Mercedes Rivero

One of major branches of philosophical research is the self, which, in particular, tries to find out how a subject creates her identity. In this work, I will just focus on two kinds of identity approaches: the narrative self-concept and the dramatic self-concept. I will argue that, although the Narrative identity approach especially helpful for the subject being able to give continuity to her actions, the Dramatic identity is which achieves to give meaning to the subject’s actions as soon as they are happened, and also to herself. Hence, although both approaches might be useful for the self-concept of a subject because maintain a bidirectional relationship, it is the Dramatic identity theory which manages to resolve certain problems facing Narrative identity theory. To explain this, I will claim that agent is dramatized herself by acting in different situations. Following Erving Goffman and J. David Velleman, what it is posed in this essay is that the subject develops a Dramatic identity, in a similar way to the performer who represents her character, when she enacts herself in concrete contexts. That is, the agent dramatizes herself in a situation in a manner similar as an actor represents a character on stage. Consequently, my main goal is to answer to how an agent makes her identity by acting in social contexts.

Este artículo trata de investigar si es posible que se produzca una emoción partiendo solo de su expresión, y no de un estímulo. Para ello se analizarán algunos trabajos de autores como William James, Francisco Alcayde y Vilar o la psicóloga chilena Susana Bloch. Todos ellos han tratado de demostrar que la expresión de una emoción puede conducir al sujeto a experimentarla. Sin embargo, estas tesis cometen el error de abolir el pensamiento del sujeto, otorgándole una especial importancia a la parte física que diferencian de la que podríamos llamar la parte mental. This article intends to investigate whether an emotion can be born from their expression, and not of an external stimulus. For this reason, I will analyze some works of authors such as William James, Francisco Alcayde and Vilar and Susana Bloch. All of them have tried to show that the expression of an emotion leads a person to experience that emotion. However, these theories are not correct because they invalidate the thinking of the self, and they give special importance to the physical part which they distinguish from what we might call the mental part

Recent works on narrative self-concept still do not pay enough attention to how a person’s actions influence her narration. Narrative structures may enable the subject to give meaning and continuity over time to her experience. But also, a person’s behavior can make sense of her self-concept. From this perspective, the Narrative Identity Theory might be insufficient for addressing the challenge of making sense of the subject’s actions during the interaction itself. The Dramatic Identity Theory's proposal can complement the Narrative Theory on such points. Accordingly, this work will explore the relationship between these two theories in order to explain how the Dramatic Identity Theory can solve these problems, with a proposal based on the analogy between a theater actor’s performance and the subject's actions.

The identity and the agency of the subject have been recurrent topics in the history of the theatre and of philosophy. Both disciplines pursue similar objectives that have guided their research along analogous paths. This assay is intended to examine the idea of the agent subject that David Velleman suggests, and which uses as an example the work carried out by Lee Strasberg at the Actors Studio. In addition, it studies Narrative Identity through the thesis of Peter Goldie and presents its relationship with -what could be called- Acting or Dramatic Identity. The fundamental intention is to discover the way in which the subject acts to build his identity, and try to make sense of his actions.