Beyond the touchline there is nothing.

I believe in the value of the book, which keeps something irreplaceable, and in the necessity of fighting to secure its respect.

All sentences of the type 'deconstruction is X' or 'deconstruction is not X', a priori miss the point, which is to say that they are at least false. As you know, one of the principal things at stake in what is called in my texts 'deconstruction', is precisely the delimiting of ontology and above all of the third-person present indicative: S is P.

To pretend, I actually do the thing: I have therefore only pretended to pretend.

If I only did what I can do, I wouldn't do anything

That is what deconstruction is made of: not the mixture but the tension between memory, fidelity, the preservation of something that has been given to us, and, at the same time, heterogeneity, something absolutely new, and a break.

There is nothing outside the text