These laws are particular responses to particular others, and from the very start they are dependent upon exclusion. The laws of hospitality must always be both hospitable and inhospitable, simultaneously welcoming and excluding.
Right. Here we are. In the Derridian sense, the laws depend on exclusion. I'm with the author here. I'm not trying to contradict, I'm just trying to spin out the relationship between D's "h" and kindness and generosity mentioned above. One of the things I love about Derridian hospitality is that it is constituted by this tension, this contradiction, that--as soon as it is pointed out--becomes part of the meaning of the word. I'm guessing the caveat above re: kindness and generosity is aimed at an audience that might understand the word in other contexts. But, in my mind, once you Derridaize "hospitality" you can in fact understand it in terms of kindness, generosity, and (I'm going to argue) "service" as long as you Derridaize those words too. D's "h" can be about kindness and generosity insofar as these ideas have the same inherent antinomy the author talks about here. I'm riffing on this here because I want to see if we can connect a Derridian hospitality to a more pedestrian version of hospitality, not to dumb down or misread Derrida, but to see how his hospitality might already be at work in the conventional "kindness and generosity" version. In short, Derrida's hospitality is not only about kindness and generosity, but I'm guessing that Derrida's kindness and generosity are also not only about kindness and generosity. They depend on exclusion and limits, too.