Appeals to Authenticity: Discourses on the True Self and the Politics of Identity Construction By Nina Marie Hagel A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Wendy L. Brown, Chair Professor Sarah S. Song Professor Shannon C. Stimson Professor Hans D. Sluga Summer 2016 Abstract Appeals to Authenticity: Discourses on the True Self and the Politics of Identity Construction by Nina Marie Hagel Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Wendy Brown, Chair My dissertation, Appeals to Authenticity: Discourses on the True Self and the Politics of Identity Construction, examines how appealing to a “true self” may have social and political value, even if such a self does not exist. Across contemporary life, individuals invoke notions of an inner self that has been maimed by oppressive norms and practices, or that would be harmed if it assimilated, conformed, or otherwise departed from who it was. From transgender individuals seeking to become the gender they feel they truly are, to indigenous groups seeking exemptions from equality laws, a variety of groups today cast their political claims in terms of authenticity. However, in the past quarter century, such appeals have been criticized by scholars from across the humanities and social sciences, who fault authenticity for stipulating regulatory notions of group identity, stigmatizing those who fall outside its norms, and relying on untenable notions of selfhood and self-knowledge. Some have even called for abandoning the term. My dissertation responds to these critiques and argues for a renewed appreciation of authenticity in political life. Through an engagement with Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, and writings from American social movements from the sixties and today, I formulate a framework for appealing to the term that departs its problematic ontological grounds and is attuned to its political risks. Each chapter responds to a particular challenge facing such appeals, from the status of the “self” they imply, to their claims of genuine self-knowledge, to the risks of exclusion, and to the ways they can blur the public/private line. In addressing these critiques, I show that there are good reasons to continue to value authenticity: appeals to the term may enable marginalized groups to counter oppressive representations of themselves, mobilize individuals around visions of selfhood and community, facilitate critiques of social norms, and animate practices of resistance. The dissertation begins by addressing those critics who claim that authenticity is too conceptually vague and too politically risky to be useful in pursuing progressive or emancipatory ends, and that political actors would be better served by parsing their claims in terms of related values, such as justice, integrity, or individualism. Chapter one examines how appeals to authenticity in American social movements in the 1960s facilitated critiques of capitalism, racism, and sexism, legitimated historically stigmatized identities, and encouraged marginalized individuals to speak truthfully about their experiences. I show that these effects were more easily elicited by appealing to authenticity than by appealing to related terms, such as sincerity or autonomy. The next chapter responds to criticisms of authenticity’s “depoliticizing” effects 1 through an engagement with the works of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The third and fourth chapters look to the works of Michel Foucault and Judith Butler, respectively, to address criticisms of the notions of “the self” and “self knowledge” underlying such appeals. In the fifth chapter, I address the tendencies of exclusion and marginalization that have historically attended such appeals by examining recent deployments of authenticity arising in contemporary discourses on transgender. I conclude by examining how two texts responding to the events animating the Black Lives Matter movement, in order to show how discourses on authenticity need not presuppose an essential self or transparent self-knowledge, and need not rely on essentialized notions of “blackness” in order to advance social critiques. My dissertation departs from contemporary philosophical accounts of the value of authenticity, which tend to treat it at an almost exclusively conceptual level. Whether providing an intellectual history, a conceptual analysis, or an exegesis of an early articulator, these thinkers largely focus on what appeals to authenticity mean rather than what they do. As a result, they incompletely answer those critics who are concerned with injuries wrought in pursuit of authenticity—for instance, the tendency to marginalize the experiences of middle-class blacks in definitions of “blackness.” By examining authenticity’s effects, my dissertation responds directly to these critiques, and provides a more complete account of why it continues to compel. I show that invoking authenticity does not always or necessarily give rise to detrimental political effects, and that refraining from such appeals may foreclose the potentially emancipatory futures they can help bring into being. Thus, my dissertation provides a more complete picture of why appeals to authenticity have been politicized, why they continue to compel, and why they need not replicate the injuries and regulation frequently associated with essentialism. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..………ii Introduction: The Politics of Authenticity…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..………1 Chapter 1: Truth, the Self, and Political Critique: Authenticity in 1960s America..……….35 Chapter 2: Between Nature and Artifice: Rousseau and the Roots of Authenticity..………62 Chapter 3: Disassembling the Self: Authenticity After Foucault..…………………………97 Chapter 4: Resignifying Authenticity: Butler’s Conceptions of Truth and the Psyche……136 Chapter 5: Alternative Authenticities: Thinking Transgender Without Essence..…………177 Conclusion: W(h)ither Authenticity? …….…...…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..……….213 Bibliography..….…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..….…..…..…..…..…..…..……224 i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have benefited enormously from having an intellectually demanding and supportive committee. My deepest gratitude goes to Wendy Brown, whose teaching and whose own work disclosed new worlds for me. I’d like to thank her for everything she’s done to help me develop as a scholar and teacher, and for constantly encouraging me to reach towards something greater. I don’t know where I’d be without her guidance and generosity. Sarah Song read many drafts and outlines over the years, and our conversations decisively shaped the project at key points. I’d like to thank her for all of her feedback, and for her various discussion groups, which were rich sources of intellectual community and enjoyment. My conversations with Shannon Stimson helped sharpen my claims and my thinking, and I am grateful for how demanding and staunchly supportive she’s been. Many thanks go to Hans Sluga, who read the entire manuscript with care, offered key distinctions, and revealed new lines of argument that I hadn’t seen for myself. Eight years ago, one of my teachers told me that if I went to Berkeley, I’d be blessed with great colleagues, and this has proved truer than I could have imagined. Richard Ashcroft, Ali Bond, Quinlan Bowman, Yasmeen Daifallah, Mark Fisher, Tim Fisken, Andrius Galisanka, Katie Heard, Nura Hossainzadeh, Jean-Michel Landry, Paul Martorelli, Sibbyl Nickerson, Tacuma Peters, Ryan Phillips, Nathan Pippenger, Jesse Cordes Selbin, Toby Reiner, Geoff Upton, Elena Wang and Sherry Zaks were all extremely generous with their criticism, encouragement and friendship throughout the years. Berkeley is unimaginable without them. In particular, I am especially lucky to have found in Nura a true friend and confidante. I’d also like to thank Kinch Hoekstra and Daniel Lee for their advice and guidance along the way, and Hanna Pitkin for her ii willingness to teach me how to speak Ordinary, and for the copious feedback she provided on my early chapter drafts. This project has its roots in my undergrad years at Johns Hopkins, where I was incredibly fortunate to find friends and teachers who have continued to read and support my work. I’d like to thank Adam Culver, Simon Glezos, Daniel Levine, Mina Suk, and especially Luke Plotica for their conversations, feedback, and formative impact on my thinking for over the course of a decade. I have an abundance of gratitude for Bill Connolly, who gave me the best possible introduction to political theory, and whose teaching and friendship infuse my thinking to this day. Outside the realms of Berkeley and Hopkins, I am deeply indebted to Ashleigh Campi, Bogdan Popa, Shalini Satkunanandan, George Shulman and Libby Anker for their intellectual engagement, support, and good counsel. E.R. Ramzipoor read this work in its entirety when I needed a fresh pair of eyes, and I am tremendously grateful that she spotted errors in my thinking and grammar. For years, I enjoyed the guidance and good company of Suzan Nunes, who helped me navigate the ins and outs of Berkeley. I continue to be indebted to Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger for her warmth and wisdom, and for having welcomed me as one of her own. My warmest thanks go to Gabriel Landau, Lydia Rieck, Heather Griffith, Jessica Cimoch, Rachel