what an interesting theory is deconstruction ~ i somehow find it ironic that it is just nebulous enough a concept as to almost be self-descriptive (i forget the rhetoric term for this phenomenon, but).
anyone have a good source which defines this movement more clearly than Goldstein's offering in AHD? i agree with the above comments that suggesting that words mean nothing in the absence of hidden meanings makes the entire idea sound ludicrous at best ~ surely there's something more to the theory.
silkmuse ~ i wasn't quite sure what to make of your post, and i'm glad you've explained it a bit further. as AnnaS has said, there was only one member of this Board who consistently demonstrated a hidden agenda ~ and he has been banned. there will always be misunderstandings, but with the exception of that particular fly in the ointment, we've always had a collective maturity and intelligence sufficient to smooth over any rough spots and hurt feelings. stick around ~ if you (amazingly!) saw something you liked in this board at such a time of turmoil, you'll be *amazed at how much fun it'll be without poltergeist(s)!
wordwind, your comment
"write in such a way that you can worm yourself out if caught in a phrase. Whatever you do, write so that you cannot be pinned down." is an extremely apt description
* of recent activity ~ and perhaps the only viable example of a need for decontruction (to the uninformed reader, comments can be sugar-coated sufficient to hide the malicious intent behind them).
EDIT(s): I, too, enthusiastically agree with Wofa's suggestion. in the absence of persistent, prolonged and intentional attacks on the board and its members, which we've seen can end only in banning, i agree that we all stumble once in a while and are deserving of forgiveness and forgetness[sic]
* albeit clearly not an intentional one, and my apologies if my post seemed to be suggesting as much. this is a perfect example of how our interpretation of text must fit into the framework of what we know of the author ~ would this be a component of deconstruction?
