The Chronicle of Higher Education has perhaps the most informative story on Derrida this week. Note the absence of the term deconstructionism. Deconstructionism is a term invented by conservatives for everything they hate. Frontpage, a site by ex-rabid-Trots, has an exemplary rabid anti-deconstructionism piece.

Why do conservatives go bananas over a philosophy professor? The Chronicle provides a clue.

Ms. Kamuf, a professor of French and comparative literature at the University of Southern California, recalled on Saturday what it was like to read Derrida's work as a graduate student at Cornell University in 1970.

"There was a sense of urgency when we encountered it," she said, "urgency in the context of the American political circumstances at the time. It was a few months after Kent State. But we were intellectuals who were not willing just to condemn the university, to renounce rigor of thought, in order to get out into the streets."

...

As an undergraduate at the University of Texas at Austin in the late 1970s, Mr. Pyle studied with Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, who had translated Derrida's book Of Grammatology (originally published in 1967). The practice of deconstructive analysis "engaged our interpretive skills, and pushed our reading beyond any prescribed boundaries."

"It was intellectually exciting and politically hopeful," he said.

It's the politically hopefulness that must have set FrontPage off. In their piece they create an effigy of everything they dislike and name it deconstructionism. Their invention has nothing to do with what Derrida thought, any more than an astrology column has to do with what astronomers think. Why is FrontPage wading into specialized waters about which they know naught? After all, we wouldn't expect them to write an informative piece on the Strong Force, which is also newsworthy, meriting last week's Nobel physics prize. They probably feel justified in venting their rage because philosophers have a history of trying to meddle in politics, from Syracuse to Freiburg, much to their disadvantage. Fortunately, interest in Derrida is not limited to literature departments.

As their students fanned out across the country, they met resistance -- and not just from those who rejected deconstruction itself. Other currents influenced by Derrida stressed his roots in the philosophy of Martin Heidegger

Roots which are not going help Derrida any with the Frontpage crowd, but they are what makes Derrida dear around here.

The best intro into Derrida, the man, is Derrida the Movie.

Favorite bits 1:

Throughout, Derrida and the filmmakers return to Heidegger, the German thinker who believed that the anecdotes and details of a philosopher's life are irrelevant to his work. Derrida wrestles with that: He believes that it's untrue and yet finds it difficult to reveal personal matters.

Reading about the private lives of others is far preferable. "If you were to watch a documentary about a philosopher -- Heidegger, Kant or Hegel -- what would you like to see in it?" Kofman asks.

"Their sex lives," Derrida replies.

"Why?" Kofman wants to know.

"Because it's something they don't talk about."

Favorite bits 2:

Derrida's most spontaneous moments occur as a public figure. He seems genuinely nonplussed, if not downright testy, when an overeager British interviewer attempts to lure him into a discussion of Seinfeld. "Deconstruction as I understand it does not produce any sitcoms," Derrida haughtily tells her. "Do your homework and read."

Favorite bits 3: Avital Ronell recalls being with Derrida when a new edition of a French dictionary is released, and it includes the word differance with an a. Avital wants to organize a celebration of this historic occasion. Derrida's mom, who's been sitting at the dinner table listening to this conversation, turns to Derrida aghast and asks, "Jacky, you spelt differance with an a?"  ¶ 11:43 AM