margin(s)(andmarginalpositions),xviiixix,78,1016,20,45,5556,91,97

McArthur,Murray,33,59

"TheExampleofJoyce:DerridaReadingJoyce,"3843

McHugh,Roland,109,114,121

mimesis,xv,xix,21,25,37,98,100,106,107,110

newcriticism,xiii,xiv,93

Norris,Christopher,44

Norris,Margot,87

Ogden,C.K.,xv,109

Paris,Jean,11

Paris,Matthew,33,36

paronomasia,4547,50,53,57,80,96,105,10910,122

Parrinder,Patrick,124,125

phenomenology,12,52,57,95

Plato,xiii,xix,27,31,3233,34,36,39,40,41,55,59,92,106,115

Philebus,21,54

Ponge,Francis,81,88

Popper,Amalia,42

Rabat,JeanMichel,11,67,72

Richards,I.A.,xv,109

Senn,Fritz,60

Shakespeare,William,69,9596

Hamlet,1213,14,106

Socrates,32,3334,36,39,40,41,54,59

Solomon,Margaret,122

specter,xvi,20,58.Seealsoghost

Storey,John,xiv

thematiccriticism,xv,97

Tindall,WilliamYork,86

Warburton,BishopWilliam,110

Weaver,HarrietShaw,107

Williams,Raymond,xiv