Deconstruction

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

The term deconstruction was theorized by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida. The term has had wide-ranging philosophical implications; this entry emphasizes its implications for case study research. Although Derrida never explicitly formulated a definitive definition of deconstruction (which would be contrary to his approach), he acknowledged four phrases that highlight its various facets.

The first of these phrases is referred to as “deconstruction is America.” Derrida's deconstruction was first debated in North American universities. In its early years, it was used as a method for literary criticism. Deconstruction does indeed apply to texts, but articles, theories, discourses, case studies, accounts, and even practices, as well as decisions, can be considered as texts. As a literary method, a deconstructive analysis first looks for the binary oppositions that organize a given text (e.g., communication/noise, change/resistance to change). It then underlines how the first term in the binary opposition is considered as positive whereas the second is devalued and parasitic to the first. Yet a close scrutiny to both concepts making up the binary opposition would reveal that each is in fact contaminated by the other. The deconstructive analysis implies that both terms embody and thus imply the other. The binary opposition appears to be too simple to grasp the studied phenomenon. A deconstructive analysis can also involve a search for what is not stated in the text, such as what may be presumed by the text. If such presuppositions are rendered [Page 283]explicit, the text is thus repainted with another meaning. Other approaches become possible. The perspectives, the plots, the frames, the fringes are open to be rebuilt; new insights and vocabularies are required to retell the story.

The second phrase acknowledges that “deconstruction means speaking more than one language.” Although unaware, we always draw on the same language to speak of a phenomenon; this means we use the same words, variables, metaphors, logics, and so on. Drawing on other languages to organize our theories would open the way for new insights. Here a case study, with its rich and thick descriptions, as well as its prescription for multiple sources of evidence, can be of much help. As a result, the deconstructionist looks closely at and pays special attention to phrases uttered by usually silenced individuals, including frontline workers, people with learning disabilities, unemployed people, and elderly residents. She may even try to voice their accounts, through lending them her voice, thus enabling them to speak through her. Through careful listening of previously silenced individuals, the deconstructionist strives to disrupt her own former insights. By taking seriously the words and worlds of the previously silenced, the deconstructionist seeks to build or craft an alternative language to speak of a given phenomenon. Because she is cautious about processes in which privileging occurs, the deconstructionist does not situate her language as superior but does emphasize the need for multivocality and multiple languages.

...