For years the term postructuralism, along with the term postmodernism, has been one of these concepts that many people like to use in order to impress his or her conversation partner. If you, however, are daring enough to insist on a definotion of this word or simply ask the question: "Well, eh, what do you actually mean when you talk about poststructuralism?" you will probably not get an answer that satisfies your intellectual needs. Catherine Belsey's book "Poststructuralism" is the perfect starting point for everybody who is interested in this subject.
One of the major difficulties of the topic is that it is impossible to answer the question 'What is poststructuralism?' just in one or two simple sentences. First and foremost one has to understand that the very foundation of poststructuralism lies in its view on language: "Poststructuralism proposes that the distinctions we make are not necessarily given by the world around us, but are instead produced by the symbolizing systems we learn" (7). This means that language does not only passively reflects a kind of external reality. It rather actively constructs what we perceive as being real. This has dramatic consequences for our position as individuals or subjects in this world.
The recently deceased philosopher Jacques Derrida argues that language is structured in binary opposiotions. His method to discover and undo these oppsoitions is summarised in the notoriously difficult to understand word deconstruction. So, what is actually meant by binary oppositions and deconstruction? Derrida argues that Western Culture in general is structured in binary oppositions in which one part is always considered to be of higher value than the other one. The most famous examples are male/female, culture/nature or speech/writing. In his writings Derrida attacks the logocentric tradition of Western Culture meaning that ideas come first and are then expressed in language. Derrida, however, brings forth the idea that meaning is the result of the signifier (the word) and that there just do not exist any signifieds without signifiers. The consequences of this view are tremendous: "If there are no pure, free-standing signifieds, we look in vain, Derrida explains, for the transcendental signified, the one true meaning that holds all others in place, the foundational truth that exists beyond question and provides the answer to all subsidiary problems. Metaphysical belief, laying claim to truth, all apeal to some transcendental signified. For Christianity this is God, for the Enlightenment reason, and for science the laws of nature. But if we take meaning to be the effect of language, not its cause, these foundations lose their transcendental status" (78f.). Deconstruction, then, means that, since signifiers do not only have one fixed meaning, language has countless meaning potentials. What is deconstructed is the idea that a text has only one and true fixed meaning: "Deconstruction undoes that impression, pushes meaning towards undecidability, and in the process democratizes language. Binary oppositions so not hold, but can, always be undone" (87).
In her book Belsey also dedicates some chapter to other major representatives of poststructuralism such as Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault or Louis Althusser. In the final chapter she comments on the basic premises of postmodernism which, in its view on language and the concepts of meaning and truth, has a lot in common with poststructuralism. "Poststrucuturalism" is a very short but a very dense book. If read carefully and with concentration it gives the reader a good overview over this interesting topic which enables him/her to further delve into the subject.
