Response to M. Butterfly
One of the differences between poststructuralism and structuralism is that poststructuralism radiate different meanings of the text; however, structuralism discuss how the structure (binary oppositions) can reveal the meaning of the text, it means that there is a center belief or explanation behind the structure to support the whole text. Both poststructuraliosm and structuralism has the theory of binary oppositions. Besides, one of the important theories in poststructuralism is ¡§ differance¡¨. We can see examples in the text of M. Butterfly.
In M. Butterfly, the characters take on different roles in the play, such as Marc as Sharpless, Conrad Chin as Suzuki, Gallimard as Pinkerton, and Song as the Butterfly. Especially the reverse of Gallimard and Song in the play can clearly state the theory of ¡§differance¡¨ in poststructuralism. ¡§Differance¡¨ means not only being different, but also differ. In the beginning, Galliamrd as Pinkerton ¡X a Western male, wants female to totally submit to him. In this way, he is a colonizer, a masculine male, and is powerful. Especially when we see the plot of Gallimard¡¦s experiment towards Song. Besides, here Song was a symbol of femininity, being colonized, and a type of Oriental female. However, when Gallimard met Renee, he started to loss his power. In P62, we can see that Song said, ¡§ All he wants is for her to submit. Once a woman submits, a man is always ready to become generous.¡¨ From here, we can see that actually Song has already control the minds of Gallimard. More obviously, we can see that at the end, Song become powerful and as the symbol of masculinity. Gallimard becomes Butterfly at the end, he is colonized by Song and thoroughly loss his power. The reverse differs the original impressions to readers. However, it let readers have different views towards the text and can have a deeper impressions to the works.
I think the reason why the characters take on different roles in the play is because that the author wants to let readers become more conscious to the reverse and changes of the characters. Besides, I agree with the idea that the textbook said, ¡§ All human knowledge¡K we can only know something because it differs from some other bit of knowledge, not because we can compare this knowledge to any absolute or coherent unity.¡¨ Because of the ¡§differance¡¨ between the characters, we can become more understand the works.