Unlike the eras that came before it, the postmodern era focused on the individual and whether or not personal authenticity is truly possible. In order to determine if personal authenticity is achievable though, one has to first take into consideration what individualism means. According to Elliot and Lemert, individualism involves a “denial of social connection” (Elliot & Lemert 2009, p. 3-4), in other words “the individualist creed was premised on the assumption that people should leave it to others to deal with their own problems and to get on with the living of life on their own terms” (Elliot & Lemert 2009, p. 3-4). This statement is especially true for a postmodern society like America whose entire creation was built on the idea of independence from an overbearing parent.
Not only is America the land of freedom, however, but it is the country where its citizens strive to be more successful than their peers which is why they leave them to solve their own problems while they focus on theirs. Elliot and Lemert then note that “in the kind of society we live in- that of the polished, expensive, globally networked cities of the West- the lures and seductions of individualism reign supreme” (Elliot & Lemert 2009, p.3-4). Thus as long as we live in a technological age, we humans (particularly we Americans) will not be emphatic to others’ plights. Instead we will focus on ourselves as we attempt to be the best at whatever it is we want to be.
Paradoxically, however, “the culture of individualism has come to represent not only personal freedom but the essential shape of the social fabric itself” (Elliot & Lemert 2009, p. 3-4). In other words the actions of the individual does not only affect the individual itself but all of society as well. Thus it goes without saying that one should consider the consequences of his actions for they could alter the shape of society itself. Keeping this in mind it is hard to believe that personal authenticity is truly possible and yet Elliot and Lemert appear to have the answer as they mention how “individuals must continue to strive to be more efficient, faster, leaner, inventive, self-actualizing than they were previously- not sporadically, but day-in day-out” (Elliot & Lemert 2009, p.3). By focusing on the perfect of their individual self, one is able to help better society as well thus personal authenticity may be achievable after all.
Now to better understand the individual and personal authenticity one must also look at what makes this era the postmodern era. In other words, what does postmodern mean? One way to describe postmodern society is by examining flexibility versus stability in which Fordism is a strong example. Fordism is a term used for a “system of mass-production first applied by car manufacturing company Ford” (Lecture 8 2016, p.11). The Ford system proved to be “an extremely efficient system of production, reinvented its savings in itself, and came absolutely to dominate the market with its product” (Lecture 8 2016, p.11). Though the Ford system’s ideal worker is a stable, dependable worker, this system soon becomes problematic as companies begin to overproduce (Lecture 8 2016, p.12).
The ideal postmodern worker, however, is not stable but “positive, flexible and inventive even when his/her job is threatened or unsatisfactory” (Lecture 8 2016, p.16). While Fordist workers struggled to adapt to change, postmodern workers are ready to make any alterations they need to in order to provide higher quality work, “Man at leisure needs the right pair of shoes. Hardworking shoes. Shoes that are worn by men who do a real man’s job; that is, who don’t sit in an office shuffling paper and making phone calls” (Barthel 1992, p. 142-3). By having the right pair of shoes for the right job, postmodern workers are prepared to excel at any occupation and are able to develop their own individuality even further.
This modern identity though can prove to be a problem in regards to authenticity as questions regarding the authenticity of something have occurred (Lecture 9 2016, p.3). This is particularly true as one way we like to “express our authenticity is through the products we consume” (Lecture 9 2016, p.4) and we all know how much we love our products especially in this postmodern age. Are these products authentic though? Or are we trying to kid ourselves in believing that the inauthentic is authentic? What is it that we truly value? The human parts of us or the inorganic parts?
In Boyle’s opinion we cherish our technology over other human beings and would rather live in a fictional world than the real one, “both globalization and the internet contain with them the seeds of their own antithesis. The effect of an increasingly virtual world, where nothing is quite what it seems, has led to a growing clamour for what is genius and human” (Boyle 2003, p.12). Though if one chooses to live in the world of movies and video games, how will he know that he has his own personal authenticity?
York argues that “the quest for authenticity is a wrong-headed way of trying to create meaning and value- the eternal verities set in ancient stones- as an antidote to the 24-hour wipe of the electronic news cycle, and the ubiquity of techno-fake” (York 2014, p. 18). So perhaps instead of actively trying to find personal authenticity by delving into the world of modern technology where nothing is real, we should just act naturally because then and only then will we be our true authentic selves. The problem, as discussed before, though is that we who live in postmodern society are too reliant on our tech that being ourselves is far more difficult than one might think. This is why there are sociologists like Charles Taylor who take the time and effort to study and write books on authenticity.
Canadian philosopher and sociologist Charles Taylor situated the “postmodern striving for personal authenticity within the range of popular critiques of individualism” (Lecture 9 2016, p.12) particularly when it came to narcissism, superficiality, and self-indulgence. After all when one thinks of a person who lives in a postmodern society like America, one often pictures someone who is greedy and selfish. In fact though people in the postmodern era appear to be actively searching for their personal authenticity for its moral value, Taylor argues that they do not but should be, “I think that authenticity should be taken seriously as a moral idealThe picture I am offering is rather that of an ideal that has degraded but that is very worthwhile in itself” (Taylor 1991, p. 22-23). Even though it’s degraded as long as people put in even the tiniest bit of effort it can still become something great.
Taylor would later go on to argue that “the pursuit for authenticity will necessarily lead to superficial and selfish goals” (Lecture 9 2016, p.15) which is common for postmodern society. Taylor also points out how “authenticity is the enemy of demands that emanate from beyond the self; it supposes such demands” (Taylor 1991, p. 41). Thus it makes sense that authenticity which is only attainable by excluding material needs, denies such meaningless demands. Only by focusing on what really matters can one reach his personal authenticity, “I can define my identity only against the background of things that matter. But to bracket out history, nature, society, the demands of society, everything but what I find in myself, would be to eliminate all candidates for what matters” (Taylor 1991, p. 41). What Taylor means is that in order for one to be authentic in this postmodern world, one has to consider not only what involves them but the world around them. This is why one cannot be selfish and authentic at the same time.
French sociologist Jean Baudrillard, on the other hand, believed “in the modern world, the world as given in signs (especially as images on television and computer screens) is the reality” (Cuff et al 2016, p. 286). In other words that which we view as fictional or not real is the gateway to the one true reality where the inauthentic is utilized to achieve one’s personal authenticity. Not only did he view this world as the path to true reality but that “this reality has not only displaced the original reality but has transcended it, has become more real than real, has become, in Baudrillard’s term, hyperreal” (Cuff et al 2016, p. 286). Thus it is vital that we accept this hyperreal reality in order to fully understand our personal authenticity.
In order to better explain his theory, Baudrillard utilizes Disneyland as an example of hyperreal, “Disneyland is presented as imaginary in order to make us believe that that the rest is real, whereas Los Angeles [is] no longer real, but belongs to the hyperreal order and to the order of simulation” (Baudrillard 1995, p.12). Whether or not his theory is true, or even possible for that matter, is entirely up to the reader; however it does demonstrate how there are multiple approaches to explaining and achieving one’s personal authenticity. It also reveals that personal authenticity may truly be possible in a postmodern society like ours yet there is still the chance of it not being possible for if there are so many theories than why has no one seemed to have achieved being truly authentic?
While I personally think that achieving personal authenticity is possible in a postmodern society like ours, I also believe attaining it will not be easy in this era where people value material goods when they should be focusing on developing their moral character like Taylor suggests. Instead of thinking about us and what we want, we should be thinking about others and the world around us for it is vaster than what our lives are centered around. Then and only then can people truly appreciate what is important in this world and thus become a more productive member of society. To be capable of this, however, will take a lot of time and effort which a lot of people in this world do not seem capable of right now but they could be eventually.
Works Cited
Barthel, D 1992, ‘When Men Put on Appearances’ in Steve Craig (ed.) Men, Masculinity and the Media, Newbury Park, Sage, pp. 137-153.
Baudrillard, J 1995 Simulacra and Simulation (S. F. Glaser, Trans.) University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
Boyle, D 2003 Authenticity: Brands, Fakes, Spin and the Lust for Real Life, Harper Perennial, London.
Communications 2016, Lecture eight: making postmodern identities, PowerPoint presentation.
Communications 2016, Lecture nine: making authentic identities, PowerPoint presentation.
Cuff, E.C., Dennis, A.J, Francis, D.W, Sharrock, W.W. Perspectives in Sociology, Sixth Edition, Routledge, London.
Potter, A 2010 The Authenticity Hoax, Harper, New York.
Taylor, C 1991 The Ethics of Authenticity, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
York, P 2014 Authenticity is a Con, Biteback Publishing, London.
