APPLICATION(S) AND IMPLICATION(S)

My understanding of the liminality of the authentic-self is founded in both Heideggerian and Sartrean ontologies, but also its application in performance studies. Charles Taylor, Charles Guignon, Somogy Varga and Daniel Schulze are some of the most notable contemporary academic figures writing about authenticity over the last twenty years. Their work does not however make the connection between authenticity and liminality. Taylor and Varga have drawn their models of authenticity from thinkers other than Heidegger and Sartre, such as Johann Herder (1763) or Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1782), who propose that one’s authenticity should be predicated on a direct negation of social influence in favour of the internal generation of the self. Charles Guignon employs the same continental tradition (Nietzsche, Heidegger and Sartre amongst others) as I have drawn from to construct his model of authenticity. His project however shifts towards the psychoanalytic writings of Sigmund Freud (1923) to describe one’s pre-social inner-self, which also resists the intrinsic sociality of being human. These more introspective approaches leave little room for a liminal position between the self and society.

In his work that does discuss authenticity in contemporary theatre and performance, Schulze states “in a time marked by social media, global interconnection and an ever fast-moving media environment, authenticity has become a vital preoccupation for many.” (2017, p. 6) His work represents a project that is materially closest to my own, however his approach towards authenticity is very much grounded in Wolfgang Funk’s (2015) notion of the ‘black box’ of authenticity, which proposes one cannot ever understand the inner mechanics of the authentic-self, only its causes and effects. From this position he expresses a longing for a discussion around authenticity that can sensitively “handle essentialist concepts” (p. 54), which again assumes an innate inner- essence or inner-self that is fundamentally at odds with the existential mode of freedom on which liminal authenticity is based.

If a liminal model of (in)authenticity is added to this contemporary tradition, further study may be able to benefit from the liminal reconciliation between individual and society. Rather than mobilising any perceived societal ills (such as neoliberal capitalism or social media) as scapegoats for non-engagement with one’s essential inner-self, a liminal approach to negotiating authenticity places the responsibility firmly in the hands of the individual to both engage with their agency, and in doing so have some efficacious influence on those systems and structures that cultivate inauthentic patterns of behaviour.

The political economy of social media and its surrounding mechanisms and frameworks have been carefully and rigorously explored by writers like Christian Fuchs162 (2017). Fuchs’ model is primarily based in Marxian theory that prioritises the division of labour as a measure for exploitation in real economic terms. He certainly broke ground on revealing the fundamental neoliberal agenda at the foundation of social media. His approach, however, intimates moral and ethical agendas concerning manipulation and exploitation. It also considers the individual social media user primarily in terms of their capital value.

If one considers the political economy of social media in terms of (in)authenticity (based in Heideggerian and Sartrean phenomenological ontologies) instead, one is less likely to be ensnared by the obligation to make judgements about whether one is economically valuable or not. Authenticity may be something one strives for, but (in my reading of it) it should not be put on a moral pedestal. Nor in that case is inauthenticity an expression of selfhood that one should be berated for operating in. As a liminal state, authenticity is simply a balance of the many complex facets of human existence. Equally, the neoliberal interests that drive social media are not immoral, but rather a manifestation of leaning more one way (inauthentically) than the other (authentically). By reading the exploitation of social media users through the lens of (in)authenticity, one tends towards determining the value of agency and the interaction between the self and Other. One is still making a value judgement, but it is based in the fundamental ontological make-up of users and non-users, those exploiting and those being exploited alike.

Nonetheless, this thesis is not a direct oppositional response to Fuchs’ work, rather an augmentation and potential enrichment of the groundwork already established. An approach to the political economy of social media grounded in (in)authenticity can build on the issues raised and recommendations made by Fuchs to make a case for a mutually beneficial model of social media going forward.

Through the analysis of their work, my aim was to increase scholarly awareness around the practice of participatory performance practitioners that are actively problematising modes of participation by both employing

and subverting audience participation in performance events. Most (if not all) of the practitioners included in this investigation have been subject to academic exposure at some point, however it has generally been predicated on the assumption that a dramaturgy of participation is somehow a spectacular dismantling of the audience-performer relationship. While this relationship is important and participatory practice is a significant break from the traditional theatrical mode of distanced spectatorship, the employment and integration of participatory strategies reflects and interrogates the modes of participation that are ubiquitous in contemporary western neoliberal and digital society. The ways audience participation is employed as a dramaturgical device and how it is received by audiences in contemporary performance can give an insight into how people are participating in society and the ways that this participation may be problematic.

The resurgence of participatory practices in the last decade is indicative of some issues present in the way people participate in social media. If the conclusions of this investigation can contribute in any way towards the recent dialogue surrounding social media163, then it will provide a window into an alternative performance-

based forum for tackling the issues. If spectators and/or participants approach social media from the standpoint of fluidity and plasticity, they may be able to cultivate an online space of authenticity that breaks from the cycle of prosumerism. If users are not beholden to advertisers, social media could evolve past a neoliberal and inauthentic orientation. Participation in a social media that could encourage growth and agency would diminish the volume of inauthentic influences that one must contend with in contemporary western society.