Philosophy and Literature: The Fortunes of the Performative

Culler, Jonathan D.
Poetics Today, Volume 21, Number 3, Fall 2000, pp. 503-519 (Article)
Published by Duke University Press
For additional information about this article
Access Provided by University of Glasgow Library at 03/14/12 10:32AM GMT
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/poet/summary/v021/21.3culler.html
Philosophy and Literature:
The Fortunes of the Performative
Jonathan Culler
English, Cornell
Abstract The notion of the performativean utterance that accomplishes the act
that it oesignatesvas proposeo b, the philosopher . L. Austin to oescribe a t,pe of
utterance neglecteo b, philosophers. This article follovs the vicissituoes of the con-
cept in literar, ano cultural theor, to shov :, vh, it appeareo useful for literar,
theor, ano vhat happens vhen literature is construeo as funoamentall, performa-
tive; ., hov it functions in theor, ano criticism associateo vith oeconstruction, ano
, vhat role it pla,s in recent vork in genoer stuoies ano queer theor,, vhere uoith
Butler has oevelopeo a performative theor, of genoer. The shifts in this concept pose
questions about hov to think about the constitutive force of language, the nature of
oiscursive events, ano literature as an act.
I propose to consioer the vicissituoes of a concept that has ourisheo in lit-
erar, ano cultural theor, in the Uniteo States in recent ,ears ano vhose for-
tunes illustrate some complexities of the relation betveen philosoph, ano
literature, or philosoph, ano literar, theor,. The concept of performative
utterance vas oevelopeo b, . L. Austin in the :qos. After brie, oescrib-
ing his account, I vill look at vhat happens vhen the notion is aoopteo b,
literar, theorists ano critics to oescribe literar, oiscourse. Then I vill take
up the fortunes of the termin vhat ve in the Uniteo States call oeconstruc-
tion, vhere it is the tension betveen the performative ano the constative
functions of language that becomes the object of attention ano, inoeeo, a
basic structure of texts of all sorts. Iinall,, I shall look at the performative in
Fortions of this argument appeareo in Culler :qq.
Poetics Today .:: Iall .ooo, Cop,right .ooo b, the Forter Institute for Foetics ano
Semiotics.
504 Poetics Today 21:3
feminist theor, ano ga, ano lesbian stuoies or queer theor,. This point of
arrival, vith talk of a performative concept of genoer, is ver, oierent from
the point of oeparture, Austins conception of performative utterances, but
to make ,our fortune, as the genre of the picaresque has long shovn us, ,ou
have to leave home ano, often, travel a long va, . . .
The notion of the performative is proposeo b, . L. Austin, in a book
publisheo after his oeath calleo How to Do Things with Words. It vas for too
long the assumption of philosophers, vrites Austin :q: :,, that the busi-
ness of a statement can onl, be to oescribe some state of aairs, or to
state some fact, vhich it must oo either trul, or falsel,. The normal utter-
ance vas conceiveo as a true or false representation of a state of aairs,
ano utterances that faileo to t this mooel vere treateo either as unimpor-
tant exceptions or as oeviant pseuoo-statements. Yet, Austin continues
ibio.: .,, ve, that is, even philosophers, set some limits to the amount of
nonsense ve are prepareo to aomit that ve talk, so that it vas natural to go
on to ask, as a secono stage, vhether man, apparentl, pseuoo-statements
reall, set out to be statements at all.
Austin thus proposes to atteno to cases treateo as marginal ano to take
them as an inoepenoent t,pe. He proposes a oistinction betveen consta-
tive utterances, vhich make a statement, oescribe a state of aairs, ano are
true or false, ano another class of utterances that are not true or false ano
that actuall, perform the action to vhich the, refer: performatives. To sa, I
promise to pa, ,ou is not to oescribe a state of aairs but to perform the
act of promising; the utterance is itself the act.
The example Austin uses to illustrate the performative ano this vill be
signicant for some later theorists, is the utterance I oo b, vhich brioe
ano groom in the Anglo-American veooing ceremon, unoertake to veo
one another. When the priest or civil ocial asks, Do ,ou take this voman
to be ,our lavful veooeo vife` ano I respono I oo, I oo not oescribe
an,thing, sa,s AustinI oo it; I am not reporting on a marriage: I am in-
oulging in it :q: 6,. When I sa, I promise to pa, ,ou tomorrov or I
oroer ,ou to stop, these performative utterances are neither true or false;
the, vill be, oepenoing on the circumstances, appropriate or inappropri-
ate, felicitous or infelicitous, in Austins terminolog,. If I sa, I oroer
,ou but have no right to oo so, or if ,ou are not ooing the thing I oroer
,ou to stop ooing, m, utterance vill be inappropriate, infelicitous, a fail-
ure. If I sa, I oo, I ma, not succeeo in marr,ingif, for example, I am
marrieo alreao, or if the person performing the ceremon, is not authorizeo
to perform veooings in this communit,. The utterance vill misre, sa,s
Austin. The utterance vill be unhapp,ano so, no ooubt, vill the brioe or
groom, or perhaps both. The essential thing about performative utterances
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 505
is that the, oo not oescribe but performsuccessfull, or unsuccessfull,
the action the, oesignate. It is in pronouncing these voros that I promise,
oroer, or marr,. A simple test for the performative is the possibilit, of aoo-
ing hereb, in English before the verb: I hereb, promise; We hereb,
oeclare our inoepenoence; I hereb, oroer ,ou. . .; but not I hereb, valk
to tovn. I cant perform the act of valking b, pronouncing certain voros.
The oistinction betveen performative ano constative captures an impor-
tant oierence betveen t,pes of utterances ano has the great virtue of alert-
ing us to the extent to vhich language performs actions rather than merel,
reports on them. But in How to Do Things with Words, as Austin pushes fur-
ther in his account of the performative, he encounters oiculties. It seemeo
initiall, that to ioentif, performatives ,ou might orav up a list of the per-
formative verbs: verbs that in the rst person of the present inoicative I
promise, I oroer, I oeclare, performthe action the, oesignate, vhile in other
persons ano tenses the, behave oierentl, ano oescribe actions rather than
perform them, as in: I promised to come; You oroered him to stop; He
will oeclare var if the, continue. But Austin notes that ,ou cant oene
the performative b, listing the verbs that behave in this va,, because, for
instance, the utterance Stop it at once' can constitute the act of oroer-
ing ,ou to stop just as much as can I oroer ,ou to stop. Ano the appar-
entl, constative statement, I vill pa, ,ou tomorrov, vhich certainl, looks
as though it vill become either true or false, oepenoing on vhat happens
tomorrov, can, unoer the right conoitions, be a promise to pa, ,ou, rather
than a oescription or preoiction like he vill pa, ,ou tomorrov. But once
,ou allov for the existence of such implicit performatives, vhere there is
no explicitl, performative verb, ,ou have to aomit that any utterance can
be an implicit performative. Ior example, in English the sentence The cat
is on the mat is for some reason the stock example of a simple oeclarative
sentence, ,our basic constative utterance. But The cat is on the mat coulo
be seen, rather, as the elliptical version of I hereb, arm that the cat is on
the mat, a performative utterance that accomplishes the act of arming
to vhich it refers. Austin concluoes that vhat ve neeo to oo for the case of
stating ano, b, the same token, oescribing ano reporting is to realize that
the, are speech acts no less than all those other speech acts oescribeo as
performative. Constative utterances also perform actionsactions of stat-
ing, arming, oescribing, ano so on. The, are a kino of performative. In
brief, Austin starts from a situation vhere performatives are seen as a spe-
cial case of constativespseuoo-statementsano arrives at a perspective
from vhich constatives are a particular t,pe of performative.
Given the oicult, of noing solio criteria for maintaining the oistinc-
tion betveen constatives ano performatives, Austin changes tack, abanoon-
506 Poetics Today 21:3
ing the initial oistinction betveen performatives ano constatives ano the
program of noing a list of explicit performative voros ano consioering
insteao the senses in vhich to sa, something is to oo something :q:
:.:,. He oistinguishes the locutionar, act, vhich is the act of speaking a sen-
tence, fromthe illocutionar, act, vhich is the act ve perform by speaking this
sentence, ano from the perlocutionar, act, vhich is an act accomplisheo
eects secureo, b, performing the illocutionar, act. Thus uttering the sen-
tence I promise is a locutionar, act. B, performing the act of uttering
this sentence unoer certain circumstances I vill perform the illocutionar,
act of promising, ano nall,, b, promising I ma, perform the perlocution-
ar, act of reassuring ,ou, for example. Or vhen I performthe illocutionar,
act of arming that Montpellier is in Irance, I ma, accomplish the per-
locutionar, act of bringing ,ou to knov it. Thus, insteao of tvo t,pes of
utterance, constative ano performative, ve eno up vith three oimensions
or aspects of ever, speech act, of vhich the locutionar, ano illocutionar,
are particularl, important to a theor, of language.
The result of Austins heuristic trajector, is raoicall, to change the status
of the constative statement: it began as the mooel for all language use, then
became one of tvo general uses of language, ano nall,, vith the ioenti-
cation of aporias that prevent the rmseparation of constative fromperfor-
mative, subsists not as an inoepenoent class of utterance but as one aspect
of language use.
Ior literar, critics, though, it has not maoe much oierence vhether ve
think of performative language as a special t,pe, as inAustins original char-
acterization, or vhether ve focus insteao on the performative oimension
of all speech acts. The essential thing is that, against the traoitional mooel
that sav language as essentiall, making statements about vhat is the case,
Austin has provioeo an account of the active, creative functioning of lan-
guage.
Critics have founo the ioea of performative language valuable for char-
acterizing literar, oiscourse. Since literar, criticism involves attenoing to
vhat literar, language does as much as to vhat it says, the concept of the
performative seems to provioe a linguistic ano philosophical justication
for this ioea: there are utterances that above all oo something. Moreover,
like the performative, the literar, utterance ooes not refer to a prior state
of aairs ano is not true or false. The literar, utterance, too, creates the state
of aairs to vhich it refers, in several respects. Iirst ano most simpl,, it
brings into being characters ano their actions, for instance. The beginning
of o,ces Ulysses, Statel, plump Buck Mulligan came from the stairheao
bearing a bovl of lather on vhich a mirror ano a razor la, crosseo :qq:
,, ooes not refer to some prior state of aairs but creates this character
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 507
ano this situation. Secono, literar, vorks seem to bring into being ioeas,
concepts, vhich the, oeplo,. La Rochefoucaulo claims that no one voulo
ever have thought of being in love if the, haont reao about it in books, ano
the notion of romantic love ano of its centralit, to the lives of inoiviouals,
is arguabl, a massive literar, creation. Certainl, novels themselves, from
Don Quixote to Madame Bovary, blame romantic ioeas on other books.
In short, the rst result of the performative is to bring to center stage a
use of language previousl, consioereo marginalan active, vorlo-making
use of language, vhich resembles literar, languageano to help us to con-
ceive of literature as act. The notion of literature as performative contrib-
utes to a oefense of literature: no longer maoe up of frivolous pseuoo-
statements, it takes its place among the acts of language that change the
vorlo b, bringing into being the things that the, name see Fetre, :qqo,.
Secono, for Austin, in principle at least, the performative breaks the link
betveen meaning ano the intention of the speaker, for vhat act I perform
vithm, voros is not oetermineo b, m, intentionbut b, social ano linguistic
conventions.
1
The utterance, Austin insists, shoulo not be consioereo as the
outvaro sign of some invaro act that it represents trul, or falsel,. If I sa, I
promise unoer appropriate conoitions, I have promiseo, have performeo
the act of promising, vhatever intention I ma, have hao in m, heao at the
time. Since literar, utterances are also events vhere the intention of the
author is not thought to be vhat oetermines the meaning, here is another
va, in vhich the mooel of the performative seems highl, pertinent.
The mooel of the performative thus seems to provioe a mooel of lan-
guage that suits the anal,sis of literature better than competing mooels.
This result is ironic, though, for tvo reasons. Iirst, Austins account of
performatives, far from having literature in viev, explicitl, excludes litera-
ture. His anal,sis, he explains, applies onl, to voros spoken seriousl,. I
must not be joking, for example, or vriting a poem :q: q,. He continues:
A performative utterance vill, for example, be in a peculiar va, hollov or voio
if saio b, an actor on the stage, or introouceo in a poem, or spoken in a solilo-
qu,. This applies in a similar manner to an, ano ever, utterancea sea change
in special circumstances. Language in such circumstances is in special va,s
intelligibl,useo not seriousl,, but in va,s parasitic upon its normal useva,s
vhich fall unoer the ooctrine of the etiolations of language. All this ve are ex-
cluoing at present from consioeration. Our performative utterances, felicitous
or not, are to be unoerstooo as issueo in oroinar, circumstances. :q: ..,
:. Derrioa ano others have argueo that in fact Austin reintroouces the controlling role of in-
tention through the insistence that the utterance be serious, but his oenial that the speech
act be construeo as the outvaro representation of an inner act is helpful for critical theor,.
See Derrioa :q88 |:q.|; Culler :q8.: ::o.
508 Poetics Today 21:3
Ior Austin, literature hao to be excluoeo in oroer to get at the funoamen-
tal nature of the performative; for literar, theorists, literature is a primar,
example of the performative functioning of language. This is no small mu-
tation.
The secono iron, is that for Austin the notion of the performative situates
language in concrete social contexts ano functions, such as getting marrieo,
christening a boat, calling a meeting to oroer. To talk about performative
utterances is, for him, to aoopt a perspective opposing that of theorists vho
tr, to anal,ze language vithout concern for its contexts of use. But for lit-
erar, theorists, the notion of the performative stresses above all the self-
reexive character of language, the fact that the utterance itself is the realit,
or the event to vhich the utterance refers.When I sa, I promise, the prom-
ise I refer to is the promise I perform in sa,ing those voros. The perfor-
mative: sociall, embeooeo act or self-reexive act` The same concept thus
sustains tvo rather oierent notions of the basic nature of language.
The ioea of the performative nature of literature oirects our attention to
tvo problems or issues. The rst is this: If, as performative, an utterance is
not true or false but felicitous or infelicitous, vhat ooes it mean for a literar,
utterance to be felicitous or infelicitous` This turns out to be a complicateo
matter. On the one hano, one coulo ask vhether felicit, isnt just another
name for vhat generall, concerns critics. When confronteo, sa,, vith the
opening of Shakespeares sonnet, M, mistress e,es are nothing like the
sun, ve ask not vhether this utterance is true or false, but vhat it ooes,
hov it ts in vith the rest of the poem, ano vhether it vorks happil, vith
the other lines. That might be one conception of felicit,. But the mooel of
the performative also oirects our attention to the conventions that enable
an utterance to be a promise or a poemthe conventions of the sonnet,
sa,. The felicitousness of a literar, utterance might thus involve its relation
to the conventions of a genre. Does it compl, ano thus succeeo in being a
sonnet rather than a misre` But more than that, one might imagine, a lit-
erar, composition is felicitous onl, vhen it full, acceoes to the conoition of
literature b, being publisheo, reao, ano accepteo as a literar, vork, just as
a bet becomes a bet onl, vhen it is accepteo. Mar, Louise Fratts Towards a
Speech Act Theory of Literary Discourse :q, leaos us in this oirection. In sum,
the notion of literature as performative enjoins us to reect on the complex
problem of vhat it is for a literar, sequence to vork.
Secono ano more oicult, there is the question of vhat is the act that a
literar, performative accomplishes. To this question I shall return later.
The next ke, moment in the fortunes of the performative comes in the vork
of acques Derrioa ano Faul oe Man. Austins anal,sis has been taken up b,
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 509
Derrioa, particularl, in Signature event context, an essa, that vas pub-
lisheo in Derrioas Margins of Philosophy ano again in the book Limited Inc,
vhich contains further oiscussion of the subject Derrioa :q88 |:q.|,.
Signature event context is not primaril, oevoteoto Austin; vrittenfor a
philosophical colloquiumoncommunication, it turns at the enoto Austinto
shov hov a ver, promising approach to language, vhich resists the notion
of language as funoamentall, a series of true or false representations, en-
counters oiculties fromnot taking account of the extent to vhichlanguage
is necessaril, a set of iterable marks. Austin sets asioe as anomalous, non-
serious, or exceptional particular instances of vhat Derrioa calls a general
iterabilit, that shoulo be consioereo a lav of language. General ano fun-
oamental, because, for something to be a sign, it must be able to be citeo
ano repeateo in all sorts of circumstances, incluoing nonserious ones.
Coulo a performative utterance succeeo, Derrioa vrites, if its for-
mulation oio not repeat a cooieo or iterable form, in other voros if the
formula that I utter to open a meeting, christen a boat, or unoertake mar-
riage vere not ioentiable as conforming to an iterable mooel, if it vere not
thus ioentiable as a kino of citation` :q88 |:q.|: :8,. Derrioas anal,sis
suggests that rather than opposing serious to nonserious or citational utter-
ances, as Austin ooes, one shoulo vork to ioentif, oierent sorts of iteration
or citation vithin the framevork of a general iterabilit,. One voulo eno
up vith oierent t,pes of marks or chains of iterable marks ano not an
opposition betveen citational utterances on the one hano ano singular ano
original utterance events on the other :q88 |:q.|: :8,.
Derrioa values vhat is most raoical in Austins proceoure ano regrets
that he backeo ava, b, excluoing the citationalit, that Derrioa sees as the
most general conoition of possibilit, for performative utterances. Though
recognizing that performatives can alva,s misre or fail, Austin faileo to
follov this perpetual possibilit, of misre to the general iterabilit, of all
signs that it implies.
In his reaoing of Austin, Derrioa relates the performative above all to the
problem of iterabilit,, to vhich I vill return later, but in other essa,s he re-
lates the performative to the general problemof the possibilit, of inaugural
acts, acts that create something nev, in the political sphere as vell as the
literar,. In literature, he vrites, this experience of vriting is subject to an
imperative: to give space for singular events, to invent something nevin the
form of acts of vriting vhich no longer consist in a theoretical knovleoge,
in nevconstative statements, to give oneself to a poetico-literar, performa-
tivit, at least analogous to that of promises, oroers, or acts of constitution
or legislation vhich oo not onl, change language or vhich, in changing
language, change more than language Derrioa :qq.: ,. Not onl, is the
510 Poetics Today 21:3
performativit, of literature analogous to that of constitutions ano other acts
of inauguration; literature, he observes, is a s,stem of performative pos-
sibilities that accompanieo the mooern form of oemocrac,. Folitical con-
stitutions have a oiscursive regime ioentical to that of the constitution of
literar, structures ,.
One va, to explicate this claim is to sa, that the act of constitution, like
that of literature, oepenos on a complex ano paraooxical combination of
the performative ano constative, vhere in oroer to succeeo, the act must
convince b, referring to states of aairs but vhere success consists of bring-
ing into being the conoition to vhich it refers. Literar, vorks claim to tell
us about the vorlo, but if the, succeeo the, oo so b, bringing into being
the characters ano events the, relate. Something similar is at vork in in-
augural acts in the political sphere. In the Declaration of Inoepenoence of
the Uniteo States, for example, the ke, sentence reaos, We therefore . . .
oo solemnl, publish ano oeclare that these Uniteo colonies are ano of right
ought to be free ano inoepenoent states. The oeclaration that these states
are inoepenoent looks constative but is a performative that is supposeo to
create the nev realit, to vhich it refers, but to support this claim is joineo
the assertion funoamentall, constative, as a claim about a state of aairs,
that the, ought to be inoepenoent see Derrioa :q86,.
The tension betveen the performative ano constative oimensions of lit-
erar, ano philosophical utterance is vhat emerges, in all its philosophical
ano political ramications, in the anal,ses of Faul oe Man. De Man, one
might sa,, starts from the oicult, Austin encounters of separating perfor-
mative ano constative but takes this oicult, to be a crucial feature of the
functioning of language that cannot be remeoieo b, approaching the mat-
ter oierentl,, as Austin trieo to oo. If ever, utterance is both performative
ano constative, incluoing at least an implicit assertion of a state of aairs
ano a linguistic act, the relation betveen vhat an utterance sa,s ano vhat
it ooes is not necessaril, harmonious or cooperative. On the contrar,. Ior
oe Man, the moments that shov us language at its most characteristic are
utterances that exhibit a paraooxical or self-unoermining relationship be-
tveen performative ano constative, betveen vhat the, oo ano vhat the,
state. To see vhat is involveo in the literar, sphere, let us consioer a brief
poem b, Robert Irost :q6q: 6.,.
2
The Secret Sits
We oance rouno in a ring ano suppose,
But the Secret sits in the mioole ano knovs.
.. Iirst publisheo unoer the title Ring Arouno in Poetry, in :q6, this poem acquireo its
oenitive title in A Witness Tree Irost :q.,.
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 511
This poem oepenos on the opposition betveen supposing ano knoving. To
explore vhat attituoe the poem takes to this opposition, vhat values it at-
taches to its opposing terms, ve might ask vhether the poem itself is in
the mooe of supposing or of knoving. Does the poem suppose, like ve
vho oance rouno, or ooes it knov, like the secret` We might imagine that
as a proouct of the human imagination, the poem voulo be an example
of supposing, a case of oancing arouno, but its gnomic, proverbial char-
acter, ano its conoent oeclaration that the secret knovs, makes it seem
ver, knoving inoeeo. So ve cant be sure. But vhat ooes the poem shov
us about knoving` Well, the secret, vhich is something that one knovs or
ooes not knovthus, an object of knovinghere becomes b, meton,m,
the subject of knoving, what knows rather than vhat is or is not knovn. B,
capitalizing ano personif,ing the entit,, Secret, the poem performs a rhe-
torical operation that promotes the object of knovleoge to the position of
subject; it presents knoving as something proouceo b, a rhetorical suppo-
sition, vhich personies this object ano makes it a subject, a character in
this little orama. The secret vho knovs is proouceo b, an act of supposing,
vhich moves the secret from the place of the object to the place of the sub-
ject. The poemthus foregrounos the oepenoenc, of its constative assertion,
that the secret knovs, on a performative supposing that creates the subject
supposeo to knov. A remarkable involution for an apparentl, simple cou-
pletbut such are the intricacies of the struggle betveen performative ano
constative.
In oe Mans essa,s, vhether on Nietzsche, Rousseau, or Froust, the con-
stative is the inescapable claim of language to transparenc,, to represent
things as the, are, to name things that are alreao, there sometimes he
substitutes cognitive for constative to emphasize the epistemological
stakes,; ano the performative for oe Man is the rhetorical operations, the
acts of language, that unoermine this claim b, imposing linguistic cate-
gories, organizing the vorlo rather than simpl, representing vhat is. In
Nietzsche, he vrites, the critique of metaph,sics is structureo as an apo-
ria betveen performative ano constative language oe Man :qq: ::,. The
aporia, the impasse of an unoecioable oscillation, as vhen the chicken
oepenos upon the egg but the egg oepenos on the chicken, here entails that
the onl, va, to claim that language functions performativel, to shape the
vorlo is to oo so through a constative, such as Language shapes the vorlo;
but on the other hano, there is no va, to claim the constative transpar-
enc, of language except b, a speech act. The propositions that perform the
illocutionar, act of stating necessaril, claim to oo nothing but merel, ois-
pla, things as the, are; ,et if ,ou vant to shovthe contrar,that claims to
represent things as the, are in fact impose their categories on the vorlo
512 Poetics Today 21:3
,ou have no va, to oo this except through claims about vhat is or is not the
case. So vhen Nietzsche claims that truth is but a moving arm, of meta-
phors ano meton,mies vhose metaphoricit, has been forgotten, he can
onl, oo this in statements that seem to claim to be true. More generall,,
the claim that oeclarations are acts of language that suppose ano impose
the categories rather than refer to vhat exists inoepenoentl, of language
cannot avoio recourse to a language of oeclaration. The oeconstruction,
vrites oe Man, states the fallac, of reference in a necessaril, referential
mooe :qq: .o,.The argument that the language of philosophical consta-
tation is in fact performative takes the formof constative statements. Ior oe
Man, then, there is no question of celebrating performativit, in general or the
performativit, of literature in particular. All one can sa, is that literature
is perhaps more likel, than philosoph, to be alert to the unoecioable re-
lation betveen performative ano constative that unoermines philosophical
statement.
Here ve have a case of a concept arising in philosoph,, aoopteo ano
oeepeneo in literar, theor,, ano reapplieo to specicall, philosophical
issues. The relation betveen literature ano philosoph,, as such cases illus-
trate, is b, no means simple.
In the latest moment of this little histor,, there is a singular turn in the for-
tunes of the performative, vith the emergence in feminist theor, ano in ga,
ano lesbian stuoies of vhat is calleo a performative theor, of genoer ano
sexualit,. The ke, gure here is the American philosopher uoith Butler,
vhose books Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity :qqo, ano
Bodies That Matter :qqa, have hao great inuence in the elo of literar,
ano cultural stuoies, especiall, in feminist theor, ano vhat is calleo queer
theor,an avant-garoe of ga, ano lesbian stuoies that takes as its ovn
name ano throvs back at societ, the common insult Queer'
3
Gender Trouble takes issue vith the notion that a feminist politics requires a
notionof feminine ioentit,, of essential features that vomenshare as vomen
ano that give themcommon interests ano goals. Ior Butler, on the contrar,,
the funoamental categories of ioentit, are cultural ano social proouctions,
more likel, to be the result of political cooperation than its conoition of pos-
sibilit,. Gender Trouble ooes not oen, that there are biological oierences
betveen the sexes though it argues that accounts of biological oierence are
cultural projections of sexual ano genoer oierences,; but one can take gen-
oer to be the cultural interpretationof biological oierence. Butler proposes
. Tvo subsequent books, both from :qq, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative ano The
Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection, are likel, to be extremel, important as vell.
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 513
that ve consioer genoer as performative, in the sense that it is not vhat one
is but vhat one ooes. A man is not vhat one is but something one ooes,
a conoition one enacts. Genoer is createo b, ones acts, in the va, that a
promise is createo b, the act of promising. You become a man or a voman
b, repeateo acts, vhich, like Austins performatives, oepeno on social con-
ventions, habitual va,s of ooing something in a culture. ust as there are
regular, sociall, establisheo va,s of promising, making a bet, giving oroers,
ano getting marrieo, so there are sociall, establisheo va,s of being a man
or being a voman.
In Gender Trouble, the ioea that genoer is performative seems to be linkeo
to a notion of theatrical performance. You become a man or voman b,
pla,ing a role. This gave rise to the ioea that Butler vas treating genoer as
something one coulo choose freel, ano leo to charges that she vas slighting
the real veight of genoer ioentities. The performative account of genoer
vas seen as vrongl, linking genoer to a freel, chosen performance.
Bodies That Matter seeks to refute this charge ano rejects the notion, as she
puts it, that genoer is a choice, or that genoer is a role, or that genoer is a
construction that one puts on, as one puts on clothes in the morning, that
there is a one vho is prior to this genoer, a one vho goes into the varorobe
of genoer ano oecioes vith oeliberation vhich genoer it vill be tooa,. This
is a voluntaristic account of genoer vhich presumes a subject, intact, prior
to its genoering. The sense of genoer performativit, that I meant to conve,
is something quite oierent Butler :qqb: .:,.
4
Butler makes tvo claims
here. Iirst, that there is not a subject, alreao, constituteo, prior to genoer,
vho chooses. When one is constituteo as a subject one is alreao, constituteo
as a bo, or girl. As soon as a chilo is spoken to or about, for example, he or
she receives a genoer. There is no one vho takes on a genoer norm. On
the contrar,, this citation of a genoer norm is necessar, in oroer to qualif,
as one, to become a viable one, vhere subject-formation is oepenoent on
the prior operation of legitimating genoer norms ibio.: .,.
The secono issue is that of choice. Butler ibio.: .., vrites, genoer per-
formativit, is not a matter of choosing vhich genoer one vill be tooa,. Fer-
formativit, is a matter of repeating the norms b, vhich one is constituteo:
it is not a raoical fabrication of a genoereo self. It is a compulsor, repetition
of prior ano subjectivating norms, ones vhich cannot be throvn o at vill
but vhich vork, animate ano constrain the genoereo subject, ano vhich
are also the resources from vhich resistance, subversion, oisplacement are
forgeo. Genoer is an obligator, practice, an assignment, sa,, butano this
. This paragraph is repeateo, in somevhat altereo form, in Bodies That Matter Butler
:qqa: x,.
514 Poetics Today 21:3
is important for Butler :qqa: .:,an assignment vhich is never quite
carrieo out accoroing to expectation, vhose aooressee never quite inhabits
the ioeal she is compelleo to approximate. In that gap lie possibilities for
resistance ano change.
Butler ibio., poses the question of the oierence betveen the performing
of genoer norms ano the performative use of language: Are these tvo oif-
ferent senses of performativit, or oo the, converge as mooes of citationalit,
in vhich the compulsor, character of certain social imperatives becomes
subject to a more promising oeregulation` Butler takes care not to ansver
this question oirectl,, but it is the notion of the citation of norms, important
inDerrioas account of the performative, that brings together the performa-
tive utterance ano the genoer performative. The utterance Its a girl' or
Its a bo,' b, vhich a bab, is, in English, velcomeo into the vorlo, is for
Butler less a constative utterance true or false, accoroing to the situation,
than the rst in a long series of performatives that vill create the subject
vhose arrival the, announce. The naming of the girl, she vrites, initiates
the process b, vhich a certain girling is compelleo ibio.: ..,.
B, insisting on the importance of the repetition of obligator, norms
in the proouction of performative eects, Butler ibio.: ., takes up the
mooel of authoritative speech: the utterances of juoges, umpires, ano others
vho oeclare vhat is vhat. Ferformative acts are forms of authoritative
speech: most performatives, for instance, are statements vhich, in the utter-
ing, also perform a certain action ano exercise binoing pover. Implicateo
in a netvork of authorization ano punishment, performatives teno to in-
cluoe legal sentences, baptisms, inaugurations, oeclarations of ovnership,
statements that not onl, perform an action but confer a binoing pover
on the action performeo. These are cases vhere one generall, supposes
that the utterance creates the situation it names because of the authorit, of
the speakerjuoge, umpire, or other authorit,. But Butler insists, rightl,
I think, that, on the contrar,, it is in the repeateo citation of norms, the
application of rules, that the authorit, of a mooe of speaking is generateo.
There is no pover construeo as subject that acts, but onl, a reiterateo act-
ing that is pover in its persistence ano instabilit, ibio.: ..,. Similarl,,
ano here Butler ibio.: ..6, brings a nev oimension to the anal,sis of per-
formative utterance, the force of the insult Queer' comes not from the
intention or authorit, of the speaker, vho is most likel, some fool quite
unknovn to the victim, but from the fact that the shout Queer' repeats
shouteo insults of the past, interpellations, or acts of aooress that proouce
the homosexual object through reiterateo shaming or abjection: Queer'
oerives its force precisel, through the repeateo invocation b, vhich a so-
cial bono among homophobic communities is formeo through time. The
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 515
interpellation echoes past interpellations, ano binos the speakers, as if the,
spoke in unison across time. In this sense it is alva,s an imaginar, chorus
that taunts queer' Not the repetition itself but the fact that it is recog-
nizeo as conforming to a mooel, a norm, linkeo vith a histor, of exclusion,
is vhat gives the insult its performative force. Conventional insults such
as nigger' or kike' accumulate, Butler vrites, the force of authorit,
through the repetition or citation of a prior, authoritative set of practices,
speaking as if vith the voice of all the taunts of the past.
Eve Seogvick, in an article entitleo Queer Ferformativit, :qq: ,,
notes the centralit, of the marriage performative in Austin ano suggests a
proouctive shift might occur if one took as ke, examples, not the explicit,
public, or state-sanctioneo proouction of heterosexual ioentit, in the per-
formatives of the marriage ceremon, but rather the innumerable minor
performative acts that shape subjects against their vill, of vhich the mooel
might be the familiar exclamation, Shame on ,ou' This utterance is an
act b, vhich the parent or teacher performativel, confers shame, creating
the situation to vhich the utterance refers, installing the chilo in an ioen-
tit, constituteo in relation to the social norms that are supposeol, being
violateo. Unlike Austins rst-person inoicative performatives, vhich are
oeliberate acts of a speaker vho him- or herself promises, marries, oroers,
or juoges, Shame on ,ou' is a performative that conceals the actor or
agent vho confers shame on the chilo, ano in this it is relateo to insults like
Queer' It oravs its force from the repeateo echo of norms.
But this historical oimension of performatives implies the possibilit, of
oeecting or reoirecting the veight of the past, b, attempting to capture
ano reoeplo, the terms that bear an oppressive signication, as in the aoop-
tion of Queer b, homosexuals themselves, or in the citation of norms of
femininit, in orag performances. Butler insists that ,ou oont become au-
tonomous b, choosing ,our name, for names alva,s carr, historical veight
ano are subject to the uses others vill make of them in the future: ,ou cant
control the terms that ,ou choose to name ,ourselves. But the historical
character of the performative process creates the possibilit, of a political
struggle.
Nov it is obvious that the oistance betveen the beginning ano the provi-
sional, eno of m, stor,betveen Butler ano Austinis ver, great. It is not,
I shoulo emphasize, a oierence betveen philosoph, ano literature. But-
ler is a philosopher vhose books contain reaoings of literar, vorksvhich
ma, contribute to the breaoth of her claimsbut her pol,s,llabic prose
seems more philosophical, less literar, than the extremel, pla,ful vriting
of Austinvho sets asioe the literar, ano the nonserious.
516 Poetics Today 21:3
There is, rst, oierence betveen vhat is at stake for Austin ano for But-
ler. Ior Austin, the concept for the performative, b, helping us to think
about an aspect of language neglecteo b, prior philosophers, starts a pro-
cess vhich he oio not himself live to take ver, far, of rethinking vhat lan-
guage is ano hov it shoulo be stuoieo; for Butler, it is a mooel for think-
ing about crucial social processes vhere a number of matters are at stake:
:, the nature of ioentit, ano hov it is proouceo; ., the functioning of so-
cial norms; , the funoamental problem of vhat tooa, ve call agenc, in
English: hov far ano unoer vhat conoitions can I be a responsible subject
vho chooses m, acts; ano , the relationship betveen the inoivioual ano
social change.
There is also a oierence in the conception of the performative itself.
One might ask vhat it voulo mean for Butlers performatives to be felici-
tous or infelicitous. Obviousl,, she ooes not take as the goal of her perfor-
matives a happ,, successful performing of femininit,, in acts that fulll all
the conoitions of this social ioea. If hers is a theor, that locates success in
the perturbation of genoer norms, that seems a oierent conception of the
performative.
Austin ano Butler seemto have tvo oierent sorts of acts in viev. Austins
examples seemto be singular acts, vhich can be accomplisheo once ano for
all if I meet the conoitions of felicit,. If I amthe umpire, I can, b, oeclaring
that a kick vas gooo, make it a goal. In the performative theor, of genoer,
b, contrast, no act in itself brings something about. I become a man, if at
all, onl, through massive, oail, repetition of conventional proceoures.
In fact, the notion of the speech act itself raises questions about this ois-
tinction betveen singular acts ano iteration. As Derrioa shovs in his reao-
ing of Austin, the iterabilit, that is the conoition of possibilit, of performa-
tives introouces a gap that puts in question a rigorous oistinction betveen
singular events ano repetitions. But this apparent oierence betveen tvo
sorts of acts brings us back to the problemof the nature of the literar, event,
accentuating a oistinction that vas concealeo in the appropriation of the
notion of performative for thinking about literature. On the one hano, the
literar, vork seems to accomplish a singular, specic act. It creates that
realit, vhich is the vork, ano its sentences accomplish something in par-
ticular in that vork. Ior each vork, one can tr, to specif, vhat it ano its
parts accomplish, just as one can tr, to spell out vhat is promiseo in a par-
ticular act of promising. This, one might sa,, is the Austinian version of the
literar, event.
But on the other hano, thinking of Butlers mooel, ve coulo sa, that
a vork succeeos, becomes an event, b, a massive repetition that takes up
norms ano, possibl,, changes things. If a novel happens, it ooes so because,
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 517
in its singularit,, it inspires a passion that gives life to these forms, in acts
of reaoing ano recollection, repeating its inection of the conventions of
the novel ano, perhaps, eecting an alteration in the norms or the forms
through vhich reaoers go on to confront the vorlo. A poem ma, ver, vell
oisappear vithout a trace, but it ma, also trace itself in memories ano give
rise to acts of repetition. Its performativit,, then, is less a singular act ac-
complisheo once ano for all than a repetition that gives life to forms that it
repeats.
This oouble approach ma, help us to reect on the nature of literature
as event. Literature, Derrioa remarks, is :qq.: ,
an institution that consists in transgressing ano transforming, thus in proouc-
ing its constitutional lav; or, to put it better, in prooucing oiscursive forms,
vorks, ano events in vhich the ver, possibilit, of a funoamental constitu-
tion is at least ctionall, contesteo, threateneo, oeconstructeo, presenteo in
its ver, precariousness. Hence, vhile literature shares a certain pover ano a cer-
tain oestin, vith jurisoiction, vith the jurioico-political proouction of institu-
tional founoations, the constitutions of states, funoamental legislation, ano even
the theological-jurioico performatives vhich occur at the beginning of lav, at
a certain point it can onl, exceeo them, interrogate them, ctionalize them:
vith nothing, or almost nothing, in viev, of course, ano b, prooucing events
vhose realit, or ouration is never assureo, but vhich b, that ver, fact are more
thought-provoking, if that still means something.
Butlers mooel helps usalthough this is in no va, her goalto conceive
of this unusual performativit, that interrogates b, repeating founoational
actsin a repetition that can have critical value, as it animates ano alters
forms that it repeats.
The fortunes of the performative are striking in the oisparities among the
various conceptions ano assumptions. Is it, then, a matter of oecioing vho
is right` Of rejecting some approaches as vrongheaoeo or as in fact ois-
cussing something quite oierent from the performative` I think that that
voulo be an unproouctive va, out, above all a va, of avoioing some of the
ke, problems in literar, ano cultural stuoies, for the concept of the perfor-
mative, in the histor, I have outlineo, has the virtue of bringing together
issues that are crucial for the oevelopment of our thinking.
Let me list them summaril,:
Iirst, hov to think about the shaping role of language: oo ve tr, to
limit it to certain specic acts, vhere ve think ve can sa, vith con-
oence vhat it ooes, or oo ve tr, to gauge its broaoer eects, as it
organizes our encounters vith the vorlo`
Secono, hov shoulo ve conceive of the relation, in the cultural realm,
518 Poetics Today 21:3
betveen social conventionsthe constitutive conventions that make
possible social lifeano inoivioual acts` It is tempting, but clearl, too
simple, to imagine that social conventions are like the scener, or back-
grouno against vhich ve oecioe hov to act; the various accounts of
the performative oer more complicateo accounts of the intrication
of norm ano action, vhether presenting conventions as the conoition
of possibilit, of events, as in Austin, or else, as in Butler, seeing action
as an assignment of repetition, vhich ma, nevertheless occasionall,
oeviate fromthe norms. Literature, vhich is supposeo to make it nev
in a space of convention, provioes ,et another case. Grasping this re-
lationship through appropriatel, complex mooels is surel, crucial for
an, trul, pertinent cultural stuoies.
Thiro, hovshoulo one conceive of the relation betveen vhat language
ooes ano vhat it sa,s` This is the basic problem of the performative
the question, ,et to be resolveo, of vhether there can be a harmonious
fusion of ooing ano sa,ing or vhether there is an ineluctable tension
here that governs ano unoermines all textual activit,.
Iinall,, hov, in this postmooern age, shoulo ve think of the event` It
has become commonplace in the Uniteo States, for instance, in this
age of mass meoia, to sa, that vhat happens on television happens
perioo, is a real event. Whether the image corresponos to a realit,
or not, the meoiatic event is a genuine event to be reckoneo vith.
The problematic of the performative can help us to explore in a more
sophisticateo va, the issues that are often cruoel, aooresseo in terms
of the mooern blurring of the bounoaries betveen fact ano ction or
the problemof pseuoo events. Ano the problemof the nature of the lit-
erar, event, of literature as act, because of its obvious complexit,, ma,
help us to avoio the temptation to oversimplif, the problem in other
oomains.
In sum, I think that rather than tr, to restrict or simplif, the performa-
tives oomain b, choosing one strano of reection as the correct one, ve
ought to accentuate ano to pursue the oierences betveen themso as to
increase our chances of grasping the oierent levels ano mooes in vhich
events occur; ano I take this to be a project requiring the cooperation
albeit the inevitabl, contentious cooperationof philosoph, ano litera-
ture, the thinking of philosoph, ano of literar, theor,.
References
Austin, . L.
:q How to Do Things with Words Cambrioge: Harvaro Universit, Fress,.
Culler

The Fortunes of the Performative 519
Butler, uoith
:qqo Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity Nev York: Routleoge,.
:qqa Bodies That Matter Nev York: Routleoge,.
:qqb Criticall, Queer, GLQ :: :..
:qq Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative Nev York: Routleoge,.
:qq The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection Stanforo, CA: Stanforo Universit, Fress,.
Culler, onathan
:q8. On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticismafter StructuralismIthaca, NY: Cornell Universit,
Fress,.
:qq Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction Oxforo: Oxforo Universit, Fress,.
oe Man, Faul
:qq Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust NevHaven,
CT: Yale Universit, Fress,.
Derrioa, acques
:q86 Declarations of Inoepenoence, New Political Science : summer :q86,: :.
:q88 |:q.| Signature Event Context, in Limited Inc, eoiteo b, Geralo Gra, :. Chi-
cago: Northvestern Universit, Fress,.
:qq. This Strange Institution Calleo Literature, interviev vith Derek Attrioge, in Acts
of Literature, eoiteo b, Attrioge, Nev York: Routleoge,.
Irost, Robert
:q. A Witness Tree Nev York: Holt,.
:q6q The Poetry of Robert Frost, eoiteo b, Eovaro Lathem Nev York: Holt, Rinehart,.
o,ce, ames
:qq Ulysses Nev York: Mooern Librar,,.
Fetre,, Sano,
:qqo Speech Acts and Literary Theory Nev York: Routleoge,.
Fratt, Mar, Louise
:q Toward a Speech Act Theory of Literary Discourse Bloomington: Inoiana Universit, Fress,.
Seogvick, Eve
:qq Queer Ferformativit,, GLQ :: ::6.