Jacques Derrida's "The Animal That Therefore I Am (Following)"

Summary

Jacques Derrida's 'The Animal That Therefore I Am' is explored in this script, challenging the human-animal divide. Derrida, a French philosopher, critiques Western anthropocentrism through the concept of 'animal seance,' highlighting our shared animality. The script uses the controversial Orangina commercial to illustrate discomfort with animals behaving like humans, reflecting on our perceptions of propriety and the need to reassess our relationships with animals. Derrida suggests we reconsider our binary thinking and embrace a more complex understanding of animals, advocating for a shift in thought rather than just action.

Takeaways

• 📚 Jacques Derrida's 'The Animal That Therefore I Am' is a philosophical exploration of the distinctions humans make between themselves and animals.
• 🎥 The script uses an Orangina commercial as a starting point to discuss the discomfort it causes, relating it to themes of anthropomorphism and societal norms.
• 🐾 Derrida challenges the concept of 'the animal' as a monolithic entity, advocating for recognition of the diversity and individuality of animals.
• 🤔 The script raises questions about why humans feel shame or discomfort when confronted with animals that display human-like behaviors or are portrayed in sexualized ways.
• 🧐 Derrida's work emphasizes the importance of questioning preconceived notions and binaries that separate humans from animals.
• 📖 Derrida is known for deconstructionism, a theory that posits language as unstable and open to multiple interpretations, which is reflected in his playful engagement with texts.
• 🐱 Derrida uses personal anecdotes, such as his interactions with his cat, to illustrate the complexities of human-animal relationships and the absurdity of human shame in the face of animal gaze.
• 🌟 The script highlights the idea that animals do not experience 'nudity' as humans do, as they lack the self-consciousness and shame associated with being naked.
• 🔍 Derrida critiques the way disciplines like biology and zoology objectify animals, reinforcing the divide between humans and animals without considering the animals' perspectives.
• 💭 The concept of 'animal seance' is introduced as a term to describe the discomfort and impropriety felt when humans are confronted with their own animality.
• 🔄 Derrida suggests that a change in our thinking about animals is necessary, moving away from anthropocentric views and towards a more nuanced understanding of our relationship with animals.

Q & A

What is the main theme of Jacques Derrida's 'The Animal That Therefore I Am'?

The main theme of Derrida's 'The Animal That Therefore I Am' is to examine and question the way humans establish differences between themselves and what they call 'the animal,' challenging the concept of the animal as 'other' and exploring the philosophical and historical underpinnings of this distinction.

What is the purpose of showing the Orangina commercial in the context of discussing Derrida's work?

The Orangina commercial is used to illustrate the discomfort and disturbance that can arise when animals are anthropomorphized and sexualized, which relates to Derrida's exploration of the complex relationship between humans and animals and the discomfort that arises when traditional boundaries are blurred.

How does Derrida approach the concept of language in relation to the animal-human divide?

Derrida, known for his theory of deconstructionism, approaches the concept of language as unstable and uses playful wordplay to challenge the binary thinking between humans and animals. He suggests that the way we use language to conceptualize animals is part of a long-standing history that fuels our misconceptions.

What is 'furry denial' as mentioned in the script?

'Furry denial' occurs when an animal is unaware that it is an animal or of a particular species, as illustrated in the commercial when the Panda is shocked and embarrassed because her clothes are ripped off, forgetting that as an animal, nakedness is not something to be embarrassed about.

What is 'furry reminder' as described in the script?

'Furry reminder' happens when we are reminded of an animal's animal-ness, such as when the camera pans from beneath the deer in a sexual angle and then the deer twitches her furry tail, reminding us that it is indeed an animal.

How does Derrida use the example of his cat to explore the concept of nakedness?

Derrida uses the example of his cat to explore the concept of nakedness by describing his own embarrassment when standing naked in front of his cat. This experience leads him to question why he feels shame and the anthropocentric notion that only humans can feel shame or be conscious of their nudity.

What does Derrida mean when he refers to 'animal seance'?

'Animal seance' is a term coined by Derrida to combine the French words for 'impropriety' (mal seance) and 'animal,' suggesting that being an animal and being improper are one and the same in the Western mind, and challenging the idea that animals are separate from or inferior to humans.

How does Derrida challenge the traditional binary relationship between humans and animals?

Derrida challenges the traditional binary relationship by arguing against the idea that humans are superior or in a master-slave relationship with animals. Instead, he suggests that human identity rests upon following the animal or animal nature, and that we should reconsider our preconceptions and the history that fuels them.

What is the significance of Derrida's neologism 'sanema'?

The neologism 'sanema' is a combination of the French words for 'animal' (animal) and 'words' (mots), which serves as a reminder that animals are many and varied and that our language should reflect this multiplicity. It also suggests a connection between the animal and human language, urging a reconsideration of our relationship with animals.

How does Derrida suggest we should change our thinking about animals?

Derrida suggests that we should change our thinking about animals by moving away from anthropocentric views and binary thinking. He proposes recognizing the multiplicity of our relationships with animals, avoiding the generalization of 'the animal,' and considering the ways in which our language and thought have misrepresented animals and ourselves.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Derrida's 'The Animal That Therefore I Am'

This paragraph introduces the central theme of Jacques Derrida's work 'The Animal That Therefore I Am', which critiques the human-animal binary. It sets the stage for a deeper exploration into how society anthropomorphizes animals and the implications of such actions. The paragraph begins with a reference to a thought-provoking commercial, using it as a springboard to discuss the concept of 'furry denial' and 'furry reminders', which are instances where animals are either unaware of their animal nature or are reminded of it in a human context. The commercial is used to illustrate the discomfort that arises when animals are sexualized or anthropomorphized, leading to a broader discussion on Derrida's philosophical approach to deconstruction and the instability of language.

05:01

🕵️‍♂️ Derrida's Deconstruction of Human-Animal Dichotomy

In this paragraph, Derrida's philosophical inquiry into the nature of animals and humans is explored. Derrida challenges the traditional Western perspective that views animals as 'other' and questions the anthropocentric history that has led to such misconceptions. He uses the concept of 'nakedness' as a metaphor to discuss the raw, unfiltered truth about the relationship between humans and animals. Derrida suggests that human identity is not separate from but rather follows from our animal nature. His discourse includes a playful yet profound examination of his own encounters with his cat, which leads to a deeper understanding of the complexities surrounding the notions of 'nakedness', 'nudity', and the human-animal relationship.

10:03

🎭 The Complexity of Animal Representation and Human Discomfort

This paragraph delves into the complexities of how animals are represented in media and the human discomfort that arises from such portrayals. It discusses the concept of 'animal seance', a term coined by Derrida to describe the impropriety associated with animals. The paragraph contrasts the traditional idealizations of animals with the reality presented in the controversial Orangina commercial, which blurs the lines between human and animal behavior. The discomfort viewers feel when watching the commercial is tied to the violation of expected propriety and the challenging of boundaries that separate humans from nonhumans.

15:05

👗 The Social Construction of Nudity and Its Impact on Human-Animal Relations

The focus of this paragraph is on the social construction of nudity and how it impacts our understanding of human-animal relations. Derrida explores the concept of nudity as it applies to both humans and animals, arguing that animals are nude without the self-consciousness that humans possess. He suggests that humans are the only creatures who feel shame about their nakedness, which is a result of cultural constructs rather than a natural state. This leads to a discussion on the implications of clothing and the act of covering oneself, which is presented as a distinctly human characteristic that separates us from animals.

20:05

🤔 The Gaze of the Animal and the Challenge to Anthropocentrism

This paragraph examines the unsettling nature of the animal's gaze and its challenge to anthropocentric views. Derrida discusses the power dynamics involved when an animal, such as his cat, gazes at a human, reversing the traditional roles of observer and observed. The paragraph also critiques disciplines that claim to speak for or protect animals without considering the animals' perspectives. Derrida emphasizes the need to rethink our approach to animals, moving away from the idea of mastery and towards a more nuanced understanding of our relationship with them.

25:07

🔍 Rethinking Our Relationship with Animals: Derrida's Proposals

In this final paragraph, Derrida offers a series of proposals for rethinking our relationship with animals. He criticizes the anthropocentric assumption that animals need to communicate in human terms and suggests that we should stop referring to animals collectively as 'the animal'. Instead, he introduces the neologism 'animots' to highlight the diversity and individuality of animals. Derrida calls for a suspension of our preconceptions and a more immersive understanding of animals, encouraging a shift in our way of thinking that acknowledges the complex, intertwined relationship between humans and animals.

Keywords

💡Jacques Derrida

Jacques Derrida was a French philosopher known for developing the critical theory of deconstructionism. He believed that language is unstable and full of contradictions. In the video, Derrida's work 'The Animal That Therefore I Am' is discussed, which challenges the way humans differentiate themselves from animals. His philosophical approach is evident when he uses playful language and references to Lewis Carroll to question the traditional binary between humans and animals.

💡Autobiographical Animal

The term 'Autobiographical Animal' refers to the theme of the conference where Derrida delivered his speech. It suggests an exploration of how animals might narrate their own lives and experiences, which contrasts with the traditional human-centric view of animals as incapable of self-reflection or autobiography. The video uses this concept to delve into Derrida's examination of human-animal relationships and the anthropocentric biases in our understanding of animals.

💡Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human characteristics or behaviors to animals or non-living things. In the video, the concept is discussed in the context of the 'furry fandom' subculture and the Orangina commercial, where animals are given human-like characteristics and engage in activities associated with human sexuality. This challenges the viewer's perception of what is proper behavior for animals and raises questions about the human-animal boundary.

💡Furry Fandom

Furry Fandom is a subculture where some individuals have a fascination with anthropomorphic animals, often depicted with human-like traits and characteristics. The video mentions this subculture to highlight the complex relationship between humans and their perceptions of animals, where animals are not only seen as 'other' but also as beings that can embody human-like qualities.

💡Furry Denial and Reminder

Furry Denial and Reminder are terms used in the video to describe the dynamic presented in the Orangina commercial. Furry Denial occurs when an animal character is unaware of its animal nature, while a Furry Reminder is when the animal's animal nature is emphasized. These concepts are used to explore the discomfort viewers feel when the boundaries between human and animal are blurred.

💡Nakedness

Nakedness is a central theme in Derrida's discourse, symbolizing the raw, unadorned truth and the vulnerability of being exposed. In the video, Derrida uses the concept of nakedness to explore the relationship between humans and animals, particularly the idea that humans feel shame for being naked in front of animals, which in turn reflects on human self-consciousness and the anthropocentric view of animals.

💡Animal Seance

Animal Seance is a term coined by Derrida in the video, blending the French words for 'impropriety' (mal seance) and 'animal' (animal). It refers to the discomfort and impropriety felt by humans when confronted with their own animal nature, especially in the context of nudity. The term is used to critique the Western preconception that being animal and being improper are synonymous.

💡Deconstructionism

Deconstructionism is a critical theory developed by Derrida that involves analyzing texts to reveal their inherent instability and contradictions. The video discusses how Derrida applies this approach to the concept of human-animal relationships, challenging the binary opposition and questioning the stability of the categories 'human' and 'animal'.

💡Binary Relationship

A binary relationship is a framework that sets two opposing entities against each other, such as master-slave or human-animal. The video explains that Derrida aims to deconstruct this binary way of thinking, arguing that it oversimplifies the complex relationship between humans and animals and perpetuates anthropocentric biases.

💡Idealization

Idealization in the context of the video refers to the way animals are often represented in media and society, either as innocent and cuddly or as brutal and violent. The Orangina commercial challenges these idealizations by presenting animals that blur the lines between human and animal behaviors, causing discomfort among viewers due to the incongruity.

💡Sanema

Sanema is a neologism introduced by Derrida in the video, combining the French words for 'animal' (animal) and 'words' (mots). It suggests a new way of thinking about animals that acknowledges their multiplicity and challenges the anthropocentric tendency to group all animals under a single heading. The term is meant to provoke a reconsideration of our preconceptions and relationships with animals.

Highlights

Jacques Derrida's 'The Animal That Therefore I Am' challenges the traditional human-animal binary.

Derrida uses the concept of 'furry fandom' and a controversial commercial to explore anthropomorphism and societal discomfort with animal sexuality.

The commercial's shock value is linked to the unexpected sexualization of animals, confronting viewers with a blend of the familiar and the improper.

Derrida's philosophical approach questions the stability of language and the deconstruction of texts, as seen through his playful engagement with Lewis Carroll.

The notion of 'nakedness' is presented as a metaphor for the raw truth of language and thought without artifice.

Genesis is referenced to discuss the historical conceptualization of animals as 'other', rooted in anthropocentric Western history.

The title 'The Animal That Therefore I Am' plays with the French language to suggest the interconnectedness of human and animal identities.

Derrida's personal encounter with his cat illustrates the complex emotions of shame and self-consciousness when faced with an animal's gaze.

The concept of 'animal seance' is introduced to convey the idea of impropriety associated with being an animal in the Western mindset.

The commercial's impact is analyzed through the lens of Derrida's philosophy, revealing the discomfort with animals acting outside of human-defined norms.

Derrida criticizes the idealization of animals in media and society, which creates a false dichotomy between human and animal behaviors.

The blending of traditional animal roles in the commercial challenges viewers' preconceived notions and expectations of propriety.

Derrida's examination of the animal gaze as an act of dominance and aggression disrupts the perceived power dynamic between humans and animals.

The critique of disciplines that claim to speak for or protect animals without considering the animal's perspective or autonomy.

The historical misrepresentation of animals through acts of naming and defining, which reinforces the notion of human sovereignty.

Derrida's call for a change in thought regarding animals, suggesting that we must move beyond anthropocentric biases.

The introduction of the neologism 'animots' as a way to acknowledge the multiplicity and individuality of animals.

Derrida's final thoughts on the interconnectedness of human and animal identities, urging a reconsideration of our relationship with animals.

Transcripts

today we will be discussing Jacques

Derrida's the animal that therefore I am

following which was originally as speech

Derrida gave to a conference in 1997 the

topic of the conference was the

autobiographical animal and so derrida's

focuses to examine the way we establish

differences between ourselves humans and

that which we call the animal the very

concept of which Derrida calls into

question to start with let's watch a

short commercial as you watch this

commercial you should be thinking about

what is this commercial about what is

its message and how does it convey that

message

do not you [ __ ] party now a giant

monkey purse clearly this is a

commercial about orange juice the

message that it is not real mom poopers

means that it is naturally pulpy but

also naturally fleshy a play on the

carnal images were shown some other

background information here the

commercial reminds us that there is a

subculture called furry fandom where for

some furs or fans and amorphous animals

make them furry that is anthropomorphize

animals is a fetish the commercial also

displays examples of furry denial and

furry reminders furry denial occurs when

an animal is unaware that it is an

animal or that it is an animal of a

particular species when the Panda is

shocked and embarrassed because her

clothes are ripped off she is in furry

denial she forgets that as an animal

nakedness is not something to be

embarrassed about

a furry reminder occurs when we are

reminded of an animal's animal Ness when

the camera pans from beneath the deer

and a sexual angle that focuses on the

deers bottom and then the deer twitches

her furry tail we are reminded that yes

indeed this is an animal in some ways

this commercial may be trying to simply

make a statement about or take advantage

of the sexually overt commercials from

other brands and countries but here

because the sexual objects are animal

many viewers have found the commercial

disturbing so let's ask why exactly is

this commercial disturbing let's include

the fact that probably several of you

laughed at the commercial as well the

point is the commercial was likely

shocking the first time you saw it or

would likely be shocking to your friends

and family if you watched it all

together at the theater or in the living

room that is we don't expect to have our

senses assaulted by sexually

anthropomorphised

animals but once again why not this is a

question Derrida helps us to answer

so Derrida who is he Derrida is a

prominent figure in philosophy he is a

French philosopher of the late 20th

century best known for fathering the

critical theory of deconstructionism

deconstructionism approaches texts with

the belief that language is unstable and

though Derrida insists on page 402 that

he will not dwell in this argument on

deconstructive points as we might expect

him to we still see him play with words

in what can only be described as true to

the characteristics of a

deconstructionist at one point when

discussing his cat for instance he

digresses and shifts focus to lewis

carroll's through the looking-glass

where a cat is also mentioned and

seemingly out of nowhere he says quote

although time prevents it I would of

course have liked to inscribe my whole

talk within a reading of Lewis Carroll

in fact you can't be certain but I'm not

doing that for better or for worse

silently unconsciously or without your

knowing you can't be certain that I

didn't already do it one day when ten

years ago I let speak or let pass a

little Hedgehog a suckling Hedgehog

perhaps before the question what is

poetry for thinking concerning the

animal if there is such a thing derives

from poetry there you have a hypothesis

it is what philosophy has essentially

had to deprive itself of etc and he goes

on from there of course although he is

playful and makes us doubt his true

meaning he has a point in the end in

this case he ends the passage by

focusing on the Hedgehog's that form the

croquette balls and the hedgehog turns

around to face alice Derrida's point at

this cheeky moment is how can an animal

look you in the face it's playful

question to be sure but it has some

serious answers let's start then by

asking what is he being playful about

and for this let's go back to the

beginning in the beginning of the

address Derrida says that he will focus

on nakedness he says quote to begin with

I would like to entrust myself to words

that were possible would be naked naked

in the first place but this is in order

to announce already that I plan to speak

endlessly of nudity and of the nude in

philosophy starting from Genesis I would

like to choose words that are to begin

with naked quite simply words from the

heart here he means to present nakedness

as a

of metaphor for naked words naked truth

that is language and thought without

artifice he seeks to reveal the

nakedness of animals and humans he

references Genesis as well as he

frequently will and he does us to inform

us that he means to call into question

the prehistory or a priori knowledge

that humans use to conceptualize the

animal as other that is in part he

argues that it is a long-standing

history that fuels our misconceptions of

the animal and that this history goes

back to what he philosophically calls

the beginning of time the moment of

humankind's fall from the Garden of Eden

the point being it is simply a part of

our anthropocentric Western history to

see animals as other but obviously

Derrida doesn't believe animals are

truly or wholly

other and that is why his address this

article is titled the way it is quote

the animal that therefore I am following

the title gives us further insight into

derrida's focus and the original French

the title phrase I am and the

parenthetical title phrase I am

following sound the same in French when

properly conjugated to the present tense

both say Zeus we and in this punny way

Derrida alerts us to the idea that

though we often think of the animal as

other human identity actually rests upon

following the animal or animal nature

that is whereas our Western

preconceptions see the animal as

following us and humans taking the lead

and evolution progress propriety and so

forth Derrida suggests that humans may

in fact be also behind subordinate

subject to and so forth to the animal it

is important to note here that Derrida's

goal is not to create a binary

relationship between humans and animals

he does not want to say we or the

animals are masters or slaves to each

other

what he's trying to do is call into

question this idea of binaries at all

hence in the title he doesn't just say I

am as in I am the master but I am

following simultaneously and

contradictorily it is at this point in

the presentation that Derrida introduces

his cat which is a passage that might

help lend some further clarity to the

points in his introduction about

nakedness and preconceptions on page 372

Derrida writes quote I often ask my

just to see who I am and who I am

following at the moment when caught

naked and silenced by the gaze of an

animal for example the eyes of a cat I

have trouble yes a bad time overcoming

my embarrassment wince this malaise I've

troubled repressing a reflex dictated by

a modesty trouble keeping silent within

me a protest against the indecency

against the impropriety that comes of

finding oneself naked once sex exposed

stark naked before a cat that looks at

you without moving just to see the

impropriety Mouse seance of a certain

animal nude before the other animal from

that point on one might call it a kind

of animal seance the single incomparable

an original experience of the

impropriety that would come from

appearing in truth naked in front of the

insistent gaze of the animal a

benevolent or pitiless gaze surprised or

cognizant the gaze of a seer visionary

or extra lucid blind person it is as if

I were ashamed

therefore naked in front of this cat but

also ashamed for being ashamed a

reflected shame the mirror of a shame

ashamed of itself a shame that is at the

same time specular unjustifiable and

unable to be admitted to at the optical

center of this reflection would appear

this thing and in my eyes the focus of

this incomparable experience that is

called nudity and about which it is

believed that it is proper to man

that is to say foreign to animals naked

as they are or so it is thought without

the slightest inkling of being so

ashamed of what a naked before whom in

this passage in short Derrida stands

naked in front of his cat and feels

embarrassed more than this he is

astonished that an animal has

successfully made him feel shame not for

being naked per se but for being ashamed

Derrida is as he says ashamed of being

ashamed and he is ashamed of being

ashamed because he recognizes that he

should not be ashamed in the first place

that is in the first place he's ashamed

of being an animal that is naked and he

is ashamed of being ashamed because

humans are animals and should not be

ashamed for being so that is his

nakedness stands in for a truth revealed

about the human body that

humans at least Western humans usually

tried to hide that we are animals the

animal then once again like an quote

extra lucid blind person and as he says

he's not our nakedness but who we really

are

again animals and finally the cat

reminds Derrida that it is improper to

be naked and that it is ridiculous to

feel that one is improper win naked

Derrida connects this feeling of

embarrassment about his impropriety with

the concept of animal sounds

he coins this term animal seance by

mixing the French word for impropriety

mal seance and the French word for

animal thus Derrida calls this nakedness

animal seance as if to say being animal

and being improper are one in the same

again at least to the Western mind let's

bring this back to the commercial where

the scenarios are comparable instead of

an animal staring at a naked human as it

is with dirt all we viewers are with the

Orangina commercials humans staring at

naked animals and yet still feeling

disturbed by it as mentioned earlier the

commercial is shocking many of the

original viewers felt embarrassed when

watching the commercial and it caused

much controversy upon its debut but if

we associate impropriety with animals

why are we so shocked by the commercial

the animals in the commercial are after

all just being animals improper and wild

what makes that so disturbing now

normally when animals are represented in

commercials they are idealized and

remember that idealization doesn't

always mean that the idealized subject

is a better version of its real form

instead think of idealization as simply

going beyond reality which could be in a

positive or negative sense a common

example of idealization is the

idealization of women where the ideal

woman may not just be the virginal

chaste motherly or domestic figure but

the [ __ ] or the [ __ ] idealization

takes real subjects and then abstracts

them into ideas that cannot exist in

reality because reality is usually more

complex and messy the idealized animal

typically appears in a few ways for one

the ideal animal is often conceived as

not being like humans in any way for

instance we might not expect animals to

have sex for pleasure this

to be a particularly human activity to

us a luxury afforded to humans while

animals must have sex in order to

survive we often also think of animals

as either innocent and cuddly like pets

or brutal and violent in a naturalist

sort of way in this commercial we see

each of these aforementioned

idealizations and not only do we see

each of them but we see them blurred

together their boundaries dissolve we'll

say with the rush of liquid orange juice

to create an amalgamation something new

and something in between these

traditional ideals for instance the

anthropomorphic animals take pleasure in

sexualized activities in this way they

are neither quite human nor quite animal

in the same manner the animals are

presented as both innocent and brutal

the deer and the bear come together in a

furry denial of their differences no

longer prey and predator innocent and

experienced the deer and bear are both

hunter and hunted teaser and teased the

ideals mentioned above non-human

innocent and brutal are present

throughout but they are mixed in this

commercial and it is in part this

incongruity that many find disturbing it

is the blending of the improper animal

with the proper animal that causes many

viewers to be embarrassed and it

questions the very concept of an animal

being improper that is of animal seance

which is precisely what Derrida

wishes to do at the end of the passage

about Gyarados cat Derrida asks ashamed

of what and naked before whom let's take

this one question at a time why am i

ashamed that's one question we've

already identified with the commercial

that we are ashamed because the animals

begin to act like humans they cross the

boundaries that we imagine help separate

humans from nonhumans and they violate

our expectations of propriety or proper

behavior Derrida asked to this that in

one sense his violent reaction to hide

his nakedness to bite his tongue as if

holding back something that is forbidden

is an animal reaction biting his tongue

in a brute and physical response and an

unthinking idiotic asinine reaction to a

problem that should be faced with

intelligence and rationality we are made

in some sense animal by our

embarrassment

reflex to hide that embarrassment but it

is only the human who is embarrassed by

its nakedness Derrida Riots quote from

that point on naked without knowing it

animals would not in truth be naked they

wouldn't be naked because they are naked

in principle from the exception of man

no animal has ever thought to dress

itself clothing would be proper to man

one of the properties of man dressing

oneself would be inseparable from all

the other forms of what is proper to man

even if one talks about it less than

speech or reason the logos history

laughing morning burial the gift and so

on the animal therefore is not naked

because it is naked

it doesn't feel its own nudity there is

no nudity in nature there is only the

sentiment the effect the conscious or

unconscious experience of existing in

nakedness because it is naked without

existing in nakedness the animal neither

feels nor sees itself naked and it

therefore is not naked at least that is

what is thought for man it would be the

opposite and clothing derives from

technics we would therefore have to

think Shane and Tecna City together as

the same subject and evil in history and

work and so many other things that go

along with it man would be the only one

to have invented a garment to cover his

sex he would only be a man to the extent

that he was able to be naked that is to

say to be ashamed to know himself to be

ashamed because he is no longer naked

and knowing himself would mean knowing

himself to be ashamed on the other hand

because the animal is naked without

consciousness of being naked modesty

would remain as foreign to it as would

in modesty as with the knowledge of self

that is involved in that so in other

words animals are nude without being

nude because nudity

doesn't exist in nature thus this idea

of nudity takes on the essence of not

just truth and shame but shamelessness

which is in the context of our Genesis

myth a form of ignorance in human terms

nakedness is truth and shamelessness as

well as shame and ignorance for the

animal nakedness is shameless and so it

exists in a state of non nudity

meanwhile humans that are nude are never

nude because they are ashamed in the SKA

hiding or clothing at least in their

minds who or what they truly are thus

never truly being naked they exist in a

state of nudity that is the

consciousness of nudity all this brings

us to an odd junction with the Orangina

commercial if animals are nude without

being nude and humans that are nude are

never nude are we as the embarrassed

viewers of the commercial like animals

that no longer have a sense of nudity

that exists in a state of non nudity or

like humans who retain this sense of

nudity exist in a state of nudity more

simply put in our embarrassment when we

are mentally unclothed and our animal

'no seveal are we non nude or nude this

is a question Derrida poses us and

certainly there is no clear answer but

what Derrida does give us is a history

of the ways we have mistreated this

question and the subject of this

question that is we have now come back

to the second query from our passage on

the cat ashamed of what

and naked before whom we have addressed

the first question what are we ashamed

of which is in some circular and

nebulous sense are animality the second

question we have yet to answer that is

naked before whom or as Derrida suggests

in his title Who am I following the who

is the animal but the question is who is

the animal in one sense the animal is as

we've been saying a messy concept it is

who we are and are not simultaneously

and in contradiction of each other but

history has painted the animal as other

and that's what Derrida wishes to expose

referring back to his example about the

cat he points out that part of the

reason why we are disturbed by the cat's

gaze is because the gaze is aggressive

we've come upon this term as well with

Virginia Woolf so flush the gaze of an

animal is active you cannot escape it

you cannot stop it it simply happens and

you are helpless to prevent it this is

the same intrusive gaze that unsettles

us when a stranger stares at us from

across the street in the bar or in class

the gaze is a dominant gesture and it

makes us the inferior to some other

superior subject it makes us the object

of that subjects focus so derrida's

cat's gaze is disturbing because it

reverses the use

relationship we think of as existing

between human and animal master and

slave to use those terms of other egg in

the Orangina commercial it is the same

the animals ruthlessly gaze upon each

other and such sexualized aggressive

gazing is unsettling to the typical

human viewer Derrida also takes to task

the many disciplines that purport to

speak for or protect the animal without

ever really taking the moment to be seen

or seen seen as Derrida says it by an

animal that is a biologist zoologist

environmentalist and so forth they all

address animals look at them study them

but Derrida explains they never consider

themselves as being looked at themselves

they have seen without being seen

reinforcing this concept that the animal

is yet and still other naming is another

way we have other the animal for this

Derrida returns to his narrative of

Genesis the story of man naming the

animals even though he himself was not

created until after the animals were

created following a stayer das title

says after the animal once a thing is

given a name though it deprives the

thing of the chance to give itself a

name when we name a thing we ignore its

ability to name itself the result of

this process of naming is that man

creates in himself

a sense of sovereignty and loneliness

power and division once again the point

is much of our history has

misrepresented the animal and we have

misrepresented ourselves there are a few

more examples of this that are important

to note in defining the animal there

have been several historical landmarks

one is jeremy bentham's defense of

animal rights by asking not whether the

animal is useful but whether the animal

can suffer in response Derrida scoffs

and replies that of course animals can

suffer and asking that question only

opens the door to doubt about whether or

not they can suffer the repercussions of

which we are still seeing today a

scientist seek to measure how different

animals experience pain the second

historical definition Derrida addresses

is the one that distinguishes animals by

the fact that they cannot communicate

and by communicate these proponents mean

that animals cannot lie they may react

or respond but they cannot cover their

tracks or hide behind words the way

humans do this is where the argument

stood and

and so Derrida then responds asking what

are we to do then should we speak for

the animal but he's already established

his views on that the biologist

zoologist and environmentalists see

without being seen he says the danger of

pitting an animal and assuming that we

must protect it means we are still other

inferior and us as benevolent protectors

or stewards so should we do nothing

saying nothing but again Derrida has

already pointed out how biting one's

tongue is an act of stupidity rather

than rationality should we simply

proceed as we always have and continue

to allow the exploitation of the animal

by ignoring these misrepresentations

perhaps even participate in the naming

of animals that results in their other

as farm animal beasts of burden pet

experiment and so forth the answer to

this seems obvious that is obviously not

so then what are we left with how can we

connect with the animal without uttering

it derrida's responses that change must

happen not in actions though eventually

change should occur there but in thought

we act in the ways we do because we

think a certain way about the animal for

instance the idea that the animal needs

to speak to name itself to defend itself

to respond to us is entirely

anthropocentric the cat for instance

doesn't need to speak not in our words

it is we who require it to speak to

respond to us and answer our questions

we must change our way of thinking to

begin with Derrida offers one change

that we stop referring to animals as the

animal the very idea that we've grouped

so many different kinds of animals into

one chimerical heading the animal

invites misunderstanding instead we must

recognize the multiplicities of our

relationships with animal nests and

animals to do this Derrida offers a

neologism on emo this word is

combination of the French word for

animal Anja MA and the French word for

words ma when put together animal this

becomes a homophone for the French

plural form of animal which is once

again funny more Derrida claims that

this new word can remind us that animals

are many and varied moreover it doesn't

try to escape the fact that we can't

escape ourselves in the

so John the Katdare da points out that

the cat is a mirror reflection of

ourselves we deplore our

anthropocentrism to some extent but we

cannot escape the fact that our

knowledge and perspectives are based in

the human experience which is largely

dependent upon language so while it is

true that language and naming has

created grievous misunderstandings in

the past language must also be a part of

the steps we take in understanding

animal the sanema connects the animal

with human language and words finally

the idea of animal is fanciful it does

not claim to give animal speech because

as we mentioned earlier animals don't

need the power of speech instead it

combines a human and non-human in a way

that isn't typically combined and with

this Derrida asks for a kind of

suspension of disbelief to break us away

from our preconceptions to not see the

human and non-human as a binary divide

but as something Messier and more

immersive and to reconsider the ideas of

and ways of thinking about animals thus

in the end to answer today's question

about who we are following he answers we

are following ourselves