Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:43:20 +0200 (SST) From: Lubna Nadvi <lnadvi-AT-pixie.udw.ac.za> Subject: Re: paradox, rhetoric, authenticity Hi Sebastian, Yes, I would to some extent agree, that authenticity is paradoxical, which is why it intrigues me so much. I quite like the idea of authenticity myself, as I have certain, firm (not necessarily dogmatic), beliefs. But does that make me authentic because, I believe in certain things, which might be true (or at the very least, believable), for me and not for others. Is it not a subjective authenticity ? Is it not the same as saying there are no universal truths, hence authenticity is not a universal truth ? Does it matter ? Regards Lubna Nadvi ******************************************* On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Sebastian Gurciullo wrote: > > I have been following the recent authenticity discussion. I am replying to > Lubna Nadvi discussion of hegemony and authenticity. It seems to me that > the idea of hegemony relies on an idea of authenticity (ie. there is a false > consciousness determined by a particular complex of power relations and this > is called hegemony, and then there is my illumination of this situation > which is not any of these things), but this is not really what I want to > talk about. My point has to do with the paradoxes of authenticity, > precisely the paradoxes one falls into when trying to get free of it, as if > you could just cast authenticity (or a unified subject, or meaning or > whatever) off like a piece of worn clothing that you did not like any more. > If authenticity is hegemonic in some way, or even if it only harbours a less > pernicious illusion of some sort, and if authenticity were then to be > abandoned for these reasons, would it be because authenticity was no longer > thought true?, or because it is incapable of authentically representing the > actual situation of power configurations (that authenticity is hegemonic as > a specific instance of the power/knowledge complex)? Can authenticity be > ditched in this way without somehow re-invoking it in the process of > ditching it? Is it not a further instance of self-purifying and wanting to > be true to oneself that characterises authenticity, to then want to purify > oneself of the last trace of that great deceiver authenticity, to then be > true to oneself in recognising that one cannot be true to oneself, that > being the authentic truth. > > And yet for all this, despite the difficulty it gives you when trying to get > free of it, I quite like the idea of authenticity. > > Sebastian Gurciullo > >
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005