When you hear the term “personhood” what thoughts, descriptions, or associations immediately pop into your head? And based on this initial thinking, how might the overarching idea surrounding this word play a role in the social, economic, and legal aspects of society and furthermore, to what or whom could this philosophy represent or become attached to?
Take a moment to look at the two images below and decide which one is most likely connected to the ideals of “personhood” in today’s world.
Even without an understanding of what “personhood” can really mean, it may seem obvious to associate it with the image on the right, quite simply because it depicts a “person” versus the image on the left which displays the logo for a corporation. However, after digging deep into the work of Bose and Lyons in addition to Chaudhuri’s article on the “New Indian,” it becomes evident that the idea of “personhood” is being symbolized by both of the images above, just in different ways.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The reading titled, Toward a Critical Corporate Studies, written by Bose and Lyons focuses on the notion that the idea of “personhood” can accompany or refer to not only the idea of a person, but also can be assigned to non-human entities such as a corporation which they thoroughly examine. As result of the 1886 Supreme Court case, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, corporations in the United States became legally recognized as persons for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment, which had originally been intended to apply to freed slaves (Bose & Lyons, 17). In other words, a corporation is defined today as “an artificial person or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state” (Bose & Lyons, 17). This legal fiction of corporate personhood assigned to corporations provides them with the ability to exercise the same rights as an individual in society, even though a corporation is clearly non-human and not focused solely on one person since it is composed of several individuals working together. Some of these rights include the right to sue and be sued, to make contracts, and to hold property in a common name. This identification, feeling of connection or”proof” of self (Thomas-Williams),of being acknowledged as an individual entity is further strengthened by the fact that “this corporate persona is “distinct from the individual” shareholders “who comprise it,” and has its own unique “personality and existence” “(Bose & Lyons, 17).
So considering the fact that corporations in America today are legally assigned the identity of an individual and therefore, benefit from the accompanying rights, shouldn’t it be plausible to assume that corporations are held under the same moral expectations and legal regulations as individuals or persons in society? Although the answer should probably be yes, this is certainly not the case.
In Bose’s essay, “General Electric, Corporate Personhood, and the Emergence of the Professional Manager,” she traces the journey of corporations from the very beginning when they first were granted the same rights as individuals up until the present in which they are thriving in society and have achieved a position of prominence and success, and what she discovers is quite noteworthy. “These changes signal an erosion in the corporation’s sense responsibility to their workers and the communities housing their operations. Whereas earlier GE’s policies had been compatible with the New Deal and social welfare, toward the end of the twentieth century these policies had given way to a vampirish hunger for profits at the expense at the expense of public interests” (Bose & Lyons, 20). Her findings evidently suggest a weakening in the social contract and general morals of corporations throughout the years.
In the film, The Corporation, the “personality” and humanly traits that are represented through the behaviors, actions, and decisions of corporations are analyzed and consequently, compared to that of a psychopath.
For example, many individuals who receive the diagnosis of this mental disorder fail to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors and often are incapable of experiencing any form of guilt after committing an illegal or frowned upon act. Although this description is not true of all corporations which exist in the world today, it may possibly sum up a good amount of them. For example, in the work titled, No Logo, Naomi Klein explains the immoral and illegal acts committed by corporations, such as Reebok, and their obvious lack of remorse or guilt they feel since they often continue to exhibit illegal behaviors time and time again. In addition to these deviant acts and qualities associated with corporations, Klein also points out that the legal system does not necessarily hold these “individuals” accountable for their actions as it does for actual humans who commit similar or equivalent crimes. And when they are held accountable, the consequences of the illegal actions are not felt by one individual but rather all of the people working within the corporation and this diffusion of punishment may play a role in the lack of guilt experienced and the tendency to commit an illegal act in the future.
As result, how is this “corporate personhood” or subjectivity which underlies these thriving companies actually existent within our societies today? Not only do corporations possess some components which individuals do not, such as immortality, but many are unable to fulfill their moral and legal roles and expectations as “individuals” in society. In addition, their deviance is often ignored or looked past by the legal system, which in turn, further promotes and contributes to the changes that corporations as individuals have experienced from 1886 until today.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
In Gender and Advertisements: The Rhetoric of Globalisation, Maitrayee Chaudhuri explains a different way to understand the term “personhood.” Aside from the notion that “personhood” can be assigned to non-human entities, such as corporations, Chaudhuri provides thorough evidence and examples of how the term can apply to a type of person and define the main characteristics and qualities surrounding that ideal persona. The main focus of the work centers around the ideals and associated attitudes or perceptions of the “New Indian” which represents an ideological shift in India created through the global economy of today. This personhood of the “New Indian” symbolizes the normalized ideal person and lifestyle that emerged after India experienced liberalization and old ways of living and simply being, were replaced with new ones. This modern way of being is characterized in a universal way as a “national culture” because the individuals living are no longer constrained by the divisions of society as they once were…they are much more free in a sense. In other words, they are cosmopolitan which can mean not belonging to one place which asserts a global connotation and allows agency within consumer citizenship. This “New Indian” represents a world filled with fashion, material, upward mobility, power, and success and partaking in this new type of lifestyle can enable one to achieve a higher level and status of respectability within society.
It can be concluded that this new type of person of the time remains an ungendered ideal since it is not an actual person, but merely a construction of subjectivity, and many of the qualities and overall vibes associated with it apply to both males and females. However, it is possible to think in terms of gender in order to understand how the lives of females and males were transformed as result of this new desire, or a want/wish for something (Thomas-Williams) to become the “New Indian.” As Chaudhuri exclaims, “if I were asked to describe the “New Indian” that adverts depict today, I would identify a typical corporate sector executive, an upwardly mobile professional who travels a great deal, works hard, and unwinds at weekends and holidays. This, I contend, would hold true for both men and women, with the difference that images of a traditional woman homemaker coexist with adverts of female high achievers, while for men images of high achievers are always at the forefront” (Chaudhuri, 375-6). So, the “New Indian” in regards to females is not only associated with the possibility of success and professionalism in the public sphere, but also the duties and expressive characteristics commonly linked to femininity, in the private sphere. For men, one of the key points worth noting is the choice they have as a consumer and the present desire and societal expectation for them to distance themselves from being a “native slob” and rather embrace their ability to become fit and attractive. The desire of a male to dress nice present himself in a polished manner does not contend that he is any less masculine than he was before the “New Indian” ideal came along.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The different research and work focusing on the understandings of “personhood” have presented some similarities and differences in relation to one another. Both explanations of the term have provided evidence that it is only an ideal attached to an entity, or a type of person. It is not real and is not literally embodied. Furthermore, both personhood in regards to the “New Indian” and corporate personhood remain basically ungendered terms since they are not actual physical beings. However, as previously discussed, it is helpful to understand the “New Indian” through the analysis of the how the genders evolved. In conclusion, the term personhood is one that can be explained in several different ways and attached to numerous different entities and through my exploration and analysis, I have learned so much about how personhood plays a part in society today across all aspects of life.
Citations:
The Corporation
Bose and Lyons – “Toward a Critical Corporate Studies,” by Purnima Bose and Laura E. Lyons in (ed.) Purnima Bose and Laura E. Lyons, Cultural Critique and the Global Corporation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010.
Klein, Naomi. No Logo, London: HarperCollins
Chaudhuri, Maitrayee, “Gender and Advertisements: The Rhetoric of Globalisation,” by Maitrayee, Women’s Studies International Forum, Vol. 24, No. ¾ p 373-385, 2001.
Thomas-Williams, Critical Terms in Gender Studies, accessed January 27, 2011: http://g205atiu.wordpress.com/critical-terms/
lg3088 