1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

Art Buchwald is one of the few writers to have devoted his

whole life for the cause of exposing the corrupt and evil practices in the social

and political order. He is a lover and follower of truth. In his intellectual

approach to truth, he is uncompromising. Naturally, he tends to use the tools

of irony and satire in his writings.

A deconstructive reading of Buchwald’s selected essays reveals that

the essayist has employed a few deconstructive strategies to expose the

common social evils through his writings. As there are certain traces of

deconstructive elements in Buchwald’s writings, this thesis attempts to

explore these aspects in detail. In other words, this thesis examines the

selected essays of Buchwald deconstructively by a close reading with a focus

on linguistic and literary elements.

1.2 AIM, SCOPE AND HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study is to analyze the essays of Art Buchwald

deconstructively and to prove that he is a deconstructive essayist.

This study reviews more than 450 essays of the essayist and

considers 246 essays for the deconstructive analysis. Although a few political

satires are taken for this research, most of the essays selected have social

themes. Of the numerous deconstructive strategies, three are chosen for this

study, namely binary opposites, indeterminacies, and dissemination.

2

A careful study of Buchwald’s selected essays reveals that he is a

serious satirist. He has used certain deconstructive strategies in his writings

that support a deconstructive analysis.

This thesis focuses on three aspects of the deconstructive strategies.

First, by way of reading the texts of Buchwald, an attempt is made to show

and challenge the implicit metaphysical presuppositions of Western thought -

the binary oppositions, which are the important elements of structure in

language that is logocentric. Second, the fictionality, the rhetoricity, and the

figurative approaches used in the essays of Buchwald make the “right

reading” or “correct reading” (Abrams 1999) of the text impossible. Third, a

deconstructive reading of the essays shows that they lack a center. The

impossibility and possibility of totalized boundary is shown. Further, by a

play of internal counter-forces like differance, trace, and, supplement, the text

“disseminates into an indefinite range of self-conflicting significations”

(Abrams 1999).

Thus, the deconstructive technique of reading, analysis, and

interpretation is adopted in this research as the critical tool to examine binary

opposites, indeterminacies, and dissemination, which suggests that Art

Buchwald is a deconstructive essayist.

1.3 POST-STRUCTURALISM, DERRIDA, AND

DECONSTRUCTION

This section introduces post-structuralism, its emergence and

importance in the area of literary studies, and the concept of deconstruction. It

also gives a brief account of the life and works of Jacques Derrida, who is the

architect of deconstruction.

3

Post-structuralism is an intellectual movement that emerged in

France in the late 1960s. It is the outcome of both the structuralist phase of

analyzing sign and structure, and the humanist model of focusing on the text,

the author, the reader, and history. Jacques Derrida gave the basic grounding

to the theory of deconstruction with his lecture ‘Structure, Sign and Play in

the Discourse of the Human Sciences’ in 1966. Based on this, various other

post–structuralists propounded their theories. ‘Jacques Lacan in

psychoanalysis, Michel Foucault in philosophy, Roland Barthes in semiotics,

Julia Kristeva in criticism, Jean-Francois Lyotard in political theory, and

Jacques Derrida with his deconstruction theory’ are the most ‘celebrated

practitioners’ of the movement (Quinn 2004).

Derrida was born in 1930 at El-Biar near Algiers. In 1949, he

moved to Paris where he studied at the Lycee Louis-le-Grand and Ecole

Normale Superieur. He was a student of Jean Hyppolite and Michel Foucault.

Later he taught at the ENS as maitre-assistant until he became the directeur

d’etudes at the Ecole des Hartes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in 1984. It was

only at the time of ‘publishing his first paper, he signed himself as Jacques

Derrida’ (Wolfreys 2006).

It was in 1967 that Derrida published three volumes of his

important works which attracted worldwide attention: ‘Speech and

Phenomena and Other Essays on Husserl’s Theory of Signs,’ ‘Of

Grammatology,’ and ‘Writing and Difference.’

If ‘Of Grammatology’ privileges writing over speech, ‘Writing and

Difference’ discusses various seminal thinkers. In ‘Speech and Phenomena,’

Derrida argues the desire for absolute truth in the ‘imperfections of language’

(Hunter 2007).

4

Since the publishing of these books, although highly influential, he

has been in controversy for his philosophical and critical theories.

‘Dissemination,’ ‘Glas,’ ‘The Postcard,’ ‘Specters of Marx,’ ‘The Gift of

Death,’ and ‘Politics of Friendship’ are some of his other notable books which

spread the concept of deconstruction. Derrida was awarded an honorary

doctorate by Cambridge University in 1992. He died in 2004.

Echoing several researchers and academic intellectuals Hunter

(2007) declares that “Derrida’s writing has consistently addressed important

political, ethical, legal, and social issues, making him a key figure in fields

outside of literature and philosophy as well.”

The word deconstruction is derived from the French verb

“deconstuire,” meaning “to undo the construction of, to take to pieces.”

Deconstruction is a process of ‘building’ that involves ‘all other allied

requirements of building centrifugally and incessantly,’ and / or “comprises

both destruction and construction in itself giving room for the explanation that

there is no destruction without construction and vice versa” (Dhanavel 2005).

As formulated by the French thinker, the theory is a fundamental

critique of certain intellectual assumptions that underlie Western thinking. It

‘focuses on the inherent, internal contradictions in language and

interpretation,’ says Quinn (2004). The theory neither ‘has a concept’ nor is ‘a

form of analysis’ (Eliot and Owens 1998). It is a process of deconstructing the

text. According to Derrida (1978c), in deconstructing a text, the “structure” is

“methodically threatened in order to be comprehended more clearly and to

reveal not only its supports but also that secret place in which it is neither

construction nor ruin but liability.”

Further Derrida (1978c) observes, “meaning is neither before nor

after the act.” At one end, the figurative language of literature and the arts

5

brings the ambiguity between the actual and the implied dimensions. At the

other end, the endless chain of signifiers leads to no conclusion of meaning.

Deconstructive analysis enlists several strategies and terms examine

“logocentrism” which tends to fix the final meaning to particular source.

An introduction to the poststructural theory without the mention of

the ‘Yale critics’ is incomplete. Yale critics are a group of critics who were

associated with deconstruction in the 1970s and ’80s. The group included Paul

de Man, J. Hillis Miller, and Geoffrey Hartman.

Thus, post-structuralism is a late 20th century ‘intellectual

movement’ of linguistic and philosophical studies that gained a new

dimension with Jacques Derrida introducing the concept of deconstruction.

The Yale critics were closely linked to the theory. Deconstruction chiefly

focuses on the contradictions in language and interpretation.

1.4 THE ROLE OF A DECONSTRUCTIONIST

This section explains the role of a deconstructionist. A

deconstructionist engages in the task of identifying the unconscious dimension

of the literary text, rather than the conscious dimension. He considers the text

to be the subject and object of analysis.

Verbal signs, binary opposites, puns, metaphors, and allusions

found in the text make reading and interpretation complicated to the

deconstructionist. The deconstructionist “sets out to show that conflicting

forces within the text itself serve to dissipate the seeming definiteness of its

structure and meanings into an indefinite array of incompatible and

undecidable possibilities” (Abrams 1999).

6

A deconstructionist has the firm belief that no single and correct

meaning can be accorded to a text. Besides, the influence of the external

world has its own impact on the text. This means that the text may be a

composite of various ‘internal contradictions,’ ‘discontinuities,’ and

‘inconsistencies.’ “Internal contradictions may be in the form of paradoxes;

discontinuities as gaps, fissure, tense, time, person, or attitude; and

inconsistencies in ‘plurality of significance’ ” (Barry 2002).

The deconstructionist assumes four roles (Barry 2002). He is at

times a reader, an interpreter, an analyst, and at some other times, a critic. The

reader is an observer who is physically outside the text, but intentionally

involved within the text. He constantly shifts and adopts his stance to the

varying angles seen in the text and comes to a consensus of the meaning

implied or derived. Derrida’s description of deconstructive reading is that the

deconstructionist as a reader must “aim at a certain relationship, unperceived

by the writer, between what he commands and what he does not command of

the patterns of language that he uses” (Barry 2002). That is, the reader

identifies gaps and fills them up by bringing the various social, historic, and

cultural norms relevant to the text before interpreting it. He brings together

the, language, history, “the notion of structure” and “phenomenon of fashion”

(Derrida 1978c). In this endeavor, he deduces several deconstructive elements

while understanding and interpreting the work of literature.

As an interpreter, he has to adapt the ‘deconstructive’ approach of

‘producing the text’ rather than ‘reproducing what the writer thought and

expressed in the ‘text’ (Barry 2002). That is, the interpreter engages in

“assembling significations, recognizing themes, ordering constants and

correspondences” (Derrida 1978c).

In “structure,” which refers to “space, geometric or morphological

space, the order of forms and sites,” the analyst sees in it “the structure of an

7

organic or artificial work, the internal unity of an assemblage, a construction,”

the “unifying principle” in the work, and “the architecture that is built and

made visible in a location” (Derrida 1978c). In other words, as an analyst, the

deconstructionist must look for causes of disunity in the text at the ‘verbal,’

‘textual,’ and ‘linguistic’ stages (Barry 2002). He locates the literary strategies

that the writer had adopted to express his ideas and / or develop the plot by

using some defamiliarizing devices. The analyst needs to “scrutinize the

contradictory elements in a text until they reach an aporia (an impasse), the

point at which the text’s contradictory meanings are shown to be

irreconcilable, illustrating the ‘indeterminacy of meaning’ ” (Quinn 2004).

Derrida (1978c) says, “… structure, the framework of construction,

morphological correlation, becomes in fact and despite his theoretical

intention the critic’s sole preoccupation” (emphasis in the original). As a

critic, the deconstructionist understands that a textual meaning is infinite. He

locates the contradictions in the use of the word(s) or the sentence structure(s).

It is not only the ‘surface features of the words’ that the post–structuralist

critic works upon in order to highlight their importance in the text, but also

determine ‘conflicts,’ ‘absence’ or ‘omissions,’ ‘linguistic quirks,’ and

‘aporia’ while analyzing the text (Barry 2002).

Although all the four roles have varied functions, they are all

integrated to the common objective, that is, to deconstruct the text.

Deconstructionists cannot assume only one standard role for themselves. They

have to function on a multiple role. Sometimes they have to be a reader, and at

other times, an interpreter, an analyst, or a critic. Based on the deconstructive

strategy discussed in the text, in this thesis the deconstructionist gives the

response of a reader, the description of an interpreter, the scrutiny of an

analyst, and/ or the observations of a critic.

8

Thus, the deconstructionist assumes four roles. The reader

perceives certain relationship in the pattern of language that the writer has

used without having explicitly realized it. The interpreter is expected to

‘deconstruct’ and not ‘reconstruct’ the text. The analyst reads and re-reads the

text so as to analyze each passage intensively and carries out a step-by-step

examination to identify the ‘internal contradiction,’ ‘discontinuities,’ and

‘inconsistencies.’ The critic reads ‘the text against itself’ to bring out the

‘textual unconsciousness.’ The deconstructionist fixes ‘the surface features’ of

words and brings them to the foreground establishing their importance or

necessity in the overall play of text. However, in this thesis the

deconstructionist assumes all the four roles of being a reader, an interpreter,

an analyst, and a critic, at various junctures.

1.5 ESSAY IN BRIEF

This section provides an overview of the essay as a literary form, its

relation to satire, and the satirical essay.

An essay is a genre of literature that is ‘informal and conversational

in manner’ and has ‘a direct and even intimate appeal to the reader’ (Fowler

1978). The term is derived from the French word ‘essayer,’ which means an

attempt.

Edmund Goose defines an essay as, “A composition of moderate

length …which deals in an easy, cursory way with the external conditions of a

subject, and, in strictness, with that subject only as it affects the writer” (Rees

1993).

The concept of essay originated with the Roman writers Cicero and

Seneca, whose ‘Epistles,’ which were initially considered as letters, were later

brought under the category of essays. Plutarch’s ‘Moralia,’ essays on ‘moral’

9

themes also belong to this category. The term “essay” goes back to 1588 when

the writer Michel de Montaigne published his book “Essais.” He introduced

not only the word and the form but also pioneered the subjective or the

concept of ‘personal essay.’ Such personal touch could be seen in the essays

of Ben Jonson also, in the later years. In England, Bacon initiated essays. He

‘showed that the essence of good writing is to have something to say, and to

say it as shortly as possible’ (Rees 1993). Consequently, he differed from

Montaigne in giving his aphoristic essays, an objective or impersonal tone.

Writers like Abraham Cowley, Joseph Addison, Virginia Woolf, and J.B.

Priestley took to this mode of writing.

Richard Steele and Joseph Addison launched the social essays.

They brought out over 550 issues of the Spectator (March 1711 to December

1712) ‘to enliven morality with wit, and to temper wit with morality.’ The

essays of Dr. Johnson, and those of Oliver Goldsmith, are all valuable

contributions to the daily newspapers and periodicals.

In the Southern parts of America, literary essays ‘were almost

neglected in the general enthusiasm for forensic and pulpit oratory.’ Even if

they were written, they had the ‘formal style of public speeches.’ William

Wirt (1772–1834) was prominent under this category of essayists. ‘The

Letters of a British Spy’ gave him the initial boost ‘as a critic and master of

eloquence.’ His ‘The Rainbow,’ a collection of ten essays written in

collaboration with his friends, dealt with various political and social queries.

James Kirke Paulding (1779–1860) was an ardent admirer of the ‘American

scenes’ and described them in his essays. He also had his share of prose satire.

Nathaniel Parker Willis (1806-61) revived the ‘discursive literature.’

Emerson’s first published essay was ‘Nature’ (1836). The most characteristic

and influential of his books are the two volumes of ‘Essays,’ issued

respectively in 1841 and 1844. The first volume was a ‘voice of

10

independence’ (Leary 1980), and had discourses on Self-Reliance,

Compensation, and The Over-Soul, which gave the typical traces of what has

been termed as ‘Emersonianism.’ The second volume advocated confidence

and responsibilities. William Ellery Channing, the earliest of the lecturer-

essayists, in 1838, wrote ‘The Essay on Self-Culture,’ which was written as an

address which had ‘the practical and poetical blending of humanity with the

humanities.’ Nathaniel Parker Willis ‘is the prototype of later semi-literary

American journalists.’ Washington Irving, an American author and a

diplomat, brought what may be known as ‘the story-essay,’ which has an

element of narration and description. Donald Grant Mitchell and George

William Curtis also came up sharing their mood of tender sentiment and

gentle satire.

Benjamin Franklin’s periodical essays were the first to be printed in

colonial newspapers which had a conscious moral purpose in them. Timothy

Dwight and John Trumbull came up with their spice of wit in almost a

hundred series of light periodical essays, which they contributed to various

journals in New England. Joseph Dennie (1768–1812) earned the honor of

being known as the “American Addison.” His periodical writings exhibited

his talent with the Farrago essays and earned him fame.

An essay is a flexible and short literary form of composition, which

focuses on a particular subject. Besides, its ‘usefulness,’ it also becomes ‘a

pretext for beauty.’ It may be short, long, factual, fictional, practical, or

playful. It has various literary elements like character, structure, theme, text,

tone, and style. It may serve any purpose and take any form that the essayist

wants it to be. Not all essays are literary. They may be just a ‘practical piece

of writing, designed to report something, or explain something, or make a case

for something.’ Such essays are business-oriented and so proceed

systematically.

11

Essays have various forms like character-sketch, critical essays,

periodical essays, social essays, personal essays, satirical essays, subjective

essays, aphoristic essays, etc. They have various functions too. Some essayists

attempt to change the world; some stay neutral, by being quite indifferent to

the practical ends of the world. Although essayists have some point to make,

they are not always persuasive. According to Virginia Wolf, the main purpose

of an essay is to give pleasure. Pleasure, to her, is ‘the principle which

controls’ and ‘the desire which impels’ the reader to read the text (Scholes et

al. 1991).

Essays are basically categorized into four types: argumentative,

narrative, dramatic, and poetic. An argumentative essay persuades the reader

through an argument. It shows the truth in the argument and convinces the

reader of the writer’s viewpoint. In a narrative essay, the essayist becomes a

narrator, a storyteller, and a reporter and presents the subject in the form of

history. A dramatic essay has dialogues between characters, and the presence

of the author is mostly obvious. A poetic essay has the poet talking to himself

rather than to others and takes the form of a meditation “overheard” by the

reader (Scholes et al. 1991).

An essayist is licensed to express his views effectively as he feels.

His expression may be a personal view, an analytical comment, or an

‘interpretive literary composition.’ The tone he assumes for the purpose can

be formal, passionate, intimate, serious, witty, ironic, or even meditative. A

satire is a literary tone used to ridicule or make fun of human vice or

weakness, often with the intention of correcting or changing some vices.

Irony, humor, wit, sarcasm, and derision are used to mock the vice or

imperfection. The satire on someone worthy of scorn or something ridiculous

may be in the form of an essay, a play, a poem, or a novel.

12

The late 2nd millennium BC ancient Egyptian Papyrus Anastasi

contains the text of a satirical letter in which the writer initially praises the

virtues but then gradually mocks the limited knowledge of the recipient of the

letter.

In the Greco-Roman literature, the terms cynicism and parody were

used in the place of what was later called satire. The ancient classic comedies

of the Greek playwright Aristophanes are political and societal commentaries.

In Rome, Quintilian first discussed satire critically and he was the

one who invented the term to describe the writings of Lucilius. The cool

satires of Horace and the ferocious ones of Juvenal served as the base for the

later classification of satires into two types, biting and mild satires.

Classic among the medieval satires of the Renaissance period were

Chaucer’s ‘The Canterbury Tales,’ Cervantes’ ‘Don Quixote,’ Ben Johnson’s

plays, and Samuel Butter’s ‘Hudibras.’ The Elizabethan satire was typically in

pamphlet form. These contained more direct abuse than gentle irony. The

social commentaries via satire became more straight forward and coarse in the

16th century, when farcical texts like the works of François Rabelais dealt

with more serious issues incurring the wrath of the crown. In the Age of

Enlightenment, the creation of Tory and Whig groups gave rise to an

intellectual movement in the 17th and 18th century that advocated rationality,

which aimed to convey the true meaning of criticism. The 18th century was the

Golden Age of Satire in England. During this period, poets like Alexander

Pope, and essayists like Addison and Steele emerged. In the 19th century,

satire took to smoother forms of criticism and featured more in novels, besides

casting its outlook in Lord Byron’s poems, William S. Gilbert’s librettos, in

the plays of Oscar Wilde and G. B. Shaw. Satirists like Mark Twain, Oscar

Wilde, Jonathan Swift, George Bernard Shaw, Aldous Huxley,

W.M.Thackeray, Charles Dickens, Samuel Butler, Washington Irving, James

13

Russell Lowell, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sinclair Lewis, James Thurber, W.H.

Auden, Khushwant Singh and Art Buchwald contributed their best to world

literature.

Depending on the demands of their times, satirists choose their

central idea of ridicule. Chaucer attacked the lack of morality of the Church

by gently laughing at it. In ‘The Rape of the Lock,’ Pope brings the absurdity

of the rich and fashionable London Society. Samuel Butler’s negative Utopia -

‘Erewhon’ is a satire on the importance given to machines, relegating human

to a secondary position. Thus, “a great satire can often do more practical good

than a hundred speeches by good democratic politicians, or a thousand

sermons by well-meaning preachers” (Rees 1993).

To sum up, an essay is an informal, incomplete, short literary

writing with scientific, political, historical, or philosophical themes. It may be

argumentative, narrative, dramatic, or poetic. It can have varied forms like the

personal essay, subjective essay, objective essay, aphoristic essay, critical

essay, periodical essay, and satirical essay. Although an essayist has the

license to design any impression of himself or herself, his ultimate aim is to

make the reader feel that the writer is addressing him/ her directly. An essayist

may use any tone to convey his or her views effectively. Satire is a powerful

tone of expression to ridicule the vices. Although varied in tone ranging from

the ancient satires to the 20th century satirical columns of Art Buchwald,

satirical essays have contributed considerably to world literature.

1.6 LIFE AND WORKS OF ART BUCHWALD

This section presents the life and works of Art Buchwald. Arthur

Buchwald was born to Joseph Buchwald and Helen Kleinberger on 20th

October, 1925 at Mount Vernon, New York. His childhood was not very

happy. His mother was committed to an asylum soon after he was born. It was

14

in Mount Vernon where he and his two sisters spent their youth in foster

homes. He joined the U.S. Marine Corps at the age of 17 and served in World

War II. In 1948, he joined the ‘Tribune Herald International’ in Paris, and

started writing for ‘The Washington Post’ from 1961.

His columns are syndicated in 550 papers throughout the world and

he is the author of several books. The Jewish-American author, columnist,

dramatist, journalist, satirist, humorist, and essayist got the Pulitzer Prize for

outstanding Commentary in 1982. He is one of the few voices on the social

and political evils that corrupt the natural order and ruin the social harmony.

His gentle satire wrapped up in humor with implicit wit earned him wide

appreciation and acceptance in the newspaper world. He died on 17th January

2007, at the age of 81.

Besides columns, he wrote a play ‘Sheep on the Runaway’ in 1970,

and two novels - ‘A Gift from the Boys’ ‘The Bolo Caper’ which were

published in 1958 and 1974, respectively.

His famous lawsuit against Paramount Pictures cannot be forgotten.

He filed a case against Paramount Pictures in 1988 for having stolen his script

for the Eddie Murphy film ‘Coming to America’. Buchwald won after a long

battle. He was awarded the compensation and a settlement from Paramount.

The case was also the subject of a book, ‘Fatal Subtraction: The Inside Story

of Buchwald V. Paramount’ by Pierce O'Donnell and Dennis McDougal,

published in 1992.

He wrote a memoir ‘Leaving Home’ in1994. In 1996, he wrote his

own experiences in ‘I’ll Always Have Paris.’ His last book was ‘Too Soon to

Say Goodbye’ (2006), which talks of his time at the hospital after he was told

that because of the kidney problem, he would live for only a short time. In this

work, he reflects on his own passing.

15

Newspaper columns are transient but Buchwald’s essays were

published in newspapers. The question here is why his essays have been taken

for research when editorial columns in general are considered momentary. In

fact, date and events may go past the time, but they are recorded as history

and history never dies. So are Buchwald’s essays, which are documentations

of the day-to-day happenings, blended with a little imagination, humor, and

wit. They serve as valuable pieces of observations made by the essayist on the

socio-political issues, enabling serious deliberations on matters and widening

the avenue of research. Thus, Buchwald’s essays, which belong to a rather

ephemeral genre of newspaper editorial, is a valuable body of writing like any

other American literary prose fiction for purposes of deconstructive analysis.

According to Antonio Gramsci, society is divided into ‘two major

superstructure levels’ – the “civil society” and the “political society.” The

former is basically ‘Private’ and of ‘Group/class’ concern and the latter is of

‘the state’ and its administrative jurisdiction (Rivkin and Michael 1998).

Based on Gramsci, Art Buchwald’s essays are classified into two categories –

social (civil) and political. Buchwald’s social essays are the contemporary

social satires in the context of events and figures in history, while his political

satires deal directly with news stories and political figures.

In Buchwald’s essays, the social issues include problems related to

global warming, environmental pollution, nuisance due to tele-callers, deceit

by insurance companies, racial and gender discrimination, problem of

unemployment, neglect of senior citizens, degrading value education, growing

business attitudes, high price of gas, oil, and drugs, etc. His political subjects

highlight constitutional violations, political corruptions, legal irregularities

and loopholes, adoption of illegal methods to outwit law, misuse of power and

authority, false promises during elections, the ‘mud-sling’ before and ‘blame

16

game’ after elections, election campaigning and fund raisings, war policies,

and so on.

Buchwald’s readers admire him for his use of polite language. He

hardly uses rough and provocative words. He is well informed about the

matter he writes and his subjects are backed up with dependable and

legitimate evidences and incidences that are not hidden from many. He does

not follow any conservative style, set pattern, traditional norm, or standard

plan in writing his essays. The only thing common to all his columns is that

they are satirical essays with much humor and sufficient wit in them. A story

is fluently found in all his essays. Sometimes he blends various genres like

poetry, prose, commentary, notes, and interview. His use of putative speakers,

parodies, ironies, and ambiguities adds intensity to the events. His dialogues

give a sense of drama to his essays. And his characterization is distinguished

by a combination of knowledge creativity, humor and wit.

However, his essays appear to be weak in terms of structure. There

is no formal ending or finality in his essays. This is because his essays are not

just prosaic to feature his thoughts, but more of a narration, a drama, or a story

and not a summary of his ideas or judgement.

Buchwald overcame many difficulties in life and emerged as a

successful essayist. His social and political essays provide an insight into the

various social and political issues that disturb the virtuousness of the society

and humanity as a whole. His tactful use of language enables him to deal with

numerous serious issues very lightly.

1.7 ART BUCHWALD AS A POPULAR SATIRIST

Buchwald is a popular satirist avidly read and appreciated by the

general public. He is a universal and eternal writer par excellence.

17

Art Buchwald admits that he is a satirist. He claims, “Satire is my

business” in his essay ‘Satire under Fire.’ Although he considers satire ‘a

malicious business,’ he insists that ‘someone has to do it’ and he explains

satire as, “a way to express an opinion and also make the reader laugh. The

important thing is for the person reading to have knowledge of what is being

satirized so he/she can be in on the joke.”

For him, the theme of satire is ‘anything.’ In the same essay, he

says, “We live in a country where writers can satirize anything they want to,

even their own satire.” Satires suit best when they are topical in nature

because the reader is aware of the real nature of the event that is being

mocked at.

The essayist who considers satire to be ‘malicious’ is uncertain

about being fair to himself and to his writing. However, a satire is believed to

have some truth in it. The satirist is expected to exploit the truth. Buchwald

does it beautifully in his writing.

Buchwald shows the power of satire in ‘Murdoch’s Fair Warning’.

He refers to ‘a billionaire,’ who is capable of hiring ‘the best lawyers in the

world’ but could not ‘win a lawsuit’ against a ‘satirist.’ In the essay, he

reveals not only the power of satire but also its close connection with politics.

“Nearly everybody is a satirist in a small way… The real satirist

however differs from most of us, both in the strength of his feeling and in

having the wit and genius to express it in novel or poem or play. He must have

some of the qualities of the moralist or the preacher, and some of the qualities

of the clown- because the best way of attacking wickedness and foolishness is

by laughing at them” (Rees 1993). Buchwald has immense strength of

feelings, both in the form of courage in expressing sensitive issues, and in the

sense of being well-expressive of his feelings. He presents his ideas seriously

18

and also sarcastically. While appreciating the seriousness of the matter, he

makes the reader laugh at the follies of human beings. He does not become a

preacher with a fixed idea of his own. As a moralist, he delights the readers

with his insights into the problems confronting the society. Perhaps there is a

satirical author in every reader. The reader’s response is one of wonder and

regard which earns Buchwald the status of being a satirist.

Every satirist has a purpose behind his writings. Buchwald also

intends to bring to limelight the social failings, which are caused by the

businesspeople on one side, and the politicians on the other. He exposes in his

essays the irregularity, lavishness, greed, wickedness, corruption, and

violation of rules, which are prevalent in the society. By drawing the attention

of the public to these shortcomings and vices, he wishes for some correction

in the social and constitutional order for a better life.

To attack the wickedness and foolishness of mankind, the satirist

may use the simplest weapon of being invective which is defined as a violent

attack in words. However, the satirist’s ‘ability to amuse and entertain the

reader’ (Rees 1993) is his most important weapon. At places where he

actually pronounces the names and activities of individuals, groups,

institutions, or government bodies, Buchwald seems invective, but his ‘ability

to amuse’ lightens up the harshness of the comments. In the 20th century, the

possible misuses of science and technology have been a major point of worry

among historians, journalists, and sociologists. However, the most effective

warnings have come from imaginative writers. As a well-wisher of the

society, Buchwald is no exception. He is concerned about this issue also,

which is discussed in this study.

The fame of the essayist can be attributed to the universal appeal in

his columns. Poverty and hunger are global issues that Buchwald examines in

‘The Cost of Democracy’ and ‘Trigger Treat.’ Although the essayist outlines

19

incidents mostly from the American world, they are relevant to the rest of the

world.

Buchwald himself believes that his columns have an appeal that

energized the authorities and the public. That is why, in his essay ‘Satire

under Fire,’ he writes about a situation ‘that almost every town in America

had four or five organizations to fight communists -- but the towns didn't have

any communists’ where he satirically comments that ‘each one imported a

communist to come there and be the threat.’ Buchwald admits that ‘the

column caused a tremendous reaction, some negative, some positive,’ but felt

contented that he had made his point. V. Gangadhar (2007) states in ‘Laugh

with Art Buchwald’ that after Buchwald wrote ‘Jackie had no right to marry’ -

the debate that went on all ‘popular TV shows, media editorials, and public

discussion’ had triggered some thought for deliberation among the public.

In conclusion, Buchwald is a popular satirist who believes that

satire is his business. He aims at making the readers laugh, though he also

attacks them genially. He gained his global recognition as a great satirist. As a

moralist, he comments on various social and political issues affecting the

society. His essays are creative commentaries on contemporary universal

problems facing mankind. Above all, he is a great satirist with mass appeal to

all readers across the world.

1.8 BUCHWALD, DERRIDA, ART AND DECONSTRUCTION

Deconstruction is said to have had an enormous impact on Anglo-

American criticism. First, this part looks at some co-incidental similarities in

the lives of both Buchwald and Derrida. Then, it tries to bridge literature and

deconstruction, art and Art [Buchwald], and Art and deconstruction.

20

Several common features are seen in both Buchwald and Derrida.

Both of them belong to the same period and are Jewish by birth. Since his

childhood, Derrida experienced the evil of discrimination. He was not

permitted to pursue his studies in two schools because he was a Jew. It could

be argued that such experiences contributed much to his ideas upon the

importance of the marginalized. Similarly, Buchwald too underwent hardships

and struggles during his childhood, which enabled him to think about

humanity at large. Derrida’s acquaintance with French intellectuals and

academics at the age of 19 enabled him move from Algiers to France where

he began to play a major role in the leftist journal ‘Tel Quel.’ His initial work

in philosophy was largely phenomenological. Inspirations from the thoughts

of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Saussure, Levinas and Freud led him develop his

approach to texts known as 'deconstruction.' In 1967, Derrida gained

worldwide recognition as a philosopher. Likewise, the essayist moved to Paris

to start his career in journalism. In 1961, Buchwald began his major writings

(columns).

Where certain instances and co-incidences bring the essayist and

the theorist on equal grounds, what binds literature, which is an art form, and

deconstruction, which is a theory?

Culler (2006) defines literature as the “language in which the

various elements and components of the text are brought into a complex

relation”. In ordinary terms, language refers to “words, their pronunciations,”

and “a given system for communicating ideas or feelings via the use of signs,

sounds, gestures or marks” (Wolfreys et al. 2002). “Language is one with

meaning, that form belongs to the content of the work,” says Derrida (1978c).

On the other hand, ‘literary language’ is defined as ‘deviations’ or ‘distortions

of ordinary language’ where, figures of speech or tropes, which are deviations

21

from ‘ordinary or literary language, characterize literary texts (Bennett and

Nicholas 2004).

Theory is an interdisciplinary discourse with effects outside an

original discipline. It is analytical and speculative. It is a ‘critique of common

sense’ and is ‘reflexive, thinking about thinking, enquiry into the categories’

(Culler 2006). Hence, deconstructive theory is a form of textual practice.

Literature allows infinite reinterpretations as it conveys no message

but a system of signs (Blamires 2000) and deconstruction applied to literature

claims that “language is non-referential because it refers neither to things in

the world nor to our concepts of things but only to the play of signifiers of

which language itself consists” (Tyson 2006). Theory is “internal to the very

idea of structure, and yet not definable within the logic of the self-same by

which ideas, concepts and beliefs maintain their ‘truth’ or significations”

(Wolfreys et al. 2002). Where literature relies upon language, deconstruction

aims to “demonstrate the inherent instability of both language and meaning”

(Eliot and Owens 1998).

In analyzing literature, deconstructionists “look for and exploit

relations between form and meaning or theme and grammar” and attempt “to

understand the contribution each element makes to the effect of the whole”

(Culler 2006). They try to find the ‘integration, harmony, tension, or

dissonance’ in the text. They focus their “attention on the implicit knowledge

that readers (and writers) bring to their encounters with texts” to answer

questions like - “what sort of procedures do readers follow in responding to

works as they do?” and “what sort of assumptions must be in place to account

for their reactions and interpretations?” (Culler 2006).

A deconstructionist believes that ‘there is no conclusive meaning

attributable to a text.’ He ‘argues that language is an inadequate method of

22

imposing order on the world, and that writers cannot organize and express

their experience effectively or accurately using words’ (Miller 2001). He

challenges the capacity of language to pinpoint center (Castle 2007) and also

tries to demystify the truth hidden in the text.

Furthermore, deconstruction is a social event. Nothing beyond the

human sphere of existence can be deconstructed. Even if a writer’s

imaginative expression is interpreted, it is perceived within the knowledge of

humans and not beyond. For instance, God is presented in the way people (the

writer or reader belonging to a community) understand God to be – in the

form of a Spirit, as Christ, as Buddha, as one with a human body and the face

of a lion, as light, etc. Let it be evolution of humankind, civilization, politics,

technology, education, law, business, culture, religion, art, literature or any

other area. Each one of these platforms is created by humans, experienced by

them, and taken from the society where they live. None of the events excludes

humans or human-related functions. For example, the description of a

dinosaur is not only an effect of visualizing but also a society-related aspect.

Though the dinosaur might have lived when no human was born, it is still

human-related. The dinosaur had lived in the same earth where the human

race is living. Men and women trace the once-existed dinosaur. Archeologists

excavate the remains of dinosaurs (their bones, footprints, etc), and scientists

work out the behavior, attitude, and nature of the species. Hence, human

findings and imagination of the huge creatures give them shape and life,

centuries after they have become extinct.

Another illustration is the discovery of a new planet or star as seen

in most science fiction. An assumption of planet Mars evidently projects that

humans have studied it or is in the process of studying it. Similarly, if a writer

presents an unknown planet X in his narration, it is evident that he or she

somehow knows it. With his little or more findings or mere imagination, he

23

dictates probabilities or postulations about the planet X. When the concept of

planet X is recorded (in books and / or in the minds of the writer / reader), the

unknown planet X becomes known. Planet X with its assumed compositions

or features finds its existence. Hence, deconstruction that is applied to

literature and various fields like psychology, literary theory, cultural studies,

linguistics, science, technology, and sociology, involving the experiences of

the society, is a social phenomenon.

Satire aims to restructure and streamline the social problems of a

particular time and place in history. On the other hand, deconstruction is

famous for its skepticism about referentiality. The question, how can

deconstruction be applied to a satire when both seem to have contradictory

features, need to be answered. When Derrida says “there is nothing outside

the text,” it means that language with its various features comprise

“textuality,” which ‘governs all interpretative operations.’ For example, “there

is no history outside of language or textuality; history itself is a linguistic and

textual construct” (Habib, 2008). And satire is a linguistic description of some

feature of history. In other words, logocentrism is the system of thought that is

based on the constancy and authority of ‘logos’ - the divine word.

Deconstruction aims at unraveling the operations of “logocentrism” in any

“text.” However, the meaning of “text” is widened by the influence of various

political, social, and intellectual backgrounds. Consequently, a text can be a

satire, which focuses on some social or political dimension. Therefore, deconstruction can be applied to a satire.

Conflict between the internal mind and the external world, the ideal

virtues and the prevailing vices, the pressure and composure of human

balance of integrity towards survival, and the stress and relaxation of the

present age underlies Buchwald’s essays. Overall, his satire against the

existing corrupt socio-political environment gives his essays a social

experience that is well-realized and experienced by the reader.

24

There is a bond between Art [Buchwald] and the literary art. It is

imagination - the power and ability to produce ‘vivid images, usually visual

images’ (Richards 2001) which is essential to a writer to present his thoughts

in a way that it imparts ‘pleasure’ to the reader. Imagination is “the power of

mediation or synthesis between meaning and literality.” It ‘is the freedom that

reveals itself only in its works.’ It is ‘a powerful agent for creating, as it were,

a second nature out of the material supplied to it by actual nature.’ To Kant,

‘the imagination was already in itself an “art”’ (Derrida 1978c).

Imagination is the cornerstone of Buchwald’s essays that fortifies

the fictional realm in his writings. An even and spontaneous flow of

imagination perceived in his essays successfully places the plot and characters

in appropriate situations and dispositions to enable the reader enjoy the

laughter, reason the wit, and sense the satire.

The resource of the essayist lies in his capability to imagine things

in both simple and complex forms. At one point, Buchwald brings in complex

narration in the essay ‘The Fugue of War,’ wherein he discusses the movie

‘The Fog of War – Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara,’ by

making McNamara narrate his experience of the Vietnam War. It is complex

because the essayist brings a narration within a narration. Although the

narrative is complex, the imaginative development of the idea or plot, put

forth in simple language gives the reader a relaxed feeling. At the other end,

he brings in simple imagination like visualizing the odds of how Bush would

react and respond to a situation if he is dressed up as Santa Claus in ‘Santa

Bush Finds an Election in the Bag.’ ‘Inventiveness,’ that is “the bringing

together of elements which are not ordinarily connected” (Richards 2001), is

yet another outcome of imagination, which is also a major characteristic found

in Buchwald’s essays. This is what Derrida calls “creative imagination”

whereby one turns “oneself toward the invisible interior of poetic freedom,”

25

and which is the operation found in “the literary act” of both reading and writing (Derrida 1978c).

When deconstruction can be applied to any text, it is obvious

that it can be applied to the essays of Buchwald also. Buchwald uses satire as

an invective tool to project the abuses of the world. The interpretation of

satires gives numerous dimensions to varied readers. The level of

understanding of history and happenings around the world determine

interpretation of the satirical comments, resulting in multiple meanings..

Eventually, deconstruction helps in separating humor and wit in satire. It

unveils the wit of the writer and of course the situation, both of which effect

serious thinking. Further, as a satirist, Buchwald invents puns. A pun is a

word that may be a part of some other word, or a combination of two or more

words to give the sound that agrees with a particular word, but varies in sense

and meaning. Understanding is deferred due to various reasons like ignorance

of external facts, limited exposure to language, inability to see critically, and

restrictions in thinking on par with the writer. A deconstructive approach to

puns forces the analyst to magnify the avenues of examination through the

microscopic lens of questioning what, why, how, when, and why not? Thus,

the deconstructive techniques elucidate the satiric purpose of Buchwald’s

essays.

Deconstruction, used as a tool, analyses the figural features in

Buchwald’s satires to find the extent of argument it can provide with respect

to the literal facets of the text. . It enables in revealing remarkable facts hidden

in the text. The analyst tries to link the diverse elements within the text and at

times, also with elements outside the text. The deconstructionist attempts to

interlace tightly the freely knit structures of language and literature, reason

and expression, logic and style in Buchwald’s writings that reveal the power

and essence of deconstruction as an analytic tool.

26

Deconstruction deals with indeterminacies in various matters. Binary

opposites present a variance between terms in the pair. Dissemination

propagates the instability and non-totality of criterion. It supports the idea that

the social composition is conditional to the ever-changing socio-cultural and

political behaviours. In tune with the changes, information like the binary

opposites is prone to reinterpretation. For instance, the deconstructive

argument over the privilege accorded to man in the man and female

opposition is the expansion of the account of the feminism that had started a

few decades ago.

Consequently, application of deconstruction to satiric essays exposes

the fissures and shortfalls in not only language and structure, but also in

values prevailing in today’s society.

The following three chapters endeavor to identify concepts and

satirical expressions from some of his essays that display various

deconstructive strategies.

Therefore, some coincidental common features observed between

Derrida and Buchwald interestingly bridge them both. Although literature

emphasizes language and deconstruction rejects the conclusion of any final

meaning, language is the prime platform for both art and the theory. Literature

is centered around social and fictional events limited to human perception,

and deconstruction applied to literary texts is a social phenomenon.

Imagination is the basis of any literary work. Buchwald’s proficiency in

imagining plots, using figurative language, and in being inventive paves the

way for a deconstructive analysis of his essays.

27

1.9 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

This dissertation consists of five chapters. The introductory chapter

presents the background and aim of the study. It deals with post-structuralism,

Jacques Derrida, deconstruction, role of a deconstructionist, chronological

development of essays, and an overview of Buchwald’s essays, the universal

appeal in his writings, and the common features seen in both Buchwald and

Derrida and the binding force between art / Art [Buchwald] and

deconstruction.

The second chapter examines two aspects of binary opposites in the

essays of Art Buchwald. One is binary opposite in the natural and cultural

order. Four pairs of binary opposites are discussed in this segment: light and

darkness from the natural order; religion and science, and humanity and

business from the cultural order; and male and female from both the orders,

considered natural by the naturalists, and claimed cultural by the feminists.

The second is the binary opposition of nature and culture itself with various

features of culture like economics, intellect, politics, law, and society.

The third chapter deconstructs Buchwald’s essays using the seven

indeterminacies put forward by Barbara Johnson. The sources of

indeterminacies are i) ambiguous words, ii) undecidable syntax, iii)

incompatibilities between what a text says and what it does, iv)

incompatibilities between the literal and the figurative, v) incompatibilities

between explicitly foregrounded assertions and illustrative examples or less

explicitly asserted supporting material, vi) obscurity, and vii) fictional self-

interpretation.

The fourth chapter projects Art Buchwald as a deconstructive

essayist who tends to defer meaning and interpretation in his essays.

Deconstructive concepts like center, totalization, non-totalization, the endless

28

process of signification in free-play, trace, differance, and supplement are

found useful to show the deferral in Buchwald’s satires.

The fifth chapter concludes that the various deconstructive

strategies used by Buchwald prove him to be a deconstructive essayist. It also

records the findings and observations of the study as well as the scope for

further research.