Paradoxes of Deconstruction in Postmodern Aesthetics and Art Cinema

Abstract

This article is an attempt to reflect on some of the key issues of the French philosopher Jacques Derrida’s ideas, and, above all, on the term "deconstruction," as well as on the practical implementation of these theses in the artistic practice of such outstanding directors as M. Haneke, A. German (senior), or Carlos Reygadas.
The article is not meant to be a statement of a certain position, but rather a quest for it, in the words of Roland Barthes — the article is like a "question in reply" — an attempt to express one’s own thoughts on this problem, and, if possible, to stimulate new works in this direction. Many theorists will no doubt agree that J. Derrida's deconstruction is the main conceptual source of the entire postmodern aesthetic. And that's fair. Not even in the sense that there have long been entire schools of new criticism, the emergence of which was in one way or another provoked by certain ideas of the leader of the French intellectuals of the post-Structuralist orientation.
Derrida himself notes that deconstruction is radically different from all the variations of traditional criticism. In our opinion, there is a very successful, aesthetically correct definition of deconstruction, which holds much promise for analytical work, as an “artistic transcription of philosophy”. It seems to us that this aspect of deconstruction is extremely popular not so much in the aesthetic, but in the artistic sphere, and above all this concerns hands-on critical practice.
The definition of the status of deconstruction as “artistic transcription”, a kind of artistic conceptualization of a particular philosophy or certain of its aspects, actually opens up the prospect of “reading” especially complicated texts, which are conceptually closed, or built around seemingly intractable contradictions that make the process of perception and comprehension extremely difficult, since all attempts to rationally explain intra-text situations seem very difficult and simply do not fit into the framework of existing traditions and regulations.
The assumption that deconstruction can become an artistic transcription of any philosophical idea opens up the possibility of creating some kind of individual conceptualization of the language of the text, which may be underlain by unexpected conclusions or hypotheses. We can say that the understanding of deconstruction as an artistic implementation of a particular philosophical concept, is here defined as the constitutive idea of this work