Applied Derrida / An Interview (short excerpt)

http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/Derrida/applied.html
Q.: What happens when you apply yourself to a thinker, in writing?
A.: I will try to answer your question - later. First: I am applied Derrida. A conference on
me, where I am here... why do they want me to be here, to listen to my name? et me
postpone the answer to this question. !..." It is not application, but dissemination. I
learned a lot from the papers. #ut why did I come here unprepared, with fa$e notes
!holds up an empty sheet of paper"? I didn%t want to apply somethin& already, I wanted to
come as na$ed as possible !ta$es off 'ac$et". (a$edness: purity and porno&raphy. As
usual, )eoff has said e*erythin& before I open my mouth, and I try to be unpredictable,
which is impossible after him. +hen you come to a conference on A,,I-D ./0, it is
as if you%re dead. I would li$e to see what it is li$e when I am dead. 1hat%s why I came.
1o relate to an ob'ect 2as such2 is to pretend that you are dead. I wanted to meet
!conference or&ani3er" 4ulian +olfreys, but the condition of that was to be quasi-dead.
+hy are we afraid of death? It is scarin& to ima&ine the end of the world. #ut what is
more scarin& is that we will continue to be dead, while attendin& the world &oin& on,
while loo$in& at thin&s... At the same time, it is the most reassurin& thin&.
If I am applied Derrida, how can I bear bein& here? It%s unbearable. 1o be dead without
bein& dead: unburyable. 1he as if, als ob, the quasi is what protects us. /n the one
hand, there is no applied deconstruction. .ou ha*e to perform in your lan&ua&e and
situation. I don%t for&et your question. /n the other hand, there is nothin& but application.
.ou can only apply deconstruction. (ow, Derrida Applied - that%s somethin& else. If I
apply myself, in a deconstructi*e &esture, it is in a sin&ular and unique performati*e
e*ent. #ut as you $now, because of the law of iterability !microphone feedbac$", it is
immediately applicable. A moment a&o, I mentioned dissemination as opposed to
application. Dissemination and the supplement e5ceed polysemy.
If my family name seems to refer to this iterability, it is not mine. And when I say that I
am applied Derrida, the name was applied to my body. I lo*e this name, but I as$ myself,
why are you wor$in& so hard, attendin& conferences, writin& a lot? 6aybe because the
name, in a way, had to be coined and in*ented for myself, at the same time unique and
iterable. 1hat%s what I can do to honour the name. And here I arri*e at your question.
7o when I read 8I ha*e been reproached for not writin& in my name9, the feelin& of duty
is to countersi&n, to be true, in the sense of fidelity, to the other. I am before them as I
am before the law, the others are the law, because they are before me. Acceptin& the
&ift is to countersi&n. 1his is a totally spectral structure.
I don%t $now what will happen to the name Derrida after this. I%ll try to sur*i*e. - 1he
theme of responsibility is a *ery eni&matic one which we cannot unfold here. First, the
proper name 8which doesn%t belon& to anyone9 names a responsibility, for the name of
the other and to the other. Autonomy, :eteronomy. 1he eni&ma of responsibility lies in
this aporia: that you are applied to.
If a decision is the impossible, it must occur in the form of a certain passi*ity. 1his
doesn%t e5culpate or e5onerate me at all. I am summoned, I recei*e an in'unction, of
someone who is not there. /beyin& the dead, that%s the problem. /f course, a limited
responsibility is irresponsible. For responsibility to be responsible you ha*e to try to
$now the ma5imum, but it &oes beyond the limit. It must be infinite, beyond theoretical
certainty. I am *ery happy there is a conference to do with deconstruction. I ha*e heard
it%s on the wane, dyin&, for the last ;< years. I tell you, it is dead. If there is a difference
between deconstruction and any other fashion, discipline and so forth, it is that it started
with dyin&.