The following article was entered in New Philosopher’s writing award XXX111: Identity for subscribers and was shortlisted (10 selected)
The introduction to episodes of the series “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” featured a corpulent Alfred moving lethargically into his hologram image until congruence was achieved. Only when this persona, a fleshed-out silhouette, commanded center stage would Hitchcock address the audience with his trademark lazy drawl of “good-evening ladies and gentlemen”. A Metaphor for identity, he seemed to say this is me and strap yourself in for the macabre to come.
Identity, or selfhood, presents as a lifetime quest for authenticity. We frequently mistake the illusory for the real, shaped by the expectations of others and our own contentions ill-defined and unresolved, suspended for later consideration. Through life stages we continually ask ‘who am I now?’ Or, standing in front of your wardrobe, asking what do I need to wear for who I need to be today?
There are times we view our identity through the lens of others who know us well. We are predisposed to seek a second opinion on our self-evaluation. Some actively plan or project-manage their selves, others passively allow identity to form with minimal intent. Apparent inconsistencies arise when those in a close relationship with us make connections with selected strands of our identity. Looking through different facets of the prism of our accessible self may reveal multiple diverse aspects of our identity. Our presentation of self to others may be mediated and confused by dissembling and insincerity. Some personality types, such as covert narcissists, own impenetrable identities.
If identity is constantly morphing, just how enduring are our personal characteristics? Are prejudices formed at an early life stage capable of change? What is the connection between attitude formation, our acceptable self, and the capacity to change one’s mind? One can speculate how tolerance might be learned in constructing identity; an antidote to gender enmity, racist postures and willful ignorance of the needs of others. It seems many are missing the compassion gene while allowing the selfish gene to direct choices.
Memories of experiences offer one guide to developing our sense of who we are. They mimic operant conditioning as we embrace the satisfying and reject the abrasive. Memories can deceive and become unreliable. A memory once captured as a primary source may become a secondary one as our mind tends to make a photocopy, a facsimile or memory of a memory, in order to file it for later retrieval. Much can be lost or obfuscated during this transfer from a lived experience to a reflected one. And some memories need to be expunged or consigned to the ‘forgetary’.
Toxic relationships may also impede the delicate iterative process of constructing an authentic self. They mitigate against clarity, often presenting a clash of values, opaque as a bathroom window. Critical to identity is forming and ‘fixing’ values, fixing in the sense of affirming contested values. Formal education is ill-equipped for this task so we must rely on our own conscientization and discrimination. Perhaps values congeal like animal fat if left unattended. Do we take the intellectually lazy route of narrowcasting the inputs to opinion formation? If society expects us to become more conservative with advancing age this implies our minds are on a stand-by setting, not turned on to receive new ways of recognizing and addressing wicked problems. An evolving identity, being continually critically re-examined, would reject the imputation of somnolence.
The stress of identity building, the zone of discomfort and anxiety, exists in the gap between who we currently perceive ourselves to be and who we aspire to be. Our intimates may detect just a few shards of color looking down the vortex of our kaleidoscope, missing many others. Consider the role of casual observers who truncate roles in public, observing just a slither; journalists attribute present time roles when situations emerge as motorist, pedestrian, or elderly woman. Can we recall when our identity was first badged as an ‘ist pursuing an ‘ism?
Erudite analysis of identity may claim a primary cause of actively choosing a life purpose. But do we consciously consider what our potential might be and articulate a plan to fulfil our purpose? Active identities, rather than complacent ones, look for opportunities to flex their potential. Conversely, psychological therapy points to hesitancy in letting go of emotional baggage as an act of will. We appear to carry referent or false conclusions from a conflicted adolescence throughout life, deferring the need for breaking and reframing our identity paradigm, acknowledging the need for a reset of life’s trajectory.
Perhaps contrarian extremists are comfortable enough with their identity and don’t particularly want their perspective-analyzing facility disturbed by credibility. Confirmation bias and the availability heuristic binds them to a world view at odds with a majority that draws on more widely accepted evidence.
Identity in the twenty first century has become entwined in mental health. Asymmetry or dissonance between who one believes themselves to be and who others judge them to be is a trigger for an identity crisis. We may look back through our history and forward to an imagined future for answers to maintain equilibrium and affirm authenticity. In addition to conscious regard for one’s life purpose, identity is bound by personal agency, the authorship of one’s life script, a recognition of one’s capacity for change. I surmise you don’t have a mission statement for your life. Agency demonstrates actor potency and impact rather than passive acceptance as an individual that life happens to in an arbitrary, uncontrollable manner.
Introspection is surveillance of the self, memory its brittle cuticle and ego a trash rack for identity waste. While engaged in exploring and creating our identity we contend with the noise of influencers competing to be heard. The experience of trauma may erode our confidence that we’ve got this under control as external forces tear apart our best laid plans for a self that fits comfortably. A journey of stolid equilibrium should ensure your eulogy matches your elevator pitch, but life seldom runs to script. As John Lennon reminded us, life is what happens to us while we’re making other plans.
It would be great to experiment with freedom and without accountability or commitment. To create a safe play area in which to try on alternative identities. Imagine we could borrow from the cartoon contrivance of the portable hole or Ralph Ellison’s invisible man. We could run amok with impunity. We generally operate within the boundaries of social convention rather than personal invention. We variously enjoy or endure quiet moments of contemplation behind barriers labelled ‘under construction’, during which time we form jaundiced or enlightened views.
Leaving the intensely personal self-making aside, we may also consider macro-identities as groups cohere, sharing characteristics often erroneously referred to as national identity. Confessions that as a society we have made mistakes that ought to be acknowledged are regarded by the blinkered as ‘black armband history’. Identity can be a collective concept, such as ‘Australian’, but few of us tick even most of the criteria boxes. Recent examples of whitewashing attempts in Australia include implanting a cheer squad for western civilization within higher education (Ramsay Centre) and a revision of the school history curriculum that omits or redacts all the bad bits that make us question our integrity and ethics. We despair when our national leaders purport to represent us to other countries, claiming their idiosyncratic values as ours, misrepresenting our identity. We ask ourselves “who are we in society?” How can we make positive changes to a shared identity by conniving with our fellow humans? Can we breed out something as pervasive as paternalism? Our ancestors expressed views we would no longer countenance, so clearly our identity is not the cumulative sum of theirs. “Parts of our national histories may be rotten. Though they can’t be replaced, the values and actions that facilitated them can” (Cherry, Myisha. Who Do We Think We Are? New Philosopher. No.33, #3/2021, p86) Like continual replacement of planks on a ship, or renewal of axe heads and handles, we have created something new in our unique identities.
Are we destined to be disappointed with our efforts at identity creation and maintenance or are we content with a satisficing snug fit? Are any parts of your self receding from the outline of your hologram or dangling outside it? We strive for congruence with our own silhouette, filling it with an acceptable self. Like Hitchcock, don’t just lean in to listen, move in to become your authentic self.
David Muscio
1402 words
Awesomely Astute 