| |
I
wasn’t able to see Derrida until it was released on
DVD, but now I’m glad. Much like his own writings, Derrida
is so complex I found myself frequently rewinding – and sometimes
re-rewinding – in order to keep up with what was going on. Even
after it all, I’m not sure I caught it all. Though the need
to rewind is often a detriment to a film’s success, I quite
enjoyed it here. Derrida’s writings take multiple rereadings
to understand, so a film about him ought equally to demand multiple
rewatchings.
A lot of different ideas are brought up throughout the short
documentary, particularly those of the concept of documentary
and biography itself. I’m always amazed that in shows such
as “The Real World”, the relentless presence of the
cameras isn’t a factor in the subject’s lives. It
probably is and they just don’t show it; but maybe it’s
just because people are really good at being fake. This is exactly
the notion to which Derrida objects, the unreality of the alleged
reality. We never forget that this is a filmed documentary, Derrida
is always reminding us.
This leads to further ideas about biography and its limits. At
one point, Derrida quotes Heidegger’s comment that all you
can really say about Aristotle’s life is that he was born,
thought and died – everything else is just an anecdote.
Immediately following this we get a string of anecdotes about
Derrida, as if that were all we could say about him. The filmmakers
seem to be constantly playing with Derrida, attempting to transcend
or “deconstruct” the line that he creates between
documentary and reality.
Derrida also includes frequent references to the Other
and our relationship to it. My favorite parts include comments
from Derrida on forgiveness that could have come from Kierkegaard
(in fact, they probably did). I was glad to see the Other given
such a prominent place in the discussion; I think it brought out
the humanity in a Derrida which is usually seen only on the page.
Despite the presence of multiple ideas and multiple anecdotes
(including one humorous bit about Derrida not wanting to have
to explain ‘differance’ to his mother), I never felt
like any of it came together cohesively. Maybe there’s some
underlying string that I missed, but it felt like more of a montage
of Derrida’s life and thought – a montage that leaves
us with less of a distinct understanding than a hazy familiarity
with who this man is. Considering, however, that that’s
the effect that frequently comes from reading Derrida’s
work, perhaps it’s the most appropriate way to approach
his life.
Documentary
|
|
|