How does deconstruction challenge the belief that an author’s intention fixes a text’s meaning?

Deconstruction challenges the traditional belief that an author’s intention fixes a text’s meaning by arguing that linguistic meaning is never fully present or stable. Instead of being anchored by the author's mind, meaning is created through the play of differences between words, a process that is inherently "limitless" and "indefinite".12

Key aspects of this challenge include:

• The Nature of Language: Deconstructionists, such as Jacques Derrida, argue that because words derive their meaning from contrasts with other words, meaning is always "deferred" in an infinite chain. Consequently, language possesses an intrinsic opacity that prevents any single, stable interpretation.21
• The "Death of the Author": Drawing on the work of Roland Barthes, many deconstructive approaches assert that an author’s intentions can never be fully known and are irrelevant to the text itself. The interpreter has only the text, which often contains internal contradictions that undermine any singular intended message.12
• Subversion of Hierarchies: Deconstruction explores how texts often rely on binary oppositions (such as speech/writing or presence/absence) where one term is assumed to be primary. By revealing that these hierarchies are constructions rather than natural truths, deconstruction demonstrates that a text’s meaning is often at odds with its own stated logic.2