"We Are Each Other’s Author": The Fake Construction Of Self Identity In Counterlife

Counterlife, a novel written by American famous contemporary writer Philip Roth,is about a story in which Nathan, a Jewish American writer, and his brother, Henry fail intheir attempt to construct their identities through their respective writing and reading.Their attempt shows that under the circumstance of the unchanged racial discriminationpolicy in America, any identity construction through the building of personal text on thebasis of free will and individual desire is unreliable and the pleasure gained by textualconstruction will finally be stuck in the loss of self identity and desperation.Borrowing Roland Barthes’ readerly text, writerly text and intertextuality, the paperscrutinizes that Nathan write his personal text with the help of the authorial violence,ensuring its meaning and forcing it to his readers to build and enhance his self identity.As his reader, Henry is unwilling to accept Nathan text so he breaks the textual meaninginto pieces through his reading. During their writing and reading, meaning multiplying,the readerly text is transferring to the writerly text. In the process of the production oftextual meaning, their texts are inevitably connected with other texts. The intertwinedtexts form intertextuality and the meaning of the intertextuality is obviously out of theircontrol. Drifting and drowned in the world filled with texts, their personal texts becomeunreal and the building of self identities becomes a fake construction.Nathan, the hero in the novel, writes his and his brother’s story with authorialviolence, forcing things encountered by him upon others to form his personal text,dominating others. He gives his text the only meaning, in his opinion, a way to build hisself identity. His death suddenly cuts the connection between him and his text, whichloses its interpreter. Seizing the opportunity, Henry begins to distort Nathan’s text,participating in the production of textual meaning. Henry’s participation makes the onlymeaning impossible, the readerly text sliding on its way to the writerly text. Themultiplication of the textual meaning makes the individual identity lose its uniquenessand author.Nathan, as the writer, obviously has close connection with his text for he provideshis text with a starting point in meaning production. On the contrary, Henry and Maria,Nathan’s mistress, as Nathan’s readers, refuses to accept Nathan’s meaning without doubt.Through their reading, they start to change his text and the textual meaning is no longerunique. Nathan and his readers are the producers when the self identity is floating withoutconstancy. Henry and Maria, based on their reading, make new text out of Nathan’s and in turn Nathan, now being a reader, interprets their text with his reading. Thetransmission of their respective identities and their respective writing and readingmultiply the textual meaning so that the transmission from the readerly text to thewriterly text is realized. And the construction of self identities is proven to be not apersonal activity, but a collective one.Human beings and texts are interdependent. The texts representing self identities areimpossible to exclude other texts. After becoming the writerly text, personal texts ischanging since their meaning is not fixed. Nathan and Henry, as Jewish Americans, nomatter recognizes or defies their Jewish identities, are unavoidable to link with theidentities. The historical, social and cultural texts concerning Jewish culture are closelyrelated with them, those intertwined texts forming intertextuality. Non-self texts invadeinto the personal text, making the personal texts shake off the shackles placed by theircreators, becoming the result of intertextual functions. The personal text becomesnon-self. The statement “we are each other’s authors” reflects the heterogeneity andintertextuality of the personal texts. In such a way, the construction of self identitybecomes a fake one.The novel, Counterlife, shows that as Jewish American Nathan and Henry’sidentities with its sense of uncertainty and drifting are directly connected with Americanpolitical circumstances and cultural atmosphere, filled with racial discrimination. It isunreliable to build one’s identity through personal writing and rewriting. Theindependence and authority of self construction will eventually be toppled by the functionof intertextuality. The heterogeneity and intertextuality of personal text make the selfconstruction a fake one, which leads to the nihility of self identity and life tragedy.