Emily Dickinson's poem “Tell the whole truth but tell it slantly” speaks to the universal idea of ​​truth and the idea that truth it should be revealed gradually. The language, however, is vague and deconstructs in many ways. The lack of punctuation, blurry line structures, and focus on the logocentric idea of ​​truth create a confusion of meaning. The language is ambiguous and the words work against each other. The multiple meanings of particular verses make it impossible to find any "absolute truth." Using the assumptions of transcendental meaning, logcentrism and binary oppositions, these deconstructive elements are easily recognisable. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay According to Deconstruction, the language of this poem weakens from the first line. The transcendental meaning that is exposed in this poem is that of truth. Truth is described as an idea that must be approached carefully and strategically. Because it is such an abstract term, however, multiple readings are possible. Truth can refer to an ultimate truth or simply honesty. If there is an ultimate truth, then it has the ability to serve as the center for all thought and reason. This idea, according to Derrida, although incorrect, is impossible to avoid completely (Bressler, 121). The fact that the word truth is capitalized in this poem also reinforces the idea of ​​a universal truth. If this poem were to assume that there is such a thing as ultimate truth, then the rest of the poem would be centered on that same idea, leading to logocentrism. The word Truth can also function as a logocentric term, but because the text is so vague regarding the actual meaning of the word that reason would more adequately fit this category. Although the reason is never directly mentioned in this passage, it exists in the argument presented. The writer argues that the truth should not be revealed completely at any given time. Rather, the truth should be presented in fragments to ease minds into the consequences of knowing the complete truth. Perhaps the text assumes that people cannot handle complete honesty or that the giver of truth is too cowardly to be completely honest. The author's intent is unknowable and therefore creates problems for the reader who tries to benefit from the reasoning. The poem is also vague about the correlation between joy and the “superb surprise” of truth (Dickinson, 4-5). Without proper punctuation, success may simply be “too bright” or “Too bright for our sick joy” (Dickinson, 4). This question refers to the question of meaning in the phrase “The proud surprise of truth” (Dickinson 4). This surprise might be expressed in the thought “for our sick joy / the proud surprise of truth,” if in reality the success is too bright to be joy, or it may be an implicit and personal joy (Dickinson 3-4). The text is unclear whether it contains any of these meanings. Truth as the intended center is thus decentralized, lacking clarity. Furthermore, due to the subversion of those lines, according to Derrida, truth turns out to be a defective "center" of thought. There are binary oppositions, including truth/falsity. The idea of ​​truth is understood because it is the absence of falsehood; however, the poem states that the truth must be told “diagonally” (Dickinson, 1), or “it must dazzle gradually” (Dickinson, 7). Truth in its essence suggests the lack of falsehood. An inclined position, however, implies the_14241>.