Discussion on Deconstruction
Deconstruction is one of the most controversial trends in the contemporary literary, social and philosophic criticism. It is relatively new and was founded in 1960 in critical theory by the French post-structuralist Jacques Derrida. It suggests that there is no absolute, reliable, consistent or even coherent message to the perseptionists of a work of art. It goes on that the meaning of a piece of art depends on our personal experience and cultural and linguistic environment which determine its interpretation rather its creator. Besides, a work of art may convey different, often contradictory messages, Consequently, if the audience tries to perceive a work of art in one single way, they mislead themselves and deliberately falsify and simplify the world.
	I would like to discuss this philosophical approach in relation to six different pieces of art. The one I would like to start with is literary bestseller “The Da Vinci Code” by Dan Brown, 2004, the USA. In my opinion, this text is very controversial itself and may be tackled in various ways, so it is a perfect example for deconstruction. Dan Brown was himself astonished by the number of ways in which his creation was perceived, starting from the discovering of the new outlook on religion and complete overturn of religious dogma to a just another fiction, though well-written and aimed at capturing the attention of the general audience. Each reader is able to understand the full sense of the book differently according to their level of education and general life experience. 
	A piece of cinematographic art, the movie “Armageddon”, 1998, the USA, by director Michael Bay, can serve as another example. Not only is it an imaginary account of what might happen in case the mankind faces mortal danger with an interwoven romantic line but also has disposed some people against the Americans seeing that in the movie the Americans are the nation which takes the credit for saving the world for themselves. Thus a lot of non-Americans interpreted the film as manifecation of the American arrogance and self-admiration – the meaning dramatically opposite to what the creators implied and expected to convey. 
	The third work of art I would like to look at is the “Black Square” by Kazimir Malevich, an outstanding abstract artist, 1913, Russia. This is a truly multivocal creation which is still widely discussed and disputed over. The phenomenon of the black square, a simple geometrical figure which many of us wouldn’t give a second thought to, is said to suppose all sorts of information, starting from secret cosmic impact and, in the artist’s words, ‘the height of everything’, to the negation of love and life as such. This work can be divided into layers literally and metaphorically and there is hardly any other trend apart from abstractionism which suggest such a wide range of interpretations. Regarding this very work, even the attitude of the author is not fully understood, let alone all the other possible comprehensive options to take into account. 
	The next kind of fine art I would like to discuss is architecture and I have chosen its representative to be the Eiffel Tower, contructed by Gustave Eiffel in 1889, France. By millions of people it is regarded as a symbol of Paris, whereas it has served a number of other variable roles thoughout its long history, being a manifectation of the Inductrial Revolution in France in the 19th century, a radio mast, a laboratory and an object of ridicule and criticism in all times. The number of functions of the Tower and attitides towards it signify that this wrok of architectural art is subjected to all ways of deconstruction, including architectural itself.
	In the field of music I have chosen the celebrated rock-opera by Andrew Lloyd Webber “Jesus Christ Superstar”, a Broadway musical first staged in 1971, the USA, in which the appearance of Jesus Christ is depicted in the modern world while the characters, actions and motives stay the same. Tackling the religious topic as well as “The Da Vinci Code”, it on the contrary doesn’t undermine fundamental sacred truths, but nevertheless can go far beyond aesthetic interpretations of the holy plot, justifying contemporary vices of society, ridiculing politicians, or being considered to treat the Bible theme in a frivolous and unpardonable way.
	And the last example of the fine art - sculpture - and deconstuctional theories towards it is Manneken Pis, a small bronze fountain sculpture portraying a little boy urinating into the fountain's basin, the symbol of Brussel, Belgium. It was created in 1619 by Franco-Flemish Baroque sculptor Jerome Duquesnoy. The Manneken Pis is believed to depict a two-year-old lord of one of the troops during the battle in 1142, who urinated on the enemies, although this meaning has eventually been erased from the memory of Brussel’s citizens and visitors. Now it represents considerable historical value as well as being an object of ribald remarks from the over-free spectators. This sculpture may be interpreted in many ways regarding cultural and religious background and upbringing of its appreciators. Whatever the reason, the original wooden sculpute has been stolen several times, which means that it possessed some value from any point of view. 
	To sum up, I would like to state that deconstruction allows a wide range of approaches to anything that has some relation to art and implies perception and appreciation. Its basic aim is to abolish any borders which were artificially created by the human mind and reveal all hidden depths of art works which we are unable to disclose because of these borders. By means of these six examples from different art spheres I have attempted to justify deconstruction as a philosophical trend and tried its application to both contemporary works of art and those of past centuries.
Bibliography 
1. The Official Website of Dan Brown. The Da Vinci Code. From http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/
2. Levin, S. The “Black Square” Phenomenon. From http://www.vor.ru/culture/cultarch9_eng.html
3. The Official Website of the Eiffel Tower. The Documents. From http://www.tour-eiffel.fr/teiffel/uk/documentation/dossiers/index.html
4. Manneken Pis. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manneken_Pis
5. Leong, A. Armageddon Movie Review. Copyright 1998. From http://www.mediacircus.net/armageddon.html
6. Burke, T. Theater Review Jesus Christ Superstar. New York , April, 17, 2000. From http://www.talkinbroadway.com/world/jcs.html