L'objet de cette thèse est de penser la légitimité philosophique du concept d'authenticité et les moyens de parvenir au « moi » véritable. Les questions qui sous-tendent notre approche sont les suivantes : pourquoi l'authenticité est-elle devenue la valeur contemporaine majeure ? Quelles réponses sont actuellement proposées dans la quête de soi ? L'authenticité a-t-elle une quelconque valeur philosophique ? Le « moi » véritable existe-t-il ? Comment ne pas faire de la question de l'authenticité (qui suis-je vraiment ?) une question d'identité personnelle (que suis-je ?) ? Enfin, comment parvenir au « moi » véritable ? L'enjeu s'avère triple : 1/ élaborer un questionnement sur la possibilité même d'un « moi » véritable ; 2/ replacer cette question dans le champ des théories de l'identité personnelle ; 3/ traiter l'authenticité comme étant à la fois représentative et mimétique, et envisager ainsi de manière renouvelée la question du rapport à soi-même. En concevant l'authenticité comme une représentation mimétique, nous verrons qu'elle parvient à résister aux menaces dissolvantes du « moi » tout en échappant aux apories substantialistes. Pour traiter ces questions, ce travail philosophique mobilise les points de vue à la fois philosophiques et littéraires. / This thesis aims to ponder over the philosophical concept of authenticity and the means to reach the true self. The queries underpinning this approach are as follows: why has authenticity become the mainstream contemporary value? What answers are currently suggested concerning the quest for the self? Has authenticity any philosophical value? Does the true self exist? How can we manage not to turn the query about authenticity (who am I really?) into a query about personal identity (what am I?). Finally, how can we reach the true self? The issue is threefold: 1. Work out a questioning about the actual possibility of a true self. 2. Put this question back in the sphere of the theories about personal identity. 3. Regard authenticity as being both representative and mimetic and thus, consider the question of the relation to oneself in a new way. By viewing authenticity as a mimetic representation, we will find out that it can stand up to the dissolving threats of the self and overcome substantialist aporia. To deal with these questions, this philosophical work uses literary as well as philosophical viewpoints.

[pt] Tem a presente pesquisa o escopo de examinar as relações entre ipseidade e alteridade, tendo como ponto de partida o terreno em que Martin Heidegger e Søren Kierkegaard desenvolvem seus pensamentos. O que se pretende ao longo da dissertação é discutir a possibilidade de acesso à ipseidade a partir de uma noção de existência que compreenda a tensão que descola ipseidade e existência. Tomando como referência a análise que deita suas raízes sobre uma leitura fenomenológica da existência e percorre diferentes traços da constituição ontológica do ente que existe, procuro demonstrar, com escólio nas concepções filosóficas de Heidegger e Kierkegaard, que o acesso à ipseidade se dá na relação de alteridade. / [en] The objective in the present dissertation is to examine the relation between ipseity and alterity, having Martin Heidegger´s and Søren Kierkegaard´s philosophys as a starting point. It intends to discuss on this paper the possibility of finding access to ipseity taking as reference a certain notion of existence which comprehends the tension that sets ipseity apart from existence. In this way the research brings us to the following conclusion: the access to ipseity comes from the relation to alterity.

<p>This dissertation applies Paul Ricœur’s theory of narrative identity to Chaucer’s poetry. The idea of a narrative subjectivity addresses gaps and synthesizes key movements in Chaucer studies, engaging with key scholars such as George Lyman Kittridge, Carolyn Dinshaw, A.C. Spearing, and Mary Carruthers. Using Ricœur’s hermeneutic phenomenology, the chapters articulate how narrative is necessary to the construction and expression of both individual and collective identity and experience. Each chapter focuses on a key element of Ricœur’s narrative hermeneutic phenomenology and how that modality of narrative is used to construct a particular kind of identity. I argue for a self-in-relation: the self as constituted through relations to others, or intersubjectively, which is expressed in and as narrative. Ricœur’s hermeneutic distills several of Chaucer’s key interests: time, history, fictionality, and poetics; selfhood and alterity; the significance of language and of fidelity to one’s word; and agency, passivity, and suffering. By applying that heremeneutic, we can consider the extent to which Chaucer’s poetry may use narrative to represent or resolve those interests and their connection to identity.</p> <p>Chapter 1 explores the identity construction of three Chaucerian women by identifying patterns of yielding discursive authority that either subvert or redirect narrative structures of masculine authority. I argue that women like Criseyde have more control over their own lives and a more positive subject-position than previously recognized. In Chapter 2, I argue that racialized narratives shared by the Canterbury pilgrims structure their community by defining what kind of identity is acceptable—in this case, a white Christian identity, shared by all the pilgrims, that reproduces a Western hegemonic whiteness. In chapter 3, I argue that in Chaucer’s talking-animal poetry, the recognition and response that narrative facilitates results in an ethic of care that is invested in principles of solicitude and friendship. In Chapter<b> </b>4, I argue that Chaucer’s dream visions represent narratives of poetic subjectivity that are embedded in issues of memory and sociality that take shape in and as space. Finally, in conclusion I tie these arguments back to a question asked of the fictional representation of Chaucer himself: Who are you? This question animates much of Chaucer’s poetry and I have endeavored to show how Chaucer answers that question with and in narrative. </p>

Le consensus a pour finalité d’éliminer le conflit. Il aimerait pouvoir sacraliser de nouvelles normes dans une société en crise de rituel. Hélas, la réalité nous montre que l’étoffe du consensus est tissée de soumission librement consentie, de nécessités et de jeux de pouvoir très liés aux plaisirs immédiats. A force d’habitude, l’exigence de consensus change le remède en poison. Le consensus sonne le glas de l’éthique. En cherchant l’unité, le consensus diabolise le conflit et cherche expressément à l’éliminer du fait de son chaos apparent. Le dissensus, lui, en mettant la parole en tension, assure le lien fécond du vivreensemble. La dualité est la clef naturelle qui rationalise la sociabilité des contraires. Le dissensus privilégie l’association des différences pour assurer la représentation de chacune d’entre elles. Ce n’est qu’à partir d’une heuristique naturelle et holiste de l’altérité que le sujet peut se développer en tant que soimême et différent. De cette façon, un « double-je » se construit, capable à la fois de dire courageusement « me voici », face à la menace potentielle de l’autre mais surtout capable de ce même courage pour palier la vulnérabilité de cet autre quand ses forces de résistance l’abandonnent. Le dissensus signe l’émancipation et le dépli du sujet visant le dépassement de soi. La réussite de cette démarche d’ipséité se confirme quand la puissance de déploiement se met au service de la vulnérabilité d’autrui en termes de sollicitude. Ce travail essaie de proposer le dissensus comme un conflit sain et nécessaire, garant d’une éthique d’ouverture, une voie d’excellence pour ceux qui sont concernés par ce que l’homme peut offrir de meilleur : un soin / Finality of consensus is to eliminate conflict. It tries to sacrilize news Norms in a rituals crisis Society. Reality shows that consensus material is woven of submission freely agreed, of necessities and power games closely linked to instantaneous pleasures. By dint of habits, consensus demand substitute Poison for Remedy; consensus sounds Ethics kneel death. Consensus demonizes conflict by seeking unity, and explicitly seeks with elimination of it, regarding its visible chaos. A contrario, Dissensus assures ethics blow of the ‘living-together’ concept by fertile speech link. Duality is the natural solution, which rationalizes opposites’ sociability. Dissensus privileges differences coexistences, rather than weakest shakeout. Subject can build himself up by his self fulfillment, and as a different man, only from a natural and holist heuristic otherness. Thereby, a ‘double-I’ build itself, able to say courageously ‘Here I am’ to other one’s potential threaten, and especially able to face other one’s vulnerability with the same courage, when his resistance forces give-up. Dissensus signs subject emancipation and opening, aiming at going beyond of oneself. Displaying process goes thought an ipseity reasoning, which emerges from otherness, free itself from the latter, to finally return to it, in solicitude terms: live with, against and for other one. This work tries to show Dissensus as a sound and required conflict which guarantees an opening Ethics, an excellence way for the ones who are concerned by the best thing a human being can offer : a Care

<p>Предмет истраживања у овом раду представља одређивање чворишних тачака<br />око којих се образује идентитет у поетици Растка Петровића. Циљ је доказивања тезе<br />да његово стваралаштво антиципира савремено схватање и разумевање идентитета<br />као конструкције, која се одвија унутар дискурса моћи, а он настоји да регулише<br />идентификацијске процесе унутар субјекта. Дело Растка Петровића указује на<br />чињеницу да идентитет представља сложену и динамичну мрежу сачињену од<br />идентитетских конституената који се непрекидно укрштају, те се на местима укрштаја<br />образују амбивалентне субјекатске позиције из којих аутор исповеда своју онтолошку<br />стрепњу и свест о конститутивној амбиваленцији. Укључивањем методолошких<br />премиса из области студија културе (маргинализација, трансгресија, лиминалност) у<br />проучавање аутентичних авангардних поетичких стратегија Растка Петровића, указали<br />смо на чињеницу да је аутор трагајући за собом остваривао своје поетско биће. На тај<br />начин образовао се хибридни и лиминални идентитет у динамичком пољу<br />антагонистичких дискурса, који се непрекидно међусобно пресецају.<br />Реч је, дакле, о томе да поетичко-естетско-филозофско исходиште<br />стваралаштва Растка Петровића чини идеја да се биће (оно што јесте), као и<br />конституенти његовог идентитета (пол, род, раса, нација, класна, верска и<br />професионална припадност...) разумевају као процесуалне категорије које су<br />непрекидно изложене променама. Петровић, заправо, отвара пут савременом<br />антиесенцијалном тумачењу бића као флукса (оно што је ток и што се мења) унутар<br />симболичких мрежа, односно дискурзивних пракси. На тај начин, ствара се могућност<br />да се појам, односно концепт идентитета тумачи као стратегијски и позицијски, те је у<br />Петровићевом делу идентитет увек релационо конструисан и изратито обележен не-<br />припадањем. Истовремено, идентитет сугерише истост и подржава неки облик<br />заједништва који варљиво испуњава онтолошку празнину.<br />Овај рад своје методолошко утемељење проналази у претпоставци да је<br />плуралитет у теоријским приступима и критичким праксама нужан, управо због<br />2<br />сложености и амбивалентности појма идентитет, који је интердисциплинаран по своме<br />досегу. Истовремено, овај рад се бави различитим аспектима идентитета са циљем да<br />се сачува и истакне свест о интеракцији између конституената идентитета и теоријско-<br />критичких пракси које се њима баве. У фокусу нашег истраживања налази се културни,<br />родни и наративни идентитет, тачније, модуси њихових конструкција. У том смислу,<br />ова студија доказује да поетика, али и живот Растка Петровића представљају<br />парадигму културолошке и родне лиминалности. Сходно томе, путујући модел<br />егзистенције показује се као пресудан у творби идентитета који се формира као<br />хибридни, услед седиментације различитих култура.<br />Исцрпна анлиза родног идентитета, односно маскулинитета, истиче<br />субверзивни потенцијал Петровићевог дела у односу на патријархалну<br />фалогоцентричну бинарну културолошку матрицу. Растко Петровић несумњиво<br />исказује свест о идеолошком карактеру родне улоге која му је намењена, те је процес<br />&bdquo;постајања&ldquo; мушкарцем изузетно сложен, обележен противуречностима и стрепњом.<br />Посебан комплекс питања која се нужно намећу када је у питању ауторефлексија<br />представља језик, јер је писац принуђен да доказ властитог постојања тражи у језику, у<br />појмовима који су такође производ дискурса који не одобрава алтернативну мушкост.<br />Тумачење наративног иденитета као ипсеитета које смо користили у раду,<br />дакле, упознавање и конституисање себе као метакатегоријалног Другог, маркирало је<br />значај културног дијалога коме је Растко Петровић несумњиво стремио. У питању је<br />дијалог у коме припадници мањинских/маргиналних култура и субкултура постају<br />равноправни саговорници. Истовремено, размена културних дарова обезбеђивала би<br />потенцијал за, из данашње перспективе посматрано, повлашћен статус агенса у<br />стварању сопствене културе, као и активно учешће у мапирању културе у свету.</p> / <p>Predmet istraživanja u ovom radu predstavlja određivanje čvorišnih tačaka<br />oko kojih se obrazuje identitet u poetici Rastka Petrovića. Cilj je dokazivanja teze<br />da njegovo stvaralaštvo anticipira savremeno shvatanje i razumevanje identiteta<br />kao konstrukcije, koja se odvija unutar diskursa moći, a on nastoji da reguliše<br />identifikacijske procese unutar subjekta. Delo Rastka Petrovića ukazuje na<br />činjenicu da identitet predstavlja složenu i dinamičnu mrežu sačinjenu od<br />identitetskih konstituenata koji se neprekidno ukrštaju, te se na mestima ukrštaja<br />obrazuju ambivalentne subjekatske pozicije iz kojih autor ispoveda svoju ontološku<br />strepnju i svest o konstitutivnoj ambivalenciji. Uključivanjem metodoloških<br />premisa iz oblasti studija kulture (marginalizacija, transgresija, liminalnost) u<br />proučavanje autentičnih avangardnih poetičkih strategija Rastka Petrovića, ukazali<br />smo na činjenicu da je autor tragajući za sobom ostvarivao svoje poetsko biće. Na taj<br />način obrazovao se hibridni i liminalni identitet u dinamičkom polju<br />antagonističkih diskursa, koji se neprekidno međusobno presecaju.<br />Reč je, dakle, o tome da poetičko-estetsko-filozofsko ishodište<br />stvaralaštva Rastka Petrovića čini ideja da se biće (ono što jeste), kao i<br />konstituenti njegovog identiteta (pol, rod, rasa, nacija, klasna, verska i<br />profesionalna pripadnost...) razumevaju kao procesualne kategorije koje su<br />neprekidno izložene promenama. Petrović, zapravo, otvara put savremenom<br />antiesencijalnom tumačenju bića kao fluksa (ono što je tok i što se menja) unutar<br />simboličkih mreža, odnosno diskurzivnih praksi. Na taj način, stvara se mogućnost<br />da se pojam, odnosno koncept identiteta tumači kao strategijski i pozicijski, te je u<br />Petrovićevom delu identitet uvek relaciono konstruisan i izratito obeležen ne-<br />pripadanjem. Istovremeno, identitet sugeriše istost i podržava neki oblik<br />zajedništva koji varljivo ispunjava ontološku prazninu.<br />Ovaj rad svoje metodološko utemeljenje pronalazi u pretpostavci da je<br />pluralitet u teorijskim pristupima i kritičkim praksama nužan, upravo zbog<br />2<br />složenosti i ambivalentnosti pojma identitet, koji je interdisciplinaran po svome<br />dosegu. Istovremeno, ovaj rad se bavi različitim aspektima identiteta sa ciljem da<br />se sačuva i istakne svest o interakciji između konstituenata identiteta i teorijsko-<br />kritičkih praksi koje se njima bave. U fokusu našeg istraživanja nalazi se kulturni,<br />rodni i narativni identitet, tačnije, modusi njihovih konstrukcija. U tom smislu,<br />ova studija dokazuje da poetika, ali i život Rastka Petrovića predstavljaju<br />paradigmu kulturološke i rodne liminalnosti. Shodno tome, putujući model<br />egzistencije pokazuje se kao presudan u tvorbi identiteta koji se formira kao<br />hibridni, usled sedimentacije različitih kultura.<br />Iscrpna anliza rodnog identiteta, odnosno maskuliniteta, ističe<br />subverzivni potencijal Petrovićevog dela u odnosu na patrijarhalnu<br />falogocentričnu binarnu kulturološku matricu. Rastko Petrović nesumnjivo<br />iskazuje svest o ideološkom karakteru rodne uloge koja mu je namenjena, te je proces<br />&bdquo;postajanja&ldquo; muškarcem izuzetno složen, obeležen protivurečnostima i strepnjom.<br />Poseban kompleks pitanja koja se nužno nameću kada je u pitanju autorefleksija<br />predstavlja jezik, jer je pisac prinuđen da dokaz vlastitog postojanja traži u jeziku, u<br />pojmovima koji su takođe proizvod diskursa koji ne odobrava alternativnu muškost.<br />Tumačenje narativnog ideniteta kao ipseiteta koje smo koristili u radu,<br />dakle, upoznavanje i konstituisanje sebe kao metakategorijalnog Drugog, markiralo je<br />značaj kulturnog dijaloga kome je Rastko Petrović nesumnjivo stremio. U pitanju je<br />dijalog u kome pripadnici manjinskih/marginalnih kultura i subkultura postaju<br />ravnopravni sagovornici. Istovremeno, razmena kulturnih darova obezbeđivala bi<br />potencijal za, iz današnje perspektive posmatrano, povlašćen status agensa u<br />stvaranju sopstvene kulture, kao i aktivno učešće u mapiranju kulture u svetu.</p> / <p>This thesis aims to determine the crucial points of identity formation in Rastko<br />Petrović&rsquo;s poetics with the intention to verify the idea that Rastko Petrović&rsquo;s work<br />anticipates the modern understanding of identity as a construct which emerges from the<br />discourse of power with its identificational processes within the subject. Rastko Petrović&rsquo;s<br />oeuvre is an excellent example of the fact that identity represents a complex and dynamic<br />network of identity constituents that constantly intertwine, and, in the places where the<br />contacts happen, they form ambivalent subject positions from which the author narrates his<br />ontological fear and the awareness of the constitutive ambivalence. By including some of<br />the methodological premises from the field of cultural studies (such as marginalization,<br />transgression, liminality) into the research of Petrović&rsquo;s authentic avant-garde poetic<br />strategies, the thesis shows that, while searching for his inner self, Petrović was epitomizing<br />his poetical self, thus forming a hybrid and liminal identity in the dynamic field of<br />antagonistic discourses that constantly intersect.<br />Therefore, we can say that the poetic, philosophical and aesthetic sources of<br />Petrović&rsquo;s work are found in the idea that self (what is), as well as the constituents of his<br />identity (sex, gender, race, nation, class, religious beliefs, professional orientation&hellip;) are<br />understood as processing cathegories constantly exposed to changes. What is more, it can<br />be said that Rastko Petrović clears the path for the modern, antiessetialist interpretations of<br />self as flux (that which is a flow, which changes constantly) within the symbolic network, i.e.<br />discoursive practices. In this way, arises the possiblity of interpretation of the notion, or the<br />idea of identity, as strategic, or positional, meaning that in Petrović&rsquo;s works identity is<br />always relationally constructed and strongly marked by non-belonging. At the same time,<br />identity means sameness and supports at least some kind of unity feebly fulfilling the<br />onthological void.<br />Methodological foundation of this thesis is found in the assumption that the plurality<br />in critical and theoretical approaches is necessary, precisely because of the complexity and<br />ambivalence of identity, the term whose scope and range are interdisciplinary positioned. At<br />the same time, the thesis examines various aspects of identity with the objective to<br />preserve and enhance the awareness about the interaction between the constituents of<br />4<br />identity and theoretical and critical practices that deal with it. Cultural, gender and narrative<br />identities or, more precisely, the modes of their constructions, form the central part of the<br />thesis. In this sense, this thesis shows that the poetics, but also the life of Rastko Petrović,<br />represent a paradigm of cultural and gender liminality, while the life on the constant move<br />proves to be crucial in the creation of identity which is formed as a hybrid one because of<br />many layers coming from various cultures. A detailed analysis of gender identity or, more<br />precisely, masculinity, stresses the subversive potential of Petrović&rsquo;s work when juxtaposed<br />to patriarchal, logocentric, binary cultural matrix. Rastko Petrović expresses an awareness of<br />the ideological character of the gender role he was assigned with; therefore, the process of<br />&ldquo;becoming&rdquo; a man is a highly complex one, marked with contradictions and fear. A separate<br />cluster of questions that inevitably appear with introspection is found in language, since<br />writer is compelled to search for the proofs of his existence in the language and in the<br />notions which are also a product of discourse that does not approve of the alternative<br />masculinity.<br />The interpretation of narrative identity as ipseity, used in this work, as well as the<br />introduction and constitution of self as a meta-categorical Other, marked the importance of<br />cultural dialog which Rastko Petrović undoubtedly strived for. It is a dialog where the<br />members of minority cultures and subcultures are equal participants. At the same time, the<br />exchange of cultural gifts provides the potential for a privileged status of agens in creation<br />of one&rsquo;s own culture, and also in active mapping of the world culture.</p>

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:27:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Sybil Safdie Douek.pdf: 1865791 bytes, checksum: ebc827ec6b5f55d21c76a00bfc6d1d0e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-06-03 / The present dissertation intends to confront Paul Ricoeur and Emmanuel Levinas philosophy, from an essential point of view: the relationship between the subject and the other, subjectivity and alterity. Question which relevance seems to be dramatic after the Two World Wars, particularly after the Shoah: which could be, subsequent to this historical experience, the meanings of words such as subject, man and ethics? Aware of the necessary and indispensable critics toward classic humanism, and willing to withdraw the subject of his central position in philosophy, since Descartes, both authors seem to rehabilitate the subject, and put again faith in him, without paying to the subject unrestricted reverence. The result is the idea of a subject that includes in itself alterity: self as another , says Ricoeur; the other in the same , says Levinas. But which is the place assigned to the other? Levinas insists in the absolute priority of the other, and proposes the deposition of the subject in behalf of the other: the subject substitutes himself to the other, it is hostage of the other, being absolutely passive in his relationship with him. Ricoeur, in his turn, defends the importance of both (oneself and other) and prefers to think in terms of reciprocity, and receptivity of the subject. These different perspectives concerning relationship between subject and other imply two conceptions of ethics: for Levinas, ethics of responsibility and election; for Ricoeur, ethics of promise, of good living together and mutuality. It implicates also two different attitudes in regard of a question not always considered as philosophical: transcendence or the Name of God. For both, God is a question which deserves attention, but Ricoeur excludes the Name of his philosophical speech, building a hermeutics of the self without the support of transcendence; while for Levinas, the problem of subjectivity goes along this the problem of transcendence. Therefore, a question is born: the presence or absence of the Name of God in their philosophy of subjectivity could have connections or correspondences with their respective religious traditions Ricoeur´s Protestantism and Levinas Judaism? Traditions never denied by both of them, although kept far from their philosophical reflections, each one in his own way / A presente tese se propõe a confrontar as filosofias de Paul Ricoeur e Emmanuel Lévinas, a partir de uma questão essencial: a relação do sujeito com a alteridade. Questão cuja relevância se coloca de modo dramático após a experiência histórica das duas Guerras Mundiais, em particular da Shoah: que sentido dar, hoje, às palavras: sujeito, homem ou ética? Conscientes da necessária e incontornável crítica ao humanismo clássico e, desejosos de retirar o sujeito da posição central que vem ocupando na filosofia, desde Descartes, ambos parecem querer reabilitar o sujeito, fazer-lhe novamente confiança, sem por isso, render-lhe irrestritas homenagens. O resultado é uma concepção de sujeito que inclui em si próprio a alteridade: si mesmo como um outro , diz Ricoeur; o outro no mesmo , diz Lévinas: mas que lugar dar a outrem? Lévinas insiste na prioridade absoluta do outro, propondo a deposição do sujeito em favor de outrem: o sujeito se substitui ao outro, é refém do outro, sendo absolutamente passivo na relação; Ricoeur, por seu lado, defende a importância dos dois pólos e prefere falar em reciprocidade da relação e em receptividade do sujeito. As diferentes perspectivas na relação sujeito-outrem implicam em duas concepções de ética: em Lévinas, ética da responsabilidade e da eleição; em Ricoeur, ética da promessa, do bem viver-junto e da mutualidade. Como também em duas atitudes diferentes, no que diz respeito a uma questão nem sempre considerada filosófica: a transcendência ou o nome de Deus. Se para ambos Deus é uma questão que merece atenção, Ricoeur O exclui de seu discurso filosófico, construindo uma hermenêutica do si que não necessita da transcendência para se sustentar; enquanto para Lévinas, o problema da subjetividade e o da transcendência caminham juntos. Nasce uma questão: a presença ou a ausência do nome de Deus nas filosofias do sujeito de Ricoeur e Lévinas poderia ter conexões ou correspondências com suas respectivas tradições religiosas - o protestantismo de Ricoeur e o judaísmo de Lévinas? Tradições que eles nunca negaram, embora as tenham mantido afastadas, cada um a seu modo, de suas reflexões filosóficas

Taking as its central motif Hans-Georg Gadamer’s claim that “the true locus of hermeneutics is [the] in-between,” this thesis defends Gadamer’s concept of the fusion of horizons as radically interstitial against recent allegations that link his project to Romantic interpretive commensurability. Distancing Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics from both the Romantic hermeneutical approach and the incommensurabilist alternative proposed by John D. Caputo, this study reassesses Gadamer’s contributions toward understanding the other in a manner that avoids both imperious reductions and hyperbolic valorizations of the other’s alterity. Extending this discussion to cross-cultural interpretation, this thesis concludes by arguing for the fusion of horizons as a model for conceiving a new postcolonial space, irreducible to the commensurabilism of colonialism and the incommensurabilism of nativism. To this end, Gadamer is brought into discussion with Homi K. Bhabha, whose work on cultural hybridity offers a striking parallel with Gadamer’s fusion of horizons.

Whereas contemporary debates in Latin American studies addressing sovereignty often focus on dictatorships and the transitions to democratic governments in Latin America in the late twentieth century, Sovereignties Displaced: Avant-Garde Prose and Authoritarianism in Spain, Chile, and Argentina (1923-1936) adopts a transatlantic framework and directs critical attention to the cultural production of the interwar period. The historical and cultural events preceding and following 1929 are connected to World War I, the political crisis of democratic systems, and the global socioeconomic instability of the period. The three countries studied in the present work would be affected by these conditions, sharing an almost synchronic development of the authoritarian governments of Miguel Primo de Rivera in Spain (1923-1930), of Carlos Ibáñez del Campo in Chile (1927-1931), and José Félix Uriburu in Argentina (1930-1932). Additionally, the rise of authoritarianism and the decay of parliamentary institutions characterizing this epoch condition and inscribe the political essays and avant-garde novels composed by the intellectuals and writers analyzed in this study: from Spain, María Zambrano (1904-1991), Ramón Gómez de la Serna (1888-1963), and Benjamín Jarnés (1888-1949); from Chile, Alberto Edwards Vives (1874-1932), Juan Emar (1893-1964), and Vicente Huidobro (1893-1948); and from Argentina, Ramón Doll (1896-1970), Norah Lange (1905-1972), and Roberto Arlt (1900-1942). It should be noted that while considering national circumstances, my argumentation is divided into sections organized not by country, but rather by subject matter: a methodological and theoretical introduction, three analytical chapters, and concluding remarks. Established critical assessments of the avant-gardes, as offered by experts like Renato Poggioli (1907-1963), have underscored that democratic forms of government would provide the initial conditions of possibility of the historical avant-gardes. Other scholars, however, have recognized the interdependency of early twentieth century artistic discourses, revolutionary ideas, and authoritarianism. Informed by the theorization of sovereignty and democracy of Jacques Derrida (1930-2004), and the concept of community of Roberto Esposito (1950-), my research examines, in political essays and vanguard novels, the opposition of individual vis-à-vis collective forms of rule. The texts of my corpus manifest a recurrent concern relating to the tension between self-rule and collective-rule, a dynamic which organizes and destabilizes avant-garde formations themselves. Consequently, I analyze the philosophical and political ramifications of these authors’ defense, negation, or destabilization of the individual-collective opposition in the context of the deterioration of parliamentarism. In my first chapter, I examine the following essays that represent a range of political positions from the interwar years: Horizonte del liberalismo (1930) by María Zambrano, Liberalismo en la literatura y la política (Con una segunda edición de: “Democracia mal menor”) (1934, n/d) by Ramón Doll, and La fronda aristocrática en Chile (1928) by Alberto Edwards Vives. Framed by the sociological assessments of José Ortega y Gasset in La rebelión de las masas (1930), this chapter considers these essayists’ observations regarding mass politics and the role of political and economic elites. I foreground the ethical problems relating to these authors’ conceptions of the human subject and their concomitant formulations of governance, deriving from various ideological orientations. The essayists’ comparable anxieties regarding the limits of democratic politics reveal the complexities of the period and serve as a springboard for the subsequent chapters that study the politics of avant-garde novels. In my second chapter, shifting from essayistic discourse to vanguard fiction, I analyze philosophical oppositions central to the configuration of sovereignty, and to the theory and practice of democracy. These tensions organize various components of the following novels: Un año (1935) by Juan Emar (pseudonym of Álvaro Yáñez Bianchi), 45 días y 30 marineros (1933) by Norah Lange, and El caballero del hongo gris (1928) by Ramón Gómez de la Serna. I demonstrate that, although these narratives do not contain explicit references to the emergence of authoritarianism and the erosion of parliamentarism of the period, these narratives are structured by problems that have implications for a thinking of issues relating to sovereignty and democracy. These novels similarly present how individuals interact with groups, such that it becomes imperative to consider the political consequences of these relations in order to critique, for example, fraternalistic and nationalistic notions of political filiation. My final chapter studies the narrative presentations of radical political projects that aim to restructure society in Los siete locos (1929) by Roberto Arlt, La próxima (1934) by Vicente Huidobro, and Lo rojo y lo azul (1932) by Benjamín Jarnés. In contrast to the narratives included in the second chapter, these avant-garde novels establish an explicit dialogue with the conditions of crisis of the interwar years. From insurrections and utopian settlements, to revolutionary military revolts, these narrations depict small vanguard groups that propose various plots that seek to radically reshape the social order. Even though poetry is often positioned as the paradigmatic form of vanguard literary expression, my research theorizes the understudied phenomenon of Hispanic avant-garde prose. In particular, I account for the variation among avant-garde novels of the period, by sustaining that there are gradations of vanguard narrative depending on different factors that range from the transparency or opacity of linguistic expression, to the organization of the narrative material. In this sense, some novels considered vanguardist, while approaching a certain radicality in terms of language and form, may incorporate elements of the realist-naturalist novelistic tradition. Likewise, I assert the importance of attending to the varied uses of meta-reflexive procedures in Hispanic vanguard prose. Given their implicit and explicit interaction with contemporary historical conditions and political and artistic discourses of the 1920s and 1930s, I contend that the essays and avant-garde novels analyzed offer a fertile ground to examine the nature of sovereignty, while also presenting, in some crucial instances, potential images of what a democracy worthy of this name could look like. / Spanish