The application of identity as an 'unfixed' and 'unstable' state within visual arts.
Identity as an 'unfixed' and 'unstable' state.
There are a number of complex theories which centre upon questions of identity. There are many issues that need to be considered when discussing this complicated area of study. I propose to examine some of these issues of identity with the support of the work of several artists whom I feel, at least in some part, directly or otherwise, deal with identity as an influence within their work.
"Personal identity within philosophical accounts almost always centres on the question of what internal feature of the person establishes the continuity or self-identity of the person through time". (1)
Judith Butler, in her book "Gender Trouble" warns us to be wary of considering the subject of identity as if there are set attributes within us that create or control the person we project outwardly towards others. We often believe that within each person there is a true and fixed identity. The theorist Foucault rejected this view. Foucault explained 'identity' as something we communicate to others during our interactions with them, a shifting and temporary construction. Because we interact with many people, from all parts of our society, it is reasonable to accept Psychologist Kath Woodward's proposition that perhaps we actually have more than one identity. And that we can call upon any of these identities at any particular time. Woodward pointed out that identity will need to change in relation to with whom we interact.
William James, in his book "Principles of Psychology" (1890), also recognised this need to adapt to circumstances. He said "A man has as many social selves as there are individuals who recognise him and carry an image of him in their minds". For example, many people combine the life of a student, a parent and an employee at the same time. Subtle and not so subtle variations of identity may well be called upon for each of these roles. (2) It would be perhaps wise to attempt to illuminate the difference between identity and personality at this stage. Woodward is keen to point out the often held misconception that personality and identity are one and the same. Personality is a construct of traits, often common to many other people, for example - shy, timid, violent, or self confident. However, identity is perhaps best explained as providing "a link between individuals and the world in which they live," this is the process of association that seems to be central to many of the arguments. (3) Charles Cooley (1902) and George H. Mead (1934) both also agreed with the theory of interaction and attributed the 'self' as being mainly a social construct. William James had also acknowledged this, to some extent, in his theory concerning the 'Me' and 'I', in which the 'Me' is the part of our identity that we wish to show to others whilst he still believed there to be another uncontrollable influence within us which he called the 'I'. James saw the 'I' as the central core of our person. Cooley was perhaps ahead of his time with his "Looking Glass" theory of 'self', whereby he said the self is a reflection, largely from the minds of others. This therefore also being recognition of the social interaction of the process of association. (4) Erikson (1968) defined this process further by suggesting that that association occurs from a young age and continues throughout our development into adulthood. He claimed that identity formation "arises from the selective repudiation and mutual assimilation of childhood identifications" (5) Erikson continued to argue that 'children at different stages of their development identify with those part aspects of people by which they themselves are most immediately affected'. They consciously take what they need and discard what they don't. (6) Indeed, from the moment we are born we are categorised as either male or female and cultural specific sets of roles are enforced to ensure a child follows the accepted norms. But complex gender issues find a way to usurp and revise these carefully constructed role models. Judith Butler does not underestimate the importance of gender within our psyche and suggests that we should consider gender issues before embarking upon any other consideration of identity. (7) So we can see that our environment plays a vital part in our early development, but as we and grow and gain experience of other environments our earliest sources of reference are amended. What was once acceptable may no longer be so. Gender identity is also be affected by this process of evolution. Freud also suggested that gender relates to a child's self-categorisation, primarily by identifying with others perceived to be the same - physically. But Freud related these issues of categorisation to the recognition of a physical 'lack' and that "a girl's gender was significantly formed by the absence of a penis." (8) Freud failed to truly recognise that being a man or a woman is not a fixed state and that "It is a condition actively under construction." (9) Connell argues that none of us are actually born as what we know to be a man or a woman. Connell claims that we also acquire these labels through our associations. We now have the technological ability to physically alter our sex to suit our sense of identity. Although this is often seen as being outside the norms of society, this is not as unusual as it first may seem. In nature, sexual reproduction does not always depend upon physical specialisation between sexes. The humble earthworm is an example of a hermaphrodite, able to perform both roles of male and female quite adequately. (10) The earthworm may not make a conscious decision to become one or the other of the sexes it contains, but neither does it 'lack' either in its reproduction function. So, arguments based upon anatomical differences can be problematic. Genetic composition may well determine the sex of a person, but chromosomal differences can equally create dilemmas.
"Masculine and feminine identities are not fixed, partly because identities are multidimensional. Diversity arises through the existence of masculinities and femininities." (11)
Although Freud would clearly dismiss the relevance of the earlier analogy of the earthworm within this argument of identity, it is necessary to consider the association or classification problems faced by those who clearly have trouble relating to either distinction of male or female. Freud's work with identity remains the basis upon which many other theories have been spawned. However, he is also perhaps largely responsible for unconsciously highlighting deeper imbalances and underlying penile politics within our modern and post modern society.
So is there really such a thing as a single personal identity, if we can slip between varieties of guises at will, as suggested by Woodward, to suit our immediate needs? Psychologists still recognise that there are also other structures at work which are totally beyond our control, but not those internal uncontrollable influences suggested and already largely discounted by Judith Butler earlier in this essay. The lack of substantial material resources, for example, places limits on social interactions. Identification with certain perceived 'higher' social groups can be pretty difficult for those without the resources to gain access to exclusive clubs or even to certain countries. If identity depends upon interaction then this is a major hurdle for certain sections of society. Class division is an issue that this present Labour Government may well wish to play down, and there may be some evidence that class divisions have, to a small extent, been eroded. However, "some sociologists argue that consumption [or consumerism] has replaced class as the key factor structuring social division and identity." (12) Perhaps we can identify with possessions easier than with class, after all isn't it just a simple matter of checking out the car on a neighbours drive? So we can see that both associations and also disassociations are major factors within the construct of identity. (13) But does this process of association and disassociation provide us with a definitive means to understand others? And, can we use this knowledge to gain a true insight to the identity of the individual?
