A Reading of the Film "Derrida"

       There is definitely irony in trying to capture the “true” Derrida in a documentary film because everything about it is fake. A documentary cannot truly capture the rawness of a person simply because a real person isn’t used to a camera. When a camera is presented in
front of you, you tend to censor your true self because of your awareness of it.
I believe the directors are aware of this because of Derrida’s comment about
how he presents a cleaned up version of himself in front of them instead of
staying in his pajamas all day which he usually does. A documentary is a lot
like an elementary school photo. The photo is used to capture the moment of
your youth so years down the road you can look at it and remember times of your
youth and what you looked like. Yet the photo does not capture the truth of who
you were back then because your given the date of the photo your mother combs
your hair a special way and makes you wear a dress or bow tie but does that really
capture the truth of your youth? No. It captures a moment in time where you’re
your cleaned up self smiling for a picture that captures nothing real or true
about who you are. The directors know this and do not try to make the film into
something it’s not. The directors are just as essential as Derrida is. They become
a part of the film because Derrida doesn’t try to pretend they are not there.

      Derrida is depicted through image because most of the documentary is centering upon his
image. His image is whatever he feels that day. Some days he seems apprehensive
where other days he is happier to share the inside workings of his mind.  Another way of looking at his image is through the self portrait oil painting in the museum. He is asked to look at himself causes him to become anxious. The images of himself conflict because of how
different people see him. He cannot depict himself through image because like
he states in the film one cannot see how you look, it is others who see you
better.

         Throughout the interview process Derrida does seem uneasy but it’s understandable, and this makes him easy to relate to and a likable figure.  I think if he went into the interview process and spit out answers instead of quietly collecting himself before hand it would have made him look pompous. Every answer he gives is well thought out and intriguing. There is some disconnection in the interview but I think it’s only because of Derrida's brilliancy. When asked the question about love he shows a hesitance only because he’s being honest and
cannot answer the question the way the interviewer asks it. After the
interviewer rewords it, Derrida gives yet another brilliant answer and makes
the interview a success. If there wasn’t any disconnect it would seem too
practiced and not as real as all the interviews turned out. So in this case the
disconnect between the interviewer and interviewee functions in a compelling way.

    A specific part of the film where I connected "Structure, Sign, and Play" was when
Derrida was asked to talk about love and what it means.  He connected this concept to love by deconstructing it. The play between love and narcissism is what demonstrates that there is no center.

     Through Derrida’s film it felt like I got to pick a part a brilliant mind. Listening to
Derrida answer some of the most profound questions really was eye
opening. I especially loved how he said eyes are a part of the body that doesn’t
age and one’s act of seeing has no age. I just think that is such a wonderful
concept that I never thought about yet can relate to.  It was really kind of beautiful.  The general sense I got out of Derrida’s theories were that they were all collectively thought out and each one of them connect to "Structure, Sign and Play" and ultimately the deconstruction of language.