Jacques Derrida's thoughts about the flow of ideas as a network of shared possibilities is something I find interesting and for me fosters a flexibility in looking at other artists work. Although he isn't an entirely radical thinker I do like his ideas on cyclical progression and that thoughts once in the world add to ways we have of creating new responses and innovation rather than seeing ideas as fixed perspectives.
The artist themselves can’t control the way in which their work is interpreted, there are always tensions and paradoxes in what art says and what art does. Everything is capable of rethought, self, art, literature, culture, identity, society and thought itself. On the one hand Derrida spoke of the emancipation by this continual revolution, however he always felt safest when memory of what was being emancipated from was also left preserved. A sort of philosophical have your cake and eat it approach to deconstruction. Deconstruction not being a dismantling but rather an inherent mutability.
Derrida enjoyed the dual gestures of preservation and emancipation, description and transformation. Emancipation being an ‘interesting’ word as it is derived from the Latin e (away from) manciapre (to transfer property). In this sense creation in the very moment of creating propels itself into a future commitment based upon an inescapable past promise. This is the permanent tension in the creative bow.The idea of ‘original’ fidelity seeking to hold the arrow in a place of permanence whilst interpretation paradoxically sets the arrow free. Such thoughts question the idea of the singular and celebrates art from a pluralist perspective, which Derrida felt was the space of joy. Art does not have to be overlaid ‘application’ but rather can be a ‘reflection’ of what is already there inherent in the objects, revealing what is at work in the work.
Creative ownership in this context would be seen as the single idea or at best a stopping down of aperture, dimming the reflective possibilities of arts inherent glory. To accept the single idea, puts an end to narrative dulling the senses. Derida wanted everything to remain open, free and still to be thought, so for Derrida arrival was an unfathomable impossibility. For him mediation, interpretation and transcription were not choices but rather a necessary unavoidable response. The physical boundaries of objects were not horizons but rather metaphysical ley lines.
Derrida strove in very simplistic terms to derive new ways of seeing the already established. He would dislike the idea of ‘protection’ but in a sense his writing seeks to maintain this ‘freedom’ to question. This continual re-looking is not about any external idea of obligation or duty but is for Derrida the reality of the thing itself, He is highlighting that the external assigning to objects and to the self fixed ‘identity’ leads to assumption and illogical familiarity with what can only ever be in ‘reality’ the establishment of transient myths.