Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Performativity is a neologism used to describe how speech, gesture, and other social actions create identity by means of their performance. This identity is not a fixed reality occurring only within oneself, but is also created and made real by means of the social gesture. Performativity asserts that identity is not the source of secondary actions and gestures, but rather actions and gestures are the source of identity. Similarly, musicologists interested in performativity challenge the notion that the locus of musical meaning is in the work. The “meaning” of a musical event is found in this social interaction, and all aspects of the music-making process (e.g., composition, performance, and listening) are performative acts.

Before the advent of performance studies as a field of research, the issue of performance was secondary (or nonexistent) for historical musicologists. The focus of study was the autonomous artwork, represented not in performance, but rather by a score as “text.” A single performance of a work might be noteworthy because of its historical significance (e.g., a premiere), but typically performance was not the focus of the study. The performance practice movement of the 1970s and 1980s emphasized even more specifically how to interpret this repertoire with historical accuracy, but the focus remained firmly on the music as text.

Since the 1980s, some ethnomusicologists and musicologists have turned to an analytical approach informed by their colleagues in performance studies that eschews the score/performance dyad in favor of a view that the production and consumption of music are both performative acts. These scholars hope to discover how music functions in society, as opposed to viewing music as autonomous from its social context. As the term performative gained cachet in the 1990s, some scholars used the term loosely to describe almost any aspect of their work that considered performance, but failed to understand that the field of performance studies assumes a radically different analytical philosophy.

Origin of the Term in Linguistic Theory

The term originates in linguistic theory with J. L. Austin, who described in his 1955 Harvard lectures certain phrases that cannot be statements because they do not describe anything and cannot be evaluated as either true or false. In linguistics, performatives do not describe an action; to say a performative statement is to make it so. Examples include “I promise …,” “I christen …,” “I apologize …,” or “I dare you …” These statements cannot be declared true or false, although it is possible to critique the performative statement or to doubt the sincerity of the utterance. For Austin, performativity is about how language can create or alter reality, instead of just describing it.

Austin limited the scope of performative utterances to these clear linguistic examples, but other scholars, such as Jacques Derrida and Judith Butler, expanded the concept to include discourse that creates or changes reality, and particularly discourse that creates or shapes identity. In contrast to an essentialist philosophy or to the Cartesian “I think therefore I am” assumption of a mind/body dichotomy, those who undertake performative studies claim that identity is created through embodied performance, and not through a disembodied, static, “given” quiddity.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading