ROLAND BARTHES

Roland Barthes - Post Structuralism

By

Roland Barthes: Post-Structralism

Introduction to Post Structuralism

Many writers, critics and theorists see post-structuralim as a clearly form of cons-modernism or anti-modernism, which consequently would report an attitude regressive, conservative or even reactionary. This interpretation would be that post-modernism is based largely on the semantic value of the prefix “post” indicates that if a “later” connotes one “beyond”. However, in the history of European ideas, we can find different attempts to modernize the sciences of the nineteenth century, with different tests to reconstruct the “science of the mind” on the model of “natural science”. French structuralism undertakes a whole new dialogue between reason and experience. This theory is understandable yet its implementation emphasize on a range of philosophical thoughts and perceptions.

Extent of post-structuralism believes that the importance of a character 's one effect of the expression side of it, it builds on common working hypothesis n of structuralism on, directed against the metaphysical tradition applies, the phonetic characters are a reflection of mental or cognitive processes (Saussure, 1959, pp. 28-40). Compared to critical directed from outside, such positioning has the advantage of relying not on a refusal in principle, inadmissible in its priorism, but a sum of hardship empirically proven. Indeed, any researcher, regardless of discipline of election or choice, appropriate, provided they do not hide behind any absolute respect for dogmatic, it is sometimes confronted in the context of its work to various obstacles that need to be considered, along with their implications. It is therefore an overview of thorny issues revealed by the practice of immanent structuralist analysis, since structuralism is most of his popularity in the discipline that is called narratology, we limit our inquiry to the consideration of texts within the narrative mode (Barthes, 1972, pp. 109-137).

Post-structuralism, in its both viewpoints from Derrida and Deleuze, was extremely sensitive to the issue of identity and difference, from a questioning of the principles of a "metaphysics of presence" that governed the Western philosophical thought until the twentieth century. The concepts of difference and repetition, becomings flows and applied to the constitution of subjects, warn against subjectivity thought of as essential pre-discursive and individual. Instead, it foregrounds the problem of language, its performative value and the dominance of the signifier in Derrida, or utterance-entered in Deleuze-Guattari for whom the speech is not original, first statement there, but is constitutively in the most indirect Bakhtinian itself (Levi-Strauss, 1963, pp. 110-128).

The concept of post-structuralism requires that both the implicit and explicit aspects of the subject are put into focus; however, we often see that it relates to a notion that supports a misconception in most of the instances. The poststructuralist subject is without origin and without unity. It is a sign that is taken from “deep inside”, a captive in the language, in the broad sense defined by cultural being (Barthes, 1967, pp. 9-34). It relates, not to what is being shown, but rather what the visual sense cannot ...