Nietzsche, Derrida, Saussure, Lacan, and the Retroactive Logic of Meaning

Retroactive Time. Dalí Revisited by AI.

Introduction

In the often-overlooked preface to the third edition of The Birth of Tragedy (Die Geburt der Tragödie), Friedrich Nietzsche reflects on the strange temporality of interpretation. This late addition, titled "Attempt at a Self-Criticism" (Versuch einer Selbstkritik), opens by referencing the "kernel of that odd and difficult book to which this later preface (or postscript) should be dedicated" [1]. The ambiguity embedded in the phrase "preface or postscript," (Vorrede oder Nachrede) signals a conceptual uncertainty about the temporal status of commentary: does the prologue precede or follow the work it attempts to frame? This rhetorical hesitation provides a fitting point of entry into Jacques Derrida's critique of temporality in Of Grammatology, where he interrogates the limits and paradoxes of framing texts.

Both Nietzsche and Derrida challenge the assumption that meaning can be located at an origin—whether in authorial intent or foundational presence. Derrida, in particular, shows that prefaces (préfaces) and postscripts (postfaces) function not as secondary supplements to a self-contained core, but as constitutive operations that actively shape how a text is read. When Derrida notes that the "last thing we write is the preface" [2], he echoes Nietzsche's paradoxical gesture. The seemingly marginal becomes central, the frame becomes the text, and the distinction between beginning and end collapses.

This temporal reconfiguration finds a conceptual framework in the theories of Ferdinand de Saussure and Jacques Lacan. Saussure's notion of the linearity of the sign and Lacan's concept of the quilting point (point de capiton) provide the analytical lens for understanding how meaning emerges retroactively. By aligning Nietzsche's hesitation (Vorrede oder Nachrede) with Derrida's deconstruction and Lacan's psychoanalysis, we uncover a shared insight: meaning is not present at the outset, but retroactively imposed by a later intervention that pretends to have been there from the start.

Nietzsche: Vorrede or Nachrede?

Nietzsche's Attempt at a Self-Criticism was composed fourteen years after the original publication of The Birth of Tragedy in 1872. He writes:

"…the kernel of that odd and difficult book to which this later preface (or postscript) should be dedicated. "

"…den Kern des wunderlichen und schlecht zugänglichen Buches, dem diese späte Vorrede (oder Nachrede) gewidmet sein soll. "

Here, Nietzsche stages a recursive performance of interpretation. In describing the original work as "odd and difficult" (wunderlich und schlecht zugänglich), he positions himself as both author and exegete, caught between disavowal and preservation.

The phrase "Vorrede (oder Nachrede)" is more than a parenthetical aside. It dramatizes the impossibility of locating a clear temporal or logical outside to the work. The preface, rather than preceding the text in a linear fashion, functions as a supplement (in Derrida's sense of supplément), both added to and constitutive of the main body. It is not merely a second-order reflection but an act that transforms the meaning of the entire work.

Derrida: The Preface as Supplement

Derrida thematizes this logic in Of Grammatology, where he examines prefaces and generalizes the instability of textual framing. "The last thing we write is the preface," he states, inverting the chronological sequence to expose how meaning is always deferred and framed through retrospective gestures [3].

For him, the preface is an example of the "logic of the supplement," a concept that dismantles the hierarchy between origin and addition. What appears as an external commentary is in fact a necessary condition for the text's intelligibility. This insight is dramatized in his own practice: his readings do not "enter" the text at an origin point but circle around its edges, engaging its margins, paratexts, and supposed supplements as primary sites of philosophical inquiry.

Derrida’s reflection on framing is not limited to literary texts; it interrogates the very structure of signification. Every sign, every act of naming, every interpretive gesture relies on a chain of substitutions, which means that presence is never given but always deferred (différance). This deconstructive temporality aligns with a linguistic model that denies any absolute beginning.

Saussure and Lacan: Linearity and the Quilting Point

Ferdinand de Saussure posits the linearity of the linguistic sign as a basic principle: "because it is auditory, language has a linear nature. It unfolds solely in time from which it gets the following characteristics: a linguistic sign is realized in succession" [4]. This seemingly trivial observation has important implications: meaning arises only as elements succeed each other in time. No element has inherent meaning; its value depends entirely on its position within the chain.

Jacques Lacan radicalizes this idea by asking: How can a stable meaning arise in a structure governed by perpetual deferral? His answer is the point de capiton (quilting point), introduced in his 1956 seminar on psychosis. This point is a retroactive anchoring signifier that momentarily halts the endless sliding of the signifier creating the illusion of stable meaning. It "quilts" the chain of signification by stitching a floating field of meanings to a point of subjective interpretation [5].

The point de capiton does not emerge from within the chain; it is a later imposition that produces the necessary illusion of anterior coherence. Just as Nietzsche’s "prologue" to the third edition stabilizes the meaning of his earlier text, and Derrida’s supplemental readings retroactively constitute their objects, Lacan’s quilting point explains how meaning is not present from the start but postulated at a specific moment that pretends to precede.

Conclusion: Meaning as Retroactive Construction

Nietzsche’s hesitant “Vorrede (oder Nachrede)”, Derrida’s insistence that the preface comes last, and Lacan’s theory of the quilting point converge in a single insight: meaning is a retroactive construction. It is not found at an origin, nor guaranteed by a transcendental signified. Instead, it is imposed from a later moment that pretends to have been primary all along.

By tracking this movement from literary prefaces to semiology, deconstruction and psychoanalysis, we expose the inherent instability of all interpretive acts. Every explanation is a delayed beginning, every commentary an afterthought masquerading as forethought. Meaning is not given; it is framed. And that frame—whether called a preface, a postscript, or a quilting point—is not peripheral but essential.

References

1. Friedrich Nietzsche, Die Geburt der Tragödie. Versuch einer Selbstkritik, in Sämtliche Werke. Kritische Studienausgabe, vol. 1, ed. Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari (Munich: DTV/de Gruyter, 1980), p. 13.
2. Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976), p. 9.
3. Ibid.
4. Ferdinand de Saussure, Course in General Linguistics, trans. Wade Baskin, ed. Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966), p. 70.
5. Jacques Lacan, The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book III: The Psychoses, 1955-56, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. Russell Grigg (New York: Norton, 1993), p. 268.