"For my part, although these two interpretations must acknowledge and accentuate their difference and define their irreducibility, I do not believe that today there is any question of choosing--in the first place..." (Keesey 363).
The two interpretations Derrida is speaking of is the differences and similarities between origin of the words, and creating our own freeplay. I found it very interesting that those statements are necessarily broken down separately, mainly because one is associated with each other through the conventions of traditions. This article was very comparable to Jonathan Culler's "Structuralism and Literature," because the fact that one tradition attempts to break away from another tradition is very influential toward the meanings behind language. While there is intertextualism, there is also a historical criticism that is more focused on the author's intent of using words. It seems to me that one criticism can not stand on its own without another criticism, which is not bad, because the idea itself of Poststructuralism is creative in itself.
Posted by The Gentle Giant at March 25, 2007 4:30 PM