In Support of Philosophy 1973–1976 273
here. What I most appreciated, as I’ve already told you, very
clumsily, was your attentive and aff ectionate closeness. And
as well as the time and energy that you lavished on me [.. .], I
was very touched by this discreet attention for the ‘diffi culty’ on
the basis of which, within which I exist and try to work. I feel
that you can understand it, that you can see it behind whatever
may strut around in pedagogical self-assurance or the games
of writing. This ‘diffi culty’ (I absolutely refuse to use any other
word) is, today, worse than ever.^19Derrida said he was already looking forward to his next stay and
‘the lessons to be drawn from this fi rst experience’. De Man was
equally enthusiastic. He, too, felt that he had found the accomplice
he needed if the Department of Literary Studies were to grow to its
fullest extent:
I can’t tell you how much good your stay did all of us, your
friends here, all those who listened to you with passion, and
myself in particular. The results of your teaching are starting to
appear. I’ve seen several students who wish to continue working
with you and will go to France next year, and a group of young
teachers has come together spontaneously and is meeting every
week to read and discuss your early works. It is literally the fi rst
time for very many years that a group of people from varied
backgrounds has gathered together in Yale to pursue an intel-
lectual goal. In fact, everyone’s been bored since you left and
things seem really grey and monotonous in your absence.^20In France, the main struggle in the years 1974–6 was to set
up the Greph, the Groupe de Recherches sur l’Enseignement
Philosophique. For Derrida, this was not just a militant activity dis-
tinct from his personal work. As he later explained in an interview,
it appeared to him at this time that any activity of philosophical
deconstruction that bore only on concepts and contents would to a
great extent miss its target: ‘It would remain a sort of purely theor-
etical enterprise if it did not take on the institution of philosophy.’
After focusing on the question of the margins and frames of the
philosophical text, Derrida thought that it was crucial to examine
the ‘institutional edges’ – the practice of teaching, the master–pupil
relationship, the form of exchanges between philosophers and the
way that philosophy was brought within the fi eld of politics. And so,
together with a small group of friends, he embarked on a ‘practice of
institutional deconstruction’.^21
Current aff airs played a part in this decision. Nearly six years had
gone by since May 1968, and there was a widespread feeling that
the university system had been reclaimed by conservative forces.