Literary theory represents a way of thinking and a body of writing that is dedicated to the analysis of literary texts. It is a means through which literary critics come to appreciate the nature of the literary texts they seek to analyze and the methodology that informs their practice. Analyzing three 21st Century Swahili novels, this paper examines a paradigm shift: literary theory becomes the sub¬ject under examination as opposed to its conventional role where it would ideally offer systematic views of what such texts would mean. Said Ahmed Mohamed’s Dunia Yao (2006) and Nyuso za Mwanamke (2010) on the one hand, and Kyallo Wadi Wamitila’s Musaleo! (2004), on the other, represent a new kind of writing that experiments on literary theory as a subject for criticism. In these texts, we read about the tenets and practice of a variety of literary theories including Russian formalism, Saussurean and Jakobsonian structuralism, Derrida’s deconstruction, Edward Said’s post-colonial theory, and Carl Gustav Jung’s psychoanalytical theory. While this experiment that the two novelists engage in may appear elitist for the average reader at first, the paper contends that this form of writing will in the long term assist in the domestication of literary theory. Further, the three texts could greatly assist in pedagogical issues if read alongside other mandatory course books on literary theory.

This thesis provides an historical and intellectual summary of the role of the concepts of 'substance,' and 'participation,' in the making of the doctrine of the Trinity. In the concluding chapter, a study is made of the assumptions of deconstruction, which are somewhat hostile to a substance paradigm. We argue for an appreciation of the importance of both substance and participation for the Trinity, and philosophy generally. Chapters are dedicated to individuals who have in some way contributed to perceptions of these two terms, as they pertain to the Christian notion of the Trinity. Additionally, we seek to define some philosophical problems that accompany a Trinitarian metaphysics of 'substance,' and 'participation.' The problems include those of deconstruction: issues such as 'Logocentrism,' and 'Presence.' Finally, we investigate how Trinitarian ontology can provide answers to many of the questions Derrida raises conceming the problematic future of metaphysical thinking. / Philosophy and Systematic Theology / M.Th. (Systematic Theology)

This thesis identifies and explores a ‘return to Freud’ in the work of Jacques Derrida. Resemblances between Derrida’s method of deconstruction and the therapeutic procedure of psychoanalysis have long been a source of debate among critics. Is deconstruction little more than a psychoanalytic reading of the history of philosophy, or is Freud a Derridean avant la lettre? Revealing this dilemma to be a false one, this thesis challenges major interpreters of Derrida such as Jonathan Culler and Gayatari Chakravorty Spivak. By developing Derrida’s well-known yet little understood concept of différance, it argues that this dilemma stems from an inadequate understanding of Derrida’s treatment of time. The structure of temporality implied by différance entails that the meaning of the past is continually reconstituted in its relationship to an ever-evolving present. Far from dissolving the importance of Freud’s contribution, this structure allows Derrida to circumvent nebulous notions of ‘influence’ and ‘indebtedness’ while still engaging psychoanalysis as a key theoretical resource in his own project of deconstruction. A productive engagement with psychoanalytic theory is shown to inform every major stage of the philosopher’s career, from his early phenomenological work to his later reflections on the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Derrida repeatedly turns to Freud as a crucial interlocutor in interrogating a number of philosophical problems encountered in his own work. These problems include the nature of time, space, and memory; the role of the fictive in scientific discourse; the question of the archive; the interdependence of the psyche and technology; and the relationship between politics and the unconscious. At a theoretical level, this thesis provides a detailed account of Derrida’s notion of spacing, arguing that the unconditional belatedness entailed by différance calls us to a difficult, dual responsibility: both towards the legator of an inheritance (that is, towards the textual legacy Freud has bequeathed to us) and towards the unforeseeable future contexts in which this inheritance will require transformation. The discourse of deconstruction, it concludes, enacts a careful negotiation of these two demands.

Thesis (MA)--University of Stellenbosch, 2000. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis examines the relationship between law and justice. Firstly, it is argued that the concept of justice tends to be defined too narrowly as distributive justice or as a mechanism to maintain social order. It is argued that Jacques Derrida's understanding of justice not only gives a richer and broader understanding of the concept, but also on its complex relationship with the law. Lastly, some of the possible implications for jurisprudence (with specific reference to Critical Legal Studies, Critical Race Theory and Drucilla Cornell) are examined. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis ondersoek die verhouding tussen geregtigheid en die reg. Daar word eerstens geargumenteer dat geregtigheid te maklik gedefinieer word as distributiewe geregtigheid of as In meganisme om sosiale orde te bewerkstellig. Daar word geargumenteer dat Jacques Derrida se verstaan van die konsep nie aileen 'n breer en ryker verstaan moontlik maak nie, maar dat dit ook fokus op die komplekse verhouding met die reg. Laastens word sommige van die moontlike implikasies vir regsfilosofie (met spesifieke verwysing na Critical Legal Studies, Critical Race Theory en Drucilla Cornell) ondesoek,

Thesis (PhD) -- University of Stellenbosch, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Philosophy has traditionally been concerned with the question of reason and rationality, as its central focus. From the perspective of the modern metaphysical tradition, this focus has developed around the theme of subjectivity in general, and the assumption of an ahistorical transcendental subject in particular. The idea of reason was thus foundational for the articulation and validation of the notions of truth and freedom. From the perspective of modernity, reason has thus been the condition of the possibility of enlightenment, freedom and moral progress. The debate between Habermas and the representatives of postmodern thinking represents the latest chapter regarding the question of reason, its limits, and its possibilities. What makes this debate particularly challenging is that Habermas, while he defends the idea of reason against its critique by the postmodernists, is actually in agreement with them in their dismissal of the tradition of metaphysical thinking. In view of his defense of the idea of reason, however, Habermas has invariably been accused of defending an outmoded and discredited form of philosophical thinking, while his opponents have generally been hailed as progressive thinkers who have succeeded in effecting a radical break with the conceptual legacy of the metaphysical tradition. In my dissertation I argue that the exact opposite position is the case, namely, that it is Habermas, and not his postmodern opponents, who has effected a radical break with metaphysical thinking. It is his ability to transform the idea of reason, from a transcendental into a postmetaphysical concept, in terms of which the question of reason and rationality, and the related ideas of truth and knowledge, are recast in fallibilistic terms, that, in my view, represents the overcoming of metaphysics. The postmodern turn, on the other hand, in view of its reluctance to consider the question of reason from an alternative model of rationality, finds itself still trapped within a form of transcendental thinking in which it seeks to enquire into the (im)possibility of reason, in the absence of a transcendental subject. In the final analysis, I argue that it is postmetaphysical rather than postmodern thinking, that offers us a practical alternative to the problematic conception of reason, bequeathed by the tradition of metaphysical thinking. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die fenomeen van die rede en die betekenis van rasionaliteit vorm tradisioneel 'n sentrale fokus van die filosofie. Vanuit die perspektief van die moderne metafisiese tradisie het hierdie fokus ontwikkel rondom die tema van subjektiwiteit in die algemeen, en die aanname van 'n a-historiese transendentele subjek in die besonder. Die rede was dus fundamenteel vir die artikulasie en legitimering van die konsepte van waarheid en vryheid. Vanuit die perspektief van moderniteit was die rede dus die voorwaarde vir die moontlikheid van verligting, vryheid, en morele vooruitgang. Die debat tussen Habermas en die verteenwoordigers van postmoderne denke verteenwoordig die mees onlangse hoofstuk van die verhaal van die vraag na rede en rasionaliteit - die beperkings daarvan, asook die moontlikhede daarvan. Hierdie debat bied besondere uitdagings omdat Habermas, terwyl hy die idee van rede verdedig teen die kritiek van die postmoderniste, eintlik met hulle saamstem vir sover hulle die tradisie van metafisiese denke verwerp. In die lig van sy verdediging van die idee van rede, is Habermas egter voortdurend daarvan beskuldig dat hy 'n uitgediende en gediskrediteerde vorm van filosofiese denke bly voorstaan, terwyl sy opponente in die algemeen voorgehou is as progressiewe denkers wat suksesvol 'n radikale breuk gemaak het met die konseptuele erfenis van die metafisiese tradisie. In my dissertasie beweer ek dat die teenoorgestelde inderwaarheid die geval is, naamlik dat dit Habermas, en nie sy postmoderne opponente nie, is wat hierdie radikale breuk met metafisiese denke suksesvol uitgevoer het. Dit is sy verrnoe om die idee van die rede te transformeer vanaf 'n transendentale na 'n post- metafisiese konsep, in terme waarvan die vraag na rede en rasionaliteit, en die verwante idees van waarheid en kennis, omskep is in fallibilistiese beg rippe, wat, soos ek aantoon, 'n (die!) suksesvolle transendering van die metafisika bewerkstellig. Die postmoderne wending, aan die ander kant, in die lig van die traagheid daarvan om 'n alternatiewe en verruimde konsepsie van rasionaliteit te ontwikkel, bly vasgevang in 'n vorm van transendentele denke waarin dit probeer om ondersoek in te stel na die (on)moontlikheid van die rede ten aansien van die afwesigheid van 'n transendentele subjek. Uiteindelik beweer ek dat dit die post-metafisiese eerder as die postmoderne denke is wat aan ons 'n praktiese alternatief bied vir die problematiese konsep van die rede, soos ons dit qeerf het by die tradisie van metafisiese denke.

本研究論述流行文化研究面向，提出解讀到解構的權力觀視，並以台灣漫畫文化的權力解析，彰顯流行文化的解構閱讀，以解構流行文化的權力軌跡。 　　由於流行文化是權力開展與抗爭、現代社會再生產和變遷之重要所在，而這一切都在表意實踐過程中完成，因此，流行文化研究要從權力的面向，檢視流行文化的多樣表意實踐和過程，以及構築此表意實踐的權力鬥爭關係。 　　不過，要如何檢視流行文化場域的權力鬥爭關係？由於權力總是處於多元交錯鬥爭的動態狀態，使得權力差異關係重疊加強、衝突削弱、鬥爭滲透，形成權力差異程度和樣態的不斷變動，而這種權力交錯鬥爭的動態狀態體現在表意實踐過程中，並經由表意實踐過程再生產且變異了權力差異關係。因此，檢視流行文化場域的權力關係，就是要由流行文化的表意實踐過程，讀出意義衝突互文的動態（差異）痕跡，也讀出權力差異關係交錯鬥爭的動態（差異）軌跡。 　　但是，解讀流行文化的權力軌跡可以彰顯權力的運作，並達到抗拒權力的目的嗎？由於意義無法固定，意義在權力總是交錯鬥爭的動態運作下，經由意義的鬥爭而流動變遷，這意義的歧異雖然造就了權力差異關係的再生產與變遷，但也再生產了權力的控制。所以，我們的表意活動總是被交錯鬥爭的權力所驅動，我們總是在權力的引導下從事意義的鬥爭與變遷，也總是在權力的動員下藉由意義的表徵來維繫、抗爭和變遷我們所在的權力關係位置，並再生產出權力。事實上，權力就是要建構一個流動的封閉世界，一個在權力操控中，意義和權力差異關係永恆動態（差異）發展，以再生產出權力的封閉世界。 　　因此，在這樣一種由權力所動員的意義和權力差異關係永恆動態發展中，解讀流行文化的權力軌跡，其再現流行文化的表意活動中，受權力操控的意義鬥爭流變痕跡，也再現與其互動連結的權力差異關係變動軌跡，但卻無法呈現背後操控的權力運作。 　　不過，權力夢想全面封閉意義的慾望卻也從來未曾達到過，在權力操控意義鬥爭以再生產出變動自己的過程中，總是出現權力無法控制的意義，這滑開權力之手的意異，它不寄望未來，也沒有抗爭慾望，它只是玩耍嬉樂的意異遊戲，然而，就是這樣的隨意散漫，就是這樣的遊戲體質，反而溢出意義與權力的互動連結，使權力之網產生裂痕，暴露出權力的運作，也侵蝕了權力的控制。 　　因此，流行文化是權力動員意義和權力差異關係互動變遷以再生產出權力的場域，更是庶民得以近用，從事意異遊戲，以暴露權力、侵蝕權力的場域。 　　所以，流行文化研究要讀出流行文化場域中意異遊戲的痕跡，並同時成為流行文化意義的意異遊戲，故而，流行文化研究需要解構的閱讀，以解構流行文化的權力軌跡，其以讀出流行文化場域的意異遊戲痕跡，成為流行文化意義的意異遊戲，如此，才不會陷入受權力動員並再生產出權力的永恆循環中，也才能滑開權力之手，暴露並阻礙流行文化場域的權力運作，彰顯並消解流行文化場域的權力運作痕跡。最後，本研究並以台灣漫畫文化權力軌跡的解析，彰顯流行文化解構閱讀的必需性。

《序曲》一直以來被視認為華茲華斯的自傳詩，描述華茲華斯如何憑藉自身心靈與自然的互動，發展獨立整合的自我。然而，《序曲》文本結構上的多重性與不完整性，卻與華茲華斯所提倡的自我形象相抵觸。本篇論文將依據德希達的翻譯理論，由三方面探討華茲華斯如何透過書寫《序曲》形塑自身詩人形象的身份認同。首先，寫作《序曲》是華茲華斯的譯者天職 (the task of the translator)。唯有完成書寫《序曲》此一必要卻又不可能的任務 (a necessary and impossible task)，華茲華斯才可確立自己作為詩人的身份認同。再者，華茲華斯的詩人身份仰賴華茲華斯之名的翻譯 (the translation of Wordsworth's proper name)。華茲華斯之名的可譯與不可譯 (the translatability and untranslatability of Wordsworth’s proper name)促使華茲華斯不斷地進行翻譯與改寫，因而造成了《序曲》文本結構上的多重性與不完整性。最後，《序曲》將以華茲華斯的「佚傳」(otobiography) 而非自傳的方式進行重新詮釋，說明華茲華斯企圖透過書寫《序曲》所建立的自我身份認同，必須藉由「他者的耳朵」(the ear of the other)來確立。 / The Prelude has long been regarded as William Wordsworth's autobiographical poem in which he celebrates an autonomous and consistent self nourished from the interaction between his mind and Nature. However, the textual plurality and a sense of incompleteness of The Prelude contradicts the unique and unitary self-identity proposed by Wordsworth in this poem. On the basis of Derrida's theory of translation, this thesis intends to investigate the establishment of Wordsworth's identity as a poet in The Prelude in three aspects. First, the writing and completion of The Prelude is Wordsworth's task of the translator, the necessary and impossible task in search of an identity as a poet. Second, the constitution of Wordsworth's identity as a poet depends on the translation of Wordsworth's proper name which calls for and against translation at the same time. The translatability and untranslatability of Wordsworth's proper name leads to the textual plurality and incompleteness of The Prelude as the result of Wordsworth's endless translation of his name. Last but not least, The Prelude is not so much Wordsworth's autobiographical poem as Wordsworth's otobiography which calls for the ear of the other to constitute his self-identity by hearing and signing with him. This thesis endeavors to prove that Wordsworth, in the position of an indebted translator committed to an insolvent debt and non-dischargeable duty by a translation contract with Nature and Coleridge, is obliged to translate his proper name in search of the sur-vival of his name as a poet and his poetry by writing The Prelude as his otobiography which is always open to and demands the ear of the other to recognize and affirm Wordsworth's name as a great poet.

Grant Morrison’s Animal Man could be argued to worry the man/animal boundary. Using closereadings of the comics against the backdrop of Jacques Derrida’s and Martin Heidegger’stheories on the boundary between man and animal, I explore the following ideas which seemcommon in the discourses on that which separates humans from animals: intelligence vs. instinct,the human hand vs. the animal’s paw, humanity’s richness-in-world vs. animal’s poorness-inworld,and language.In Animal Man, Morrison gives voice to animal characters by giving them personalities,which seems a romanticizing of the real state of affairs. Alongside all the depicted animals, thereare many hybrid characters, which take on the characteristics of both humans and animals. Theuse of hybrid characters such as the Coyote and Animal Man problematize the boundary betweenman and animal. This study of Animal Man, most importantly, shows that the differences as wellas similarities between humans and animals are based on ideologically produced discourses, andthis includes Morrison’s own philosophy on animal rights and his activism. I argue that Morrisonboth worries the boundary between humans and animals, and keeps it operative in order to makethe reader perceive animals in more anthropocentric terms.

No description available.

No description available.