Critical Theory's Foundation in the Theories of Freud and Marx By
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Critical Theory’s Foundation in the Theories of Freud and Marx How to Read Adorno’s, and Butler’s Critique of Dialectics as Being Similar by Philip Højme Student number: 11105259 Universiteit van Amsterdam 08/08/2017 Research Master’s Thesis Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Josef Früchtl Second Reader: Dr. Stefan Niklas Word count: ≈ 21.000 Abstract: It has been suggested that Adorno’s and Butler’s critical theories could be understood as being similar, and it is the aim of this thesis to highlight certain similar aspects between their usage of Freud and Marx. A focus which is chosen due to critical theory generally being indebted to these two theories. By first outlining Butler’s critique of the gender/sex distinction, followed by a critique of this ‘undialectical critique of dialectics’ a critique which suggests that such a critique would be better formulated as the negative dialectics posited by Adorno. It is posited how Butler should be read in a dialectical favorable light. This is followed by an explanation on Adorno’s negative dialectics, and usage of Freud and Marx in two texts. After which comes an uncovering of Butler’s utilization of Psychoanalysis and Marxism, and how this shares strong similarities with Adorno’s. These similarities thus come to provide yet another argument for reading Adorno’s, and Butler’s critical theories of society as being similar, in addition to the claim that Butler’s critique of the gender/sex distinction is similar to Adorno’s negative dialectics. By positing these similarities, together with the critique of Butler’s criticism of gender binarity, this thesis come provide yet another assertion for reading Adorno and Butler as conduction a similar emancipatory enterprise. 1 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Gender Trouble - A Critique of the Dialectics of Sex and Gender ............................................................ 4 The Nonidentity of Herculine Barbine .................................................................................................... 7 The Performance of Drag ....................................................................................................................... 9 Subject trouble, an Immanent Critique of Dialectics .......................................................................... 10 Materiality, On the Similarities in Adorno and Butler ........................................................................ 12 A Dialectical Reading of Butler ............................................................................................................... 15 Adorno, a Negative Dialectics ..................................................................................................................... 16 Negative Dialectics ................................................................................................................................... 17 Negative Dialectics, and the Principle of Nonidentity ..................................................................... 19 Constellations ........................................................................................................................................ 27 Marx and Freud ......................................................................................................................................... 29 Negative Dialectics, as a Critical Theory ............................................................................................... 36 Similarities in Adorno and Butler............................................................................................................... 36 A Psychoanalytic Mode of Thinking? ..................................................................................................... 37 A Marxist Mode of Thinking? ................................................................................................................. 43 Concluding on the Similarities Found in Adorno and Butler ............................................................. 44 Gender Constellations .................................................................................................................................. 48 Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................... 53 2 Introduction What is gender? 1 When I came to reread Judith Butler's Gender Trouble, leaving this book the first time around after finishing my Bachelor degree, it left me with a renewed interest in this question. Issues of this kind have intrigued me for quite some time, and what shall be attempted in this thesis is a coupling of; a particular interest of mine in Psychoanalysis, with the allure which the theories of The Frankfurt School seem to have gained on me during my studies. The primary interest which was elicited in me, which prompted me to undertake this thesis, was a concern with similarities that I kept finding between Butler’s Gender Trouble, and the general project of The Frankfurt School - in particular with Adorno’s reformulation of dialectics as being negative (as opposed to positive in the sense Hegel had thought of it). Marcel Stoetzler (2005) and Carrie L. Hull (1997) thus came to provide me with a possible re-reading of Butler, to reinterpret the critique of dialectics that was given in Gender Trouble in an way more lenient towards Adorno’s philosophical project in Negative Dialectics. However, seeing how my interest is more psychoanalytic inclined than Hull’s, and Stoetzler’s arguments which seemed to be guided towards an interpretation of Butler’s undialectical critique of dialectics more in line with Adorno’s. This raised my interest for the role which Psychoanalysis and Marxism play in both the works of Adorno and Butler. Thus, by seeing how Psychoanalysis and Marxism were neglected in both Stoetzler’s and Hull’s interpretation of Butler, this thesis attempts to expand on this. In the following paragraph, I will provide a rough outline of the structure of this thesis. The first chapter seeks to provide a general overview of Butler’s main argument in Gender Trouble, follow by an overview of Stoetzler and Hull’s critical interpretation of Butler’s critique of dialectics. This is followed by a lengthy chapter on Adorno’s conception of negative dialectics, divided into a first and second part. The former will have a more explanatory feel to it, as it will outline the theoretical concept of negative dialectics and to some extent its historical development. Whereas the latter part is an examination of 1 I would like to note that I intend not to use any gendered pronouns (he, she, his, hers, and so on) in this paper. Doing so is a stylistic choice, as an attempt to write in a gender-neutral language. A point, not so much made as a part of the argument this paper seeks to suggest, instead it is more an act of trying to escape the normative gender constellations which suggest a particular usage of he, or she. Moreover, I hope the reader will receive this as an honest effort to bring a bit of the theory which this thesis deals with into the ‘matter’ of the thesis itself. So that the thesis describes a theory, which also works back on the thesis. 3 Adorno’s usage of Psychoanalysis and Marxism in analyzing the fascist leader, and The Cultural Industry. In the third and last chapter, will explore some of the similarities which are to be found in Adorno’s and Butler’s usage of Psychoanalysis and Marxism - as frames of references for their critical analysis of society. Gender Trouble - A Critique of the Dialectics of Sex and Gender The general outline of Judith Butler’s argument in Gender Trouble which this chapter seeks to provide. Come to serve as a way of introducing a critical reevaluation of Butler’s project in Gender Trouble and Bodies That Matter, has provided by Marcel Stoetzler (2005) and Carrie L. Hull (1997). Butler’s general project in Gender Trouble can be summed up as an attempt at collapsing the distinction between sex and gender, an attempt to show that they are both social constructions. What is important regarding the argument of this book, is how Butler comes to critique de Beauvoir’s claim: that one is not born as a woman, but rather becomes a woman 2. While Butler does not contend the fact that woman is something that one becomes, Butler does criticize the dialectical distinction between sex and gender which Butler suggests is to be found in the works of de Beauvoir. Butler formulates this at the beginning of Gender Trouble as: “If the immutable character of sex is contested, perhaps this construct called ‘sex’ is as culturally constructed as gender … the distinction between sex and gender turns out to be no distinction at all.” (Butler, 1990, p. 7) By revealing that the categories of gender and sex are not part of the same constellation (to use terminology borrowed from Adorno) Butler shows that de Beauvoir was wrong in claiming that gender follows from sex, and in claiming sex to be naturally constituted. In addition to this Butler asserts that “sex by definition, will be shown to have been gender all along.” (Ibid. p. 8) Hence, if sex was gender all along, how does this fit with the fact that Butler shows de Beauvoir’ error in claiming that gender follows from sex? This question is answered by Butler’s collapsing of the sex/gender distinction in de Beauvoir. Together with the stipulation