Hm, I wondered, isn't 801 something to do with philosophy of literature? But the cover seems to suggest this Derrida (whose name I've only ever seen on a work in the area of art criticism) is a philosopher about everything. DDC: 801.95 'theory, technique, history of literary criticism'. (& I know 092 is persons standard subdivision).
Clearly I don't know enough so I borrowed it to watch for myself. I'm still puzzled. The DVD really seemed to be about the philosopher - a partial biography of sorts, with snippets of explanation about the area of philosophy that he spawned: deconstruction.
So... google 'deconstruction':
wisegeek "Deconstruction is a philosophy applied to literary criticism, as well as to criticism of the other arts"
... okay so maybe deconstruction is principally a philosophy of literary criticism?... No:
Wikipedia says: "Deconstruction is a term in contemporary philosophy, literary criticism, and the social sciences, denoting a process by which the texts and languages of Western philosophy (in particular) appear to shift and complicate in meaning when read in light of the assumptions and absences they reveal within themselves."
... which rather suggests, as do the movie and its cover, that this process applies to more than criticism of literature.
I'd be classifying it at 194 (persons treatment in modern philosophy, France) or 149 (deconstruction, modern philosophies).
Maybe the work was obtained (in this TAFE library) for use in the context of literary criticism?
Maybe I'll ask the cataloguers, they've not minded me asking in the past, but I don't want to be a pest.
pester them it is your duty to be a pest:)
ReplyDeleteThanks Edward
ReplyDeleteI did, and they were happy with it classified as theory, technique, history of literary criticism maybe it is more useful there in light of how the work is expected to be used at the school.
And we have a new system with which I may report such potential mis-classifications without taking items off the shelf, so I can happily report ... though I just realised it doesn't have a strategy for me to get feedback (from which I can learn) on the outcome of review.