After hours of reading summaries of what Deconstruction means I still had no clue of the concept... but you explained it very well! Thanks!!!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

Glad to help!

@PatriciaJKamel

8 жыл бұрын

same here ! thank you it was fun .

@kritika8891

8 жыл бұрын

and i thought i was the only one jostling....i wish they taught like this in the school/ college....thankyou so much...

@john-lenin

7 жыл бұрын

Well he gets half of the procedure right but misses the point entirely. Deconstruction is a mode of critical reading where you identify a (common sense) 'binary opposition' in which one term is 'privileged' (for example in Of Grammatology the binary opposition is Speech/Writing; for something more relevant here perhaps Hero/Villain), then invert it to show that the privileged term can only exist because of its opposite. By itself that doesn't accomplish anything particularly productive. The next step is to 'displace' the opposition and create a new perspective with new possibilities. The other point to remember is that Deconstruction is a recursive process: once you have inverted an opposition and displaced it, you create a new perspective - but one that is unavoidable and necessarily another binary opposition with a privileged term. (Derrida's argument is that this way of thinking is built in to the very framework of western language.) But that's ok, as long as we gain a productive new perspective. We just have to remember that each perspective is also contingent and not an ultimate truth.

@ryangarritty9761

7 жыл бұрын

But that's simply repeating Hegel's dialectic - nothing new here, it seems.

I don't what I expected, but for a late night crash course this had me in tears when he came out with the hammer. Thank you.

@Nancenotes

7 жыл бұрын

You're welcome!

@mzm95

Ай бұрын

😊

@mzm95

Ай бұрын

😊

Deconstruction really needs to be deconstructed !

@mohamedaminebenlehmar9724

6 жыл бұрын

charly kyoryu agreed

@jkws0

5 жыл бұрын

There is no deconstruction without meta-deconstruction, considering it knows its application can't work appropriately unless it is then again applied.

@Cssaarr

4 жыл бұрын

@@jkws0 please, elaborate for a newbie

@Jamyn1996

3 жыл бұрын

Cssaarr deconstruction attempts to dismantle a text, because it assumes that language doesn’t work. But, by using the very tool that it is aiming to criticize, deconstruction invalidates it’s own assumptions that language does not work. Essentially, it deconstructs itself.

@notproductiveproductions3504

3 жыл бұрын

Are you trying to divide by zero or something

Thanks, Tim. You're such an enthusiastic teacher.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Chijioke Azuawusiefe Thank you! I do enjoy my job!

Explained in the easiest way I have ever come across. Thanks.

Thank you so much! You are so enthusiastic and you have great and clear explanations too! You helped me more on my project in just a few short minutes than reading an obscure and confusing booklet/package for a few hours!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Jason Jia Glad to help!

Interesting video and great attempt at explaining deconstruction. With that said (and I'm assuming you may get a lot of these types of responses, so I apologize ahead of time), but I have to say, as a reader of Derrida's works, I have issues with a lot of what you're saying about deconstruction in this video. Deconstruction is not about pointing out the failure of trying to communicate using language, as if Derrida or other deconstructionists are lurking in the background, waiting to say, "Gotcha! You screwed up!" Rather, deconstruction is about moving us away from the thinking that the purpose of language is to communicate meaning. For Derrida, language in itself cannot communicate meaning; rather, interpretation is dependent upon context, and context depends upon a variety of factors, including culture, history, the people participating in the communication, etc. - all things, to a large extent, outside of a communicator's control. But this doesn't mean that using language is useless for Derrida. On the contrary, what's important about language is that due to its structure and quality - i.e. its fluid, evolving rules - we can produce different and newer contexts for interpretation. In other words, language is what allows us to interpret a sentence one way or another. If we use your touchy friend example, what allows a "normal" person to interpret a statement one way and what allows the "touchy" friend to interpret it differently is precisely the same thing - the language involved. Thus, for Derrida, the point of language is not to control meaning (as you said, modify one's language so that we get closer to communicating meaning), but to allow for the possibility of different ways of being interpreted. To reiterate, Derrida and other deconstructionists are NOT saying there is no such thing as meaning. Nowhere in Derrida's work have I ever read this statement or something like it. Rather, what he is saying is that the point of language is not to communicate meaning (since meaning is dependent upon context), but to open itself up to different (possible) interpretations.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Mark Blasini You are very right, and I've oversimplified here--perhaps to the point to misrepresenting the approach. My goal was to give high school students a chance to dabble in theory, and I hope that it at least gives them a taste. The theory is more playful than fatalistic, and I may come across as vilifying the concept without really meaning to. At least that's what I've gleaned from some comments. Thanks for your astute clarification of the ideas! I appreciate the correction and especially your good-natured and polite presentation of it!

@jasonito23

7 жыл бұрын

Very similar to New Historicism.

@BimaMusisi

6 жыл бұрын

To that, I really do agree. One cannot clearly understand deconstruction without studying Frankfurt School's Critical Theory first.

@nellyliyanagamage4305

6 жыл бұрын

I just came across Derrida's deconstruction theory and what you explained seems to make more sense. Do you have any books or articles I can read to get a more in-depth view on this..Thanks :)

@michaelhunter2136

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks Mark. That was a very concise yet clear explanation.

If I got you at the initial stage of my graduation, I could make my CGPA bigger than what I obtained.Thank you so much for the way you explained.

Thank sweet baby Jesus for you, man! I have been falling asleep in these books for hours and you made it click for me in 6 minutes and 51 seconds.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+T. Ward Glad I could help!

Finally I found somebody who explain deconstruction in a way I can actually understand. Thank You!

You make it look so simple! Thank you so much; I was really lost.

Entertaining lecture and explanation. Thanks for that! Let's put deconstruction aside for a minute. Regarding the sign on the lift door, if you think about it it is pure genius to write sg like this. It does not matter if the blind person cannot read the sign as its purpose is to stop those who see to use the elevator with a dog.

Thanks Mr Nance!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Helped a great deal!!!!! Keep doing what you do!!!!!

Such a helpful, dynamic video on what's involved in a decon reading!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Caroline Cacahuète Glad you found it useful!

After watching 100 of videos and wasting my time you are first one who explaining in easy and great way ... Loved it sir.

You saved my life. Paper focused and worthy of an A. Thank you!

You summarized Derrida in 15 seconds. I salute you!

Thanks a lot for clearing out my doubts and helping me sort out my head 😀You truly are a valuable asset to literature lovers.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Riya Pundir Glad to help! You're very kind.

these 6 minutes were much better than 45 minute Lecture👌❤

I love the way you teaching... This is sooo amazing

THANK YOU!!! I finally understood deconstruction.

You're the only one on the Internet that made it understandable for me

You saved my life with your videos, thank you

Yes! Thank you! I truly appreciate this video

You discussed our full-semester course work in a very easy and comprehensive way. Thing which most of teachers won't do in formal class... hahahaaha! Your videos helped me soo much. Thank you.

I remember a text by Derrida from the quote "there is only text" is derived. By reading that letter you can figure out that Deconstruction exists in the first place to point out that we are social creatures with a brain that is wired to figure out associations, thus creating context. It is because of our social nature that we are given constructions that become the carriers of meaning. We are limited by our social environment to discover our individual personality, to find out our true essence as human beings. To deconstruct means to question the social structures we are raised in and to use it against itself in order to cause change. It's fun with these examples but really, it's more fun to consume art that relates to these concepts like David Lynch, Agnes Varda, Andy Warhol, Duchamp, surrealism.

Thank you so much for breaking this down to a commoners understanding!

Thanks Tom ,ive been reading this topic for some time now and it really felt like i was reading a language from space, you explained it well in the shortest amount of time.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Surprise Worship Know what you mean! I spent plenty of hours struggling through its space language in college! It gets easier with practice though!

You are just brilliant - thank you!!!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Nico Kos You're very kind!

I'm a college student at Green river College and my English teacher asks us to use literary criticism without ever explaining what it it or what each type are. You are saving my grade.

thank you so much! this really helped me understand this theory after really struggling!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Orochigirl17 Glad to help! Let me know if you have any questions!

I tried googling for deconstructionism and what it was, but I couldn't find any clear explanation. Then I came across this video. Thanks a lot, it's very clear now!

@Nancenotes

9 жыл бұрын

TheDutchMaurits Glad I could help! This is a thumbnail sketch of the topic, and if you're interested, you should definitely dig deeper. You'll find a lot of extremely complicated texts on it, which are more irritating than helpful, but the one I'm using here--Text and Context by Steven Lynn--is excellent and user friendly. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to deconstruct any actual pieces of literature in this video. I often use music videos in my classroom as fun pieces for applying literary theory; we do Miranda Cosgrove's Dancing Crazy with decontruction because it basically deconstructs itself. Good luck with your continued exploration of the topic, and always feel free to ask me any questions!

deconstruction made me lose my sanity, that i'am thinking of marrying every person or every text that could explain it better.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Aki Sakura Is this a proposal? 'Cause I'm taken.

@maryam5759

8 жыл бұрын

+Tim Nance (NanceNotes and Narwhals) haha, it is totally a proposal! can you please do a video explaining what the heck does derrida( my sworn enemy) means by the cente being the center and not really a center?! :D

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

Ha! Yeah, I know the feeling. When I was in Literary Theory in grad school, I loathed the man, but I've softened up to him a bit more now. He actually died while I was in the class, and I wasn't absolutely certain that it wasn't my hatred floated across the ocean and killed him. Anyway, the center that he's talking about is a point of reference that is inherent to the text--the idea that everything has an absolute meaning that we're basing all of our understanding upon. But then, he points out that that "center" is really just a figment of our imaginations. There is no point of reference or absolute in language for us to hang meaning on. Therefore, meaning is really pretty wishy-washy wobbly. And we can push and prod any statement until it falls apart and means nothing if we want to.

@maryam5759

8 жыл бұрын

Tim Nance thank you for replying! i have spend three days in undrestanding the theory of deconstruction and the center and all that blah blah, i almost gave up with a superficial understanding, especially that there is not enough materials to be able to study it more. PS: i will always loathe the guy. i can't forgive him, since he can't possibly apologize to all of us suffering undergraduate students.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

Aki Sakura Well, best of luck! Here's to surviving!

Thanks a lot! You explained it in such a simple way! Thanks a ton for using great examples!

Taking a class on Contemporary Literary Theory right now and these videos are saving my life. Thank you for your talent and knowledge!! Subscribed :)

I can't thank you enough for this video. You have succeeded in making a talk about theory interesting :)

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

Yay! Glad you enjoyed it!

A minute in the video and already subscribed bc of how beautifully u explain the complex phenomenas!

boy! you rock! that explanation was awesome! thank you

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Ruth Allio Oudri Thanks! Glad it helps!

Thank you so much for the explanation!

Hi, Sir! Please continue creating videos like this!!! 🙏😊

Man, that was awesome! Thank You.

@Nancenotes

9 жыл бұрын

Rufus Mosis Glad you enjoyed it!

Thanks a lot for this video!! So very helpful. I so wish you were my teacher!! Your students are exceptionally lucky to have such a wonderful teacher as you. Your channel, I’m sure, is helping tons of us out here! Thank you for sharing 😊😊🤗

@Nancenotes

6 жыл бұрын

Thank You!

Tyhuu! You explained deconstruction so well.

i’m writing a conclusion for our group project and i’m crying….I REALLY ENJOYED LEARNING FROM THIS

Thank you so much sir. This video is the only thing that helped me to get the idea regarding Deconstruction properly. WIsh you all the best :)

This was a very confusing topic for me but your explanation is very clear and concise. Thanks!

I am a masters student of Danish literature and I have been reading many highly academic texts about "dekonstrktion" and I finally got it now. Thanks! I have an exam coming up where I hope to use it.... and after that exam I will leave it forever

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

Good luck on the exam!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

By the way, a Masters in Danish lit sounds fantastic! What are some of the works you study?

this actually helped me more than my professors explanation of deconstruction. now to apply it to my final essay. . .

Thank you Mr..

I have a report about this thing and Ive been researching about deconstructionist criticism in google for hours and I'm still clueless. But thankfully I found this video, I definitely get it now thankyou so much!

You’ve earned yourself another subscriber. Great explanation sir!

Bright and simply amazing! Thank you so much!

@Nancenotes

9 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Glad I could help!

Great video! Sums it all up for me. Thank you Tim :)

Very helpful video for me. Thanks for clearing my all doubt .

Wow, ang video na ito ay talagang nakakatulong sa akin! Matagal na akong interesado sa paksa na ito, at ang iyong paliwanag ay talagang nakatulong sa akin na mas maintindihan ito. Pinapahalagahan ko ang iyong kahusayan at pagkahilig sa paksa na ito. Ako rin ay isang content creator, at nag-eexplore rin ako ng mga katulad na tema sa aking channel. Gusto ko makipag-ugnayan at magpalitan ng mga ideya sa mga taong may parehong interes. Keep up the good work!

I want to say that this was perfect.

Absolutely great Sir...

Great job buddy, thanks!

Awesome video! Are you planning for additional ones on literary theory?

Thanks, I have often heard the term “deconstruction” .... but it never before occurred to me to find out exactly what it means.

Thank you so much!!!!! 😭😭

Deconstruction is what a mad teenager does when it has no arguments left so they try to take apart the parents argument sarcastically.

wow, your explanation is much better than any book I ever read about decontstruction :))))

you are so funny. our doctors need alot of your way in demonstrating, especially the deconstruction theory 😂. big like

@Nancenotes

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Great. And I liked the way you wrote Deconstruction. I'm going to copy/steal it.

You are amazing. Your every video helped me🖤

Tim please can you do a video on Speech Act Theory?

Such a wonderful informative video 🙌🏼🙏🏼

I thought that this is a very interesting approach, and your videos seem quite helpful and on point

I love ur video so much ! Thank you!!!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+鄒易庭 Thanks! Glad I could help!

finally found the right channel!

Thank you, you beautiful man

Thank you so much! It really helps me to understand deconstructions means! 😊😆

Thank you so much for making this video! Your delivery really makes deconstruction easy to understand. I'm currently writing an essay on Michael Jackson's HIStory album and how Jackson attempts to imply meaning with his image, videos and songs but they are constantly seemingly misinterpreted and I'm trying to use deconstruction to explain why. Have you got any advice for writing an essay on deconstruction? Would you recommend I include semiotics and the sign and signifier or does that not really play much of a part in deconstruction?

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Jamie Hoyte Oh, I love the topic of your essay! A paper on misreading is always fun. Yes, Deconstruction is quite a bit about semiotics and discussing them would be appropriate. I've simplified it considerably in this video to give my high school students a taste, but it can be explored much more richly.

@MrJamiehoyte1

8 жыл бұрын

Thank you, I hope I can do it justice! One quick question again. After doing more reading I think I'm thinking more within the realms of post structuralism and Roland Barthes mainly because, as I understand it, he doesn't suggest that meaning is endlessly deferred like Derrida does which I think is what I'm arguing with Michael Jackson. Would you say Barthes views are just a less extreme form of deconstruction or is it more complex than that? Thank you so much for your help, this is all pretty heavy stuff but I think i'm getting it thanks to your videos!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

Jamie Hoyte I think Barthes is excellent for this because he deals with not only language but also culture. Derrida, to some extent, undermines Barthes's limits and suggests that Barthes's ideas are still too centralized, in spite of the fact that Barthes was interested in shift and connotation. I think Barthes is much more accessible.

@MrJamiehoyte1

8 жыл бұрын

Tim Nance Okay thank you so much for taking the time to reply Tim, you have just saved my essay! :) I've passed on your videos to some of my course mates.

Ohhhh my word, thank you for making my homework funny, I needed that tonight. XD *still giggling at you slamming your hammer against the picture*

@Nancenotes

7 жыл бұрын

+Riverfox237 Thanks for watching!

Thank you! helped a bunch!

Thanks for being alive.

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+F PC Cogito ergo sum. You're welcome.

"Raising irritating, trivial objections." The word for this is _cavil._

The hammer part deconstructed deconstruction. I loved that.

Great teacher. Thank youuu. You saved my life in exam

Husband: You look beautiful tonight, dear. Wife: Oh, so I'm not beautiful yesterday??

this theory is the hardest one i think , im writing a paper about literary theories and writing about deconstrucion is taking all my time , but thank you very much for resuming it , it realy helps ^^

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Radhia Sky It can be tricky to get started with, but once you've gotten the hang of it, deconstruction can be very fun. Good luck, and let me know if you have any questions!

THANK YOU!!!! You explained it so well. The textbook I'm using for my literary theory class is so dense and dry lol

Thank you indeed for the useful videos

5:26 it is intended for a person who can see and is with a dog that is not a “seeing eye dog”.

i think i learned more about deconstructing here than any of criticism classes combined

thank you so much, this is very helpful! cheers

I'm writing an essay involving deconstruction and Miley Cyrus, and this was the first video I clicked on. When Nance started singing wrecking ball I couldn't believe it and now you're getting quoted!

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

+Asha Jane Ha ha! Love it! My class usually deconstructs Miranda Cosgrove.

@ashajane

8 жыл бұрын

+Tim Nance (NanceNotes and Narwhals) How does that usually turn out?

@Nancenotes

8 жыл бұрын

A little nudge and the whole thing falls apart.

@ashajane

8 жыл бұрын

+Tim Nance (NanceNotes and Narwhals) My essay is going that way! However you explained it very well thank you!

At last somebody came out to explain it..... thank god

My profesor explains this like explaining sth from outer space I just didnt get it. However, you explained it very well I finally understood what it is about. Thank you.

Came to watch the explanation for my exam and end up watching this guy singing wracking ball 😂

Nice video. I totally agree!

I'm so happy and fuzzy 🤭 hahah.. you teach so simply and so well 🙌 we need more teachers like you, won't miss a single class 😅

Deconstructionist: “All statements are devoid of meaning (except mine here, but please don’t notice that.”)

@draw4everyone

4 жыл бұрын

How about this reformulation: "For all statements, truth value cannot be necessarily validated." There's no way to verify this statement as, similarly, there is no means to verify the totality of statements possible. All statements, then, are likely in a limbo, a proposition which itself is in a limbo because it cannot be verified.

@gregorykavivya875

4 жыл бұрын

@@draw4everyone Christ! So we cant know whether anything is true? wtaf

@DuskAndHerEmbrace13

4 жыл бұрын

‘A person who says all truth is relative is asking you not to believe him, so don’t’

@soi4685

3 жыл бұрын

Deconstructionists arent relativist

@ouisellmedia

3 жыл бұрын

@@soi4685 Really?

that was extremely helpful, thank you so much!

@Nancenotes

9 жыл бұрын

Glad I could help!

Thank you🌷

Thanks for the explanation it helped a lot in studying for the exams

Thanks for sharing your views

Thanks, I like your channel

As a non-native speaker of English, I think I can provide a different approach which you may not have thought of in the first place. Initially not having been being aware of the term "seeing eye dog" meaning "a leading dog for blind persons", I understood the sign in terms of its literal meaning, "only dogs with seeing eyes are allowed on the elevator" that is. This would, for whatever reason, mean that only sighted dogs are allowed on the elevator and blind dogs are not. Still, I agree with you with regard to the ambiguity expressed in the sense of 'we do not know if humans or anything else than this kind of dogs are allowed'. Anyway, as you can see, the signifier, in this case, is ambiguous in another way as well, even though you probably did not perceive it as what I am trying to explain at first glance. As far as I understand the idea of deconstruction, this can be seen as a perfect example for its application. The meaning you understand by reading these words is only based on a convention which English speaking persons have agreed upon. It, in some way, disguises the meaning which the constituent words as a whole carry for readers unaware of this convention and hides it from native speakers (who have reached a certain level of proficiency, at least). Thus, these groups might have a different understanding, which is solely due to their cultural (particularly linguistic) initial situations. Also, I disagree with what you said around 5:25 ("[...] who is this sign intended to be for? Presumably a blind person [...]"), which is not the case, in my opinion. The sign is rather addressed to sighted persons with dogs in order to keep their pets off the elevator (or the entire building, we cannot know that due to missing additional context). It is probably somewhat safe to assume that an indication for blind persons would not have been conveyed via the visual channel, but rather a different one like the acoustic or the tactile one. In the end, I do agree with what you're explaining in the video on the whole, but I partially interpret it differently. You are most welcome to let me know what you think about my response. Nice video and keep up the good work!