Kara Ireland
ENGL 2145
Going “Past” Identity in The Likeness
Identity is a multifaceted concept comprised of internal and external factors. When a person can replicate one’s appearance, mannerisms, and personality, it lends suspicion towards the integrity of identity. This much was explored in Tana French’s The Likeness, where the concept of identity is proven to be flexible. Regarding the impersonation of Lexie Madison, Cassie’s integration into the Whitethorn House was made possible due to the deprivation of the most integral part of one’s identity: their past. Identity in The Likeness is a malleable concept that can be mostly attributed to memory because it features impersonation by means of memorizing one’s characteristics. In this paper, I will argue that authentic impersonation does not exist due to the misalignment of one’s experiences and the intimacies of one’s personality.
Our identities are a compilation of stories that we choose to tell. In The Likeness, French introduces a situation in which one is not permitted to tell their stories. By neglecting to understand the contributions towards the current identity, they are doing themselves a disservice in building a fraudulent friendship. Cassie Maddox impersonates someone who is impersonating a variation of herself. In such a tricky situation, the lines of identity blur. Everything that is native to her being, “her routine, her moods, her relationships” along with files of her “known associates” are offered for her to memorize (French 81). Initially thinking that the mastery of this memorized slate was enough to portray another identity, it was falsified due to the ignorance of Lexie’s past. Without proper insight on everything that contributed to her present character, she could not last in her deception. Cassie was aware of this and had anxiety regarding every intrinsic thing she couldn’t possibly have known. She had anxiety around what talents Lexie may have possessed as she wondered “if Lexie had had two left feet [...] if she hadn’t had two left feet and [her] clumsiness gave [her] away” (French 174). A talent like dancing cannot be replicated authentically; Lexie could have been classically trained but Cassie would not have known that by studying records from her phone or from photos. Though she had gotten comfortable, she relapsed because “it hadn’t occurred to [her] that Lexie might have food quirks” (French 242). Cassie would not know about Lexie’s aversion to onions because Lexie never expressed her distaste for food in the media that Cassie has studied. Even casual, nonconfrontational conversation caused her to hiccup, as she should’ve known the frequency of her smoking habit when Daniel mentioned that “[she] didn’t usually take [her] cigarettes on [her] walk” (French 235). No one truly documents their routine so staunchly; Lexie would have left no framework around how or when she smoked, only the mere fact that she once did.
The perceptions of others conflate the innermost components of identity with externalities. Shields claims that memory is “the understanding of the world we have our hearts set on [...] however removed it may be from reality” (32). Borrowing from that notion, identity can also be expressed as the world’s understanding of us, however removed it may be from reality. In the words of researchers Rathbone and Steel, there is a natural tendency for people to “generate positive, rather than negative, information about themselves when prompted to describe their identities” (474). Due to this, there is a level of artificiality present in both our own as well as others’ interpretations of ourselves. The perception of others lies in the last impression we remember of them, which is often skewed by opinion rather than the innate qualities of the person. Because everyone within the Whitethorn House is curating identities from one central point, forward, their perception of each other will be forever at a disadvantage. When Rafe, Abby, Daniel, and Justin are confronted with Cassie’s presence, it is not off-kilter because of the fragmented way they know Lexie. A portion of Lexie’s supposed identity had been altered, as far as her mannerisms and behavior, due to her accident – which made it easy for Cassie to learn the role she was assuming with some leeway.
One cannot effectively be a part of someone else’s present or future without first understanding their past. Though no one will ever fully know everything about a person, there is a way to get the most optimal, rounded assessment of someone; By delving into their past, sharing stories, and acknowledging the previous selves before the self one is currently knowing, one has valid insight into a portion of the other’s identity. Because Cassie adapted extensively around the mould that is Lexie Madison, the only thing that truly differentiates Cassie from Lexie is their stores of memory. The difference lies in their childhoods, relationships, interests – all of which is likened to memory. If one can merely study a checklist to implicitly impersonate someone, even fooling their closest counterparts, memory must be an integral part of identity. Rathbone and Steel are in agreeance stating that there is a “bidirectional link” between memory and one’s sense of self (474). Daniel vehemently rejects this, which raises questions regarding his peculiar character. While most healthy people’s identity is an equal amount of internal and external forces, Daniel’s is almost exclusively external. He resonates most with the group identity, that of the Whitethorn House. Regarding Daniel, there is hardly a “self,” only “other.”
In fact, Daniel deprives himself and his friends of part of their identities with his adamancy about “no pasts” (French 184). Cassie has demonstrated how easy it is to memorize a character index, but her disadvantage was that she had no parameters for the past (or multiple pasts, rather) that Lexie had created for herself. Because of this missing information, her integration was flawed and everyone registered it, “just as you would sense something amiss if your partner were replaced by his identical twin” (French 332). This quote from Daniel expands on the intimacies of one’s personality, regarding minute identifiers about a person. Regarding their twin studies, Markovitch et al. declares that “environmental components influence identity development” (2094). By subtly controlling the environment within Whitethorn House by offering them shared ownership, Daniel was keener on developing their own, separate, house identity. The most central self-image stems from “salient autobiographical memories” and by depriving the others of speaking of their experiences, Daniel deprives them of genuinely understanding one another (Rathbone & Steel 474). Considering that they never had a grounded perception of each other initially, it is easier to believe how Cassie impersonated Lexie so effectively and why they could not differentiate between them.
Daniel prefers unity and configures a space where he can control the identity of his friend group. “Barricade” and “impenetrable” are the descriptors for the group, functioning as a single unit – a wall, an identity – of their own (French 155). A parallel relationship exists between “negative memories and negative images of the self,” and it can succumb to a cycle of reinforcing negative views about the self (Rathbone & Steel 475). Rafe admitted that Daniel was “a full on freak show,” and it can be generally assumed that he wasn’t the first to denounce him like that (French 423). That kind of widespread opinion can develop an inferiority complex. Stone denotes that “the more his inferiority feeling is pushing for compensation, the tighter he will hang onto his plan,” which sheds light on why he ultimately died for the sake of protecting his newfound house identity (77). If Daniel’s previous identity was insufficient, it makes sense why he clings so tightly to those within the Whitethorn House; It offers him a new outlet, a rebirth of sorts.
With the rejection of pasts, Daniel is able to manufacture a more desirable identity of his own. His dire need to protect the interest of his joint identity with the Whitethorn House provokes him to trap the others within his fantasy. Daniel ensnares them with the proposition of joint ownership of the house. He imposes an ominous house conformity over his friends as another means to delineate this group identity alongside him. Daniel exhibits his unhealthy attachment by saying “all I ever wanted ... was here in this house” (French 424). This quote asserts how detrimental it can be to place most of your identity outside of the self. Rafe comes to the realization that “[they’d] have been OK without [Daniel] ... but he wouldn’t have been OK without [them]” (French 423). With this admission, Rafe simultaneously acknowledges their participation in his deranged group identity by dismantling it and viewing them each as a separate entity – as separate identities – once more. The prospect of their future lives reshapes his willingness towards the assembled identity Daniel is trying to cultivate because the rest of their identities survived with the “self”, though it functioned with the “other.”
Internally, identity is made mostly of one’s beliefs, morality, interests, relationships, et cetera. Nationalism falls under beliefs, which provide a specific lens to consider oneself through. Ethnocentrism functions under a certain framework of beliefs. Naylor’s character offers insight towards how one’s chauvinism suits identity. Well aware of his country’s history, Naylor has residual deep-seeded hatred towards those in the Whitethorn House. Striessnig and Lutz suggests that this is a symptom of “identity also [reflecting] the emotional attachment of citizens to a political system” (307). Naylor is the anomaly, as most within Glenskehy generally feel that “identity need not be associated with a decline in specific national and regional identities” (Striessnig and Lutz, 307).
Sam ventured to say that upon learning the source of Naylor’s aggressions, “he’s looking more and more like a suspect” (French 261). As a result of his nationalist attitudes, Naylor now fits the identity of the person they are looking for. Beyond the relative physical description and the matching crime, his beliefs and motives are able to identify him further upon principle. Passions and convictions are as much a part of identity as the concrete evidence we present on a daily basis.
The charged atmosphere around Whitethorn House denotes the distinct separation from their “West Brit” status and being Irish, product of a long-standing hostile history (French 267). Abby is cognizant of the animosity surrounding her and the Whitethorn House, knowing that “they don’t like [them]” (French 221). Naylor’s incident was not the first hostile infringement they’d encountered; He was merely their most frequent offender. Moran endorses that in order to understand Irish nationalism, one must do so in a British imperial context – acknowledging their confrontation of the legacy of colonial rule and anti-Irish sentiments (20). Naylor’s malice towards the Whitethorn House is born out of applied prejudices towards undeserving targets. This inferiority complex of Naylor’s is exploited with Daniel’s mentioning of “a touch of the horsewhip” to draw him out of hiding (French 249). Recalling the history of his people ignited his vitriol towards the Whitethorn House. Everyone within Whitethorn House is aware of their favored history and culture, though they may not have resonated with it. The detachment prompts Abby to say “I’m getting really, really sick of your colonial attitude” to Rafe, who, in his anger, resorts to the very prejudice Naylor accused them of (French 221).
Identity is not a fixed entity, but one that is everchanging; It is a conglomerate muse, compounding the new experiences one acquires every day. Consuming new memories of people, new hobbies or interests, or new politics works to mould it. Without the concrete essence or the elasticity of memory, one would not truly know themselves as they are, but only as they have once been. The Likeness exemplifies this nature by introducing characters without a sound sense of identity within themselves or their friends. French has proposed the notion that identity hardly belongs to the self, but it serves as a comfort system for the other. However, one’s past is the impermeable factor in identity, the only part that belongs solely to oneself and that is entirely individual.
Works Cited
French, Tana. The Likeness. The Penguin Group, 2008.
Markovitch, Noam, et al. “Identity Exploration and Commitment in Early Adolescence: Genetic and Environmental Contributions.” American Psychological Association Developmental Psychology, Vol 53, No. 11, p. 2092-2102.
Moran, Sean F. “The Ideal Irish Male and The New Irish Nation-State.” Irish Literary Supplement, p. 20.
Rathbone, Clare, and Craig Steel. “Autobiographical Memory Distributions for Negative Self-Images: Memories are Organized Around Negative as well as Positive Aspects of Identity.” Memory, Vol 23, No. 4, p. 473-486.
Shields, David. “Memory.” A Journal of Literature and Art, No 46, 2009, p. 32-36.
Stone, Mark. “The Golden Complex.” The Journal of Individual Psychology, Vol 70, No. 1, Spring 2014, p. 77-85.
Striessnig, Erich, and Wolfgang Lutz. “Demographic Strengthening of European Identity.” Population and Development Review, Vol 42, No. 2, June 2016, p. 304-311.