To Speak in One's Own Voice is to Speak in Clichhs: Gustave Flaubert's Radical Criticism of Democratic Opinion-Formation

Democracy embraces the spontaneous presentation of the individual’s voice. Be it Rousseau’s inward self, Tocqueville’s grassroots citizen, Habermas’s deliberating citizen, or Foucault’s self of “fearless speech,” democratic ideals regard the individual’s speaking in her own voice as a central element. However, rarely discussed is the feasibility of this ideal. Are we not speaking in the inauthentic voice of others rather than in our authentic voices? Posing this question, my paper explicates the fundamental problem in the democratic practice of our opinion-presentation. While many thinkers are worried about citizens’ conformism, their worries do not stop them from embracing the ideal of authentic voice. This is because they detect the sources of the problem in exogenous factors such as oppression and distorted communication. Against this ideal, I show that our speaking in the voice of others is the endogenous problem: we spontaneously re-present others when we think we present ourselves. To reveal this endogeneity, my paper draws upon the insight of critic of democracy, Gustave Flaubert. His writings show how we, under democracy, speak cliches, i.e. spontaneously speak in the voice of others. My exploration reveals Flaubert as one of the most radical critics of democracy. Moreover, being “radical,” he is not an anti-democrat as is usually seen. Drawing upon his insight, my paper offers an alternative defense of democracy that acknowledges our making cliches.