Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 97–110

Expressivity and performativity: Merleau-Ponty and Butler

Article

Abstract

Until now post-structuralism and phenomenology are widely regarded as opposites. Contrary to this opinion, I am arguing that they have a lot in common. In order to make my argument, I concentrate on Judith Butler’s poststructuralist concept of performativity to confront it with Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenological concept of expressivity. While Butler claims that phenomenological theories of expression are in danger of essentialism and thus must be replaced by non-essentialist theories of performativity, I hold that Merleau-Ponty’s concept of expressivity must strictly be understood in anti-essentialist terms. Following this line of interpretation, “expressivity” and “performativity”—as well as phenomenology and post-structuralism—are not opposites but partners in the search for an anti-essentialist gender concept. Consequently, feminist phenomenology turns out to be a non-essentialist approach that combines phenomenological and post-structural insights.

Keywords

Judith Butler Maurice Merleau-Ponty Performativity Expressivity Gender Essentialism Phenomenology Post-structuralism 

References

  1. Binswanger, Ludwig. 1994. Ausgewählte Werke, vol. 3: Vorträge und Aufsätze, ed. Max Herzog. Heidelberg: Roland Asanger.Google Scholar
  2. Butler, Judith. 1988. Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal 40(4): 519–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Butler, Judith. 1989. Sexual ideology and phenomenological description: A feminist critique of Merleau-Ponty’s Phenomenology of Perception. In The thinking muse. Feminism and modern French philosophy, ed. Jeffner Allen and Iris Marion Young, 85–100. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex”. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Butler, Judith. 1994. Gender as performance: An interview with Judith Butler. Radical Philosophy 67: 32–39.Google Scholar
  7. Butler, Judith. 1997. Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Deleuze, Gilles. 1990. Expressionism in philosophy: Spinoza. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  9. Foucault, Michel. 1994. Dits et écrits, vol. 2: 1970–1975. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  10. Frank, Manfred. 1984. Was ist Neustrukturalismus? Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. In English What is neostructuralism? (trans. Sabine Wilke and Richard Gray). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  11. Lawlor, Leonard. 2003. Thinking through French philosophy: The being of the question. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1945. Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  13. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1962. Phenomenology of perception (trans. Colin Smith). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Sartre, Jean-Paul. 2004. The imaginary: A phenomenological psychology of the imagination (trans. Jonathan Webber). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Shannon, Claude E., and Weaver Warren. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  16. Stoller, Silvia. 1999. Merleau-Pontys Psychoanalyse-Rezeption. In Phänomenologische Forschungen, 43–76. Neue Folge 4, 1. Halbband.Google Scholar
  17. Stoller, Silvia. 2010. Existenz–Differenz–Konstruktion: Phänomenologie der Geschlechtlichkeit bei Beauvoir, Irigaray und Butler. München: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
  18. Stoller, Silvia, Veronica Vasterling, and Linda Fisher (eds.). 2005. Feministische Phänomenologie und Hermeneutik. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
  19. Turner, Victor. 1974. Dramas, fields and metaphors: Symbolic action in human society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Vasterling, Veronica. 1999. Butler’s sophisticated constructivism. A critical assessment. Hypatia 14(3): 17–38.Google Scholar
  21. Vasterling, Veronica. 2001. Judith Butlers radikaler Konstruktivismus – Einige kritische Überlegungen. In Verhandlungen des Geschlechts. Zur Konstruktivismusdebatte in der Gender-Theorie, ed. Eva Waniek and Silvia Stoller, 136–146. Wien: Turia + Kant.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of OregonEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations