1. I’m on record that I find the “I’ve read this through a certain figure” a type of bloated stretchmark type of intellectual work, and about as pretty. Look, there in the cracks, it’s there! And I’ve said numerous times here that I wish more people would stop trying to make something of a master figure and be happy that they’re doing that work.
2. But, that doesn’t mean I think Derrida was some sort of Kantian, that I don’t think that Caralco is right.
3. That said, the “Derrida 101” of when I was coming up—that is Derrida as through his worst interpreters—was some sort of bad Kantian: difference is on this side of human things and fools who access the real are mistaken.
4. The interesting connection, perhaps, is through Nancy (it’s no accident he’s the interlocutor for “Eating Well”), but I’ll just throw that out there for the moment. (He has his own flat, democratic ontology, though Graham’s point has been that it’s too “flat”…)
5. As for Derrideans and OOO, turning to Graham’s point: well (a) give some people some time to get some writing done! but more seriously, (b) no “Derridean” or “Heideggerian” or anyone that would self-identify that way would be doing much beyond tight readers of Derrida, Heidegger, et al. But those influenced by Derrida would include, um, me. And Tim Morton, who came out as an OOO last night. (The prop 8 ruling has had all sorts of strange effects here in California.)
I think this might be where the SR/OOO difference would come to the fore and how one marks it. Let’s say that one is working on a book on time: that would be less an “object,” of course, though this person can’t deny the influence of the OOO people on it. (For example, this same person might be writing that Derridean notions of time are too much about the time of life…) In other words, an early critique of Morton by Levi, if I recall, was that the “mesh” was too relational and therefore could only speak of objects’ relations in a very flattened-out way. In other words, too much SR, too little OOO. (His view is not still this, but it helps me make that point.)