Authenticity is a difficult word - as we've seen, lots of
interpretations!
'We know that people invent personal histories and present them as
true...' makes me wonder if the question is about 'truth' rather than
'authenticity' though 'truth' is difficult too. Maybe the question is
'what makes a personal history believable to certain individuals?'
I think there are at least three elements - the message creator (words,
visuals, style), the receiver (their perception of what they receive)
and the quality of connection between them.
The receiver's perception depends on complex factors such as
experiences, values, beliefs etc...and these may change over time so
that what is believable today is not believable in ten years and vice
versa.
I could write convincingly about the death of my pet dog, when I was a
child...but it's not true, I never had a pet dog. How would you know if
it's true? I don't think you can. But some things might have a bearing.
I write authoritatively - you are more likely to believe me. You had a
dog that died - you identify with what I've written and it touches you
deeply. All these factors push you to believe a lie, although a well
constructed one.
Another example. Think about how con artists work - they are believable
because people need to believe. 'Miracle cure' or 'make money fast' are
all known to hook people into believing a lie.
A further thought - we don't all take the same thing from the same
source. I'm thinking about poetry, where four of us agree: 'Wow,
fantastic, it touched me deeply.' When we examine the meaning we took
from the poem, we find we all have a different take.
I'm left concluding there is no easy way to judge the 'truth' of what we
receive when we believe it to be true - except perhaps by getting the
thumb screws and bright lights on the creator!
Di
|