What is Deconstruction?

Tricia Christensen
Tricia Christensen

Deconstruction is a philosophy applied to literary criticism, as well as to criticism of the other arts, which began to gain popularity in the 1980s. The field arose partially in reaction to the literary theories of structuralism, which posited that, when words could be understood within the context of a society of readers, then one could point to the specific meaning of a text. This philosophy eschewed the concept of one possible meaning for a text and instead suggested that meanings are multiple and contradictory.

Deconstruction often confuses readers of literature.
Deconstruction often confuses readers of literature.

Underlying a text is the subtext, a set of values that must be evaluated to see if the text is really contrary in nature and, therefore, somewhat without meaning. Deconstruction also evaluates the way in which texts in the traditional literary canon are taught to students, suggesting that traditional “readings” often ignore underlying value structures in direct opposition to what is taught.

A simple example of this is analysis of the work Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. For many years, this novel was thought to be an important work on human rights and an examination of man’s inhumanity to man. Through the eyes of Huck, the reader could see the devastation of slavery and the degradation suffered by African Americans.

Critics who use deconstruction quite logically point to the last portion of the book, in which Huck and Tom realize that Jim is a free man and no longer a slave, yet go to great lengths to pretend he is a slave. They lock him up and nearly starve him. Huck is quite willing to degrade Jim in this way, showing few moral qualms about doing so.

For those practicing this type of criticism, this bizarre chapter suggests that the so-called work about human rights is something else. The underlying values in the text are not consistent with the way it is presented to students. In a sense, the deconstructionist has taken apart the novel and its critical tradition, displaying its inconsistencies.

Many literary critics abhor this practice, stating that taking a text apart deprives it of meaning and ultimately dismisses the value of anything it touches. Those who use this method might argue “How does one define value? What is meaning?” Though this answer may frustrate critics, it points to the way in which deconstructionists see the text as a source of multiple meanings, determined very much by each reader's own subtexts and definitions. To reduce the meaning of a work may ultimately make it purposeless, say some critics. At its best, though, this philosophy can be helpful in unmasking huge contradictions present in a text.

Critics have also accused the theory of being fascist in nature, largely due to one major proponent, Paul de Man, who may have written for a magazine that had some Nazi sympathies. Paul de Man has refuted these charges, yet deconstruction seems inexorably tied to fascism in the minds of many.

It is true that reading a deconstruction of a text can be similar to attempting to decode a secret message. Deconstructionists like Jack Derrida deliberately choose confusing and lengthy words to derive a multiplicity of meanings from their interpretation. In some ways, this makes the practice elitist and inaccessible to many readers. The deconstructionist doesn't care, however, for those who are confused, and they believe that confusion should be the result.

Tricia Christensen
Tricia Christensen

Tricia has a Literature degree from Sonoma State University and has been a frequent wiseGEEK contributor for many years. She is especially passionate about reading and writing, although her other interests include medicine, art, film, history, politics, ethics, and religion. Tricia lives in Northern California and is currently working on her first novel.

You might also Like

Readers Also Love

Discussion Comments


Keep in mind that deconstruction is linked to Derrida's hypothesis that there is a subtle preference in the Western tradition for the spoken word over the written.


I simply love the way you have summarized deconstructionism (?) into fewer words, yet covering almost all the issues. However, there are more than these.


I have read multiple sources on Deconstructionism but yours presents it the clearest. My take on deconstructionism is that it is a "Teenage Attitude" towards literary analysis hiding behind a veneer of intellectualism by utilizing $1,000 words where $1.00 words would do. It appears equitable in theory but it is selective in practice. ESR


I am a phd student and I'm working on Naipaul's work. My aim is to deconstruct Naipaul's short stories.

What I need is a good sample of a literary work with deconstructionist practice applied to it. I'll be grateful if I can receive any good comments about how to apply deconstruction to Naipaul's work, or any good samples given to me.

Unfortunately, I could not find any good comments.


So, how does deconstruction make it easier to notice inconsistencies within Huck Finn and various social attributes stuck to it?

I'm studying modernism and post/modernism-structuralism and just can't get Deconstruction. One would think you'd always have to know the cultures of the times in which a work was created and that critiques help emphasize trends, perspectives (e.g., gender awareness). Thanks.


If something is simple it doesn't mean it is necessarily understandable.

"I hate him." This is simple, but you don't know the true meaning behind my statement, so how could you possibly understand it?


I´m so glad I found this site, it explains everything super clearly! Some sites are just unreliable and over complicated sometimes. We need clarity!


Great! This helped me cement some ideas for a paper I'm writing.


very simple and thus understandable.

Post your comments
Forgot password?