Signifying

So, it looks as if I'm the first student to be posting a response here. Of course, that also means that I have no idea how to construct this post. So, I'll just list off some thoughts on Saussure.

Saussure is amazing. The introduction of the idea of signifier and signified, as well as the realization that the sign is essentially arbitrary created a huge shift in thought, and still opens up possibilities today. However, I don't feel as if everything Saussure wrote is correct. For example, the concepts of synchronic and diachronic. While these are essentially true in a western context, things begin to get stranger when you try to factor in the Yoruba myth of Esu-Elegbara (who is related to the Signifying Monkey found in stories in the Americas) and the tradition of signifyin(g). Esu-Elegbara was essentially a trickster who had power over words and their meaning. However, Esu does not control what is said or done; he only controls the interpretation and meaning of the sacred texts. While this idea makes much more sense with an understanding of Yoruba religion, it essentially means that words were viewed as having a "truth" (for example, the exact words of a sentence) and an "understanding" (the meaning behind that sentence) that are separate. While the truth is fixed down, the meaning can shift and fluctuate. Esu has multiple meanings, which means that the "truth" also has multiple meanings (as Esu controls interpretation).

Henry Louis Gates linked this tradition to the practice of signifyin(g), or the art of distorting the meaning of a word so that a small group of people could communicate and interpret the words being said one way, while an oppressor would interpret the words in a completely different way. Take for example the word, "bad." "Bad" has always meant "bad." But, then a small group decided to use "bad" as a term for "good." By playing off the original meaning of the word, the group is able to subvert language to their own purposes (or at least, is able to for the short period of time during which only the group uses this term). In this case, while Saussure is certainly right to say that we cannot control language after we release it to the general population, his idea that synchronic and diachronic must be completely separated are weakened by signifyin(g); in this case, a group of people were able to change languange to fit their own needs and goals by subverting it.