Simone de Beauvoir’s Philosophy of Individuation: The Problem of The Second Sex by Laura Hengehold

Abstract

Reviewed by: Simone de Beauvoir’s Philosophy of Individuation: The Problem of The Second Sex by Laura Hengehold Rose Trappes (bio) Laura Hengehold, Simone de Beauvoir’s Philosophy of Individuation: The Problem of The Second Sex Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017, 256 pp. isbn 978-1-4744-1887-4 “This book began with something like a gamble. What would happen if we read The Second Sex as an exercise in the creation of concepts, as Deleuze defined philosophy?” (199) Laura Hengehold’s daring experiment in Simone de Beauvoir’s Philosophy of Individuation reinvigorates de Beauvoir as a feminist philosopher of individuation. The book’s major contribution is the application of a Deleuzian framework of problems, concepts, and conceptual personae. This approach enables Hengehold to unify standard Beauvoirian themes in a new key, in which de Beauvoir emerges as a thinker concerned with singular becoming across her entire oeuvre. A venture that ultimately pays off, Hengehold’s book is a rewarding if challenging read. Situating de Beauvoir in an alternative philosophical tradition offers novel insights concerning both de Beauvoir and Deleuze, establishes de Beauvoir as a key source for the philosophy of individuation, and provides ample material for further research situated between Deleuzian and phenomenological feminism. Throughout the book Hengehold traces Deleuze and de Beauvoir together in a trajectory that calls on Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Edmund Husserl, [End Page 131] Henri Bergson, and Gilbert Simondon, amongst others, all thinkers in one way or another of individuality, sense, and becoming. Resituating de Beauvoir in this tradition, rather than the standard phenomenological one, is enlightening for those with sufficient background knowledge—though in this respect it is quite demanding—and provides historical support for Hengehold’s reading of de Beauvoir as a philosopher of individuation. The Deleuzian structure of problems, concepts, and conceptual personae proves to be an illuminating framework for understanding de Beauvoir’s work in a unified way. In What Is Philosophy? and other works, Deleuze (with long-time co-author Félix Guattari) describes philosophical work as that of developing concepts that are related to certain problems, which they bring to light. Hengehold convincingly argues that de Beauvoir was always concerned with the broad problematic of individuation, the difficulty of becoming as a singular being that is nevertheless dependent on others and embedded in a potentially restrictive society. This broader problematic situates and explains de Beauvoir’s introduction of the specific problem of what Hengehold calls “sexist sense,” the way women’s singular becoming is blocked by sexist habits in society. The details that result from the Deleuzian reading of de Beauvoir are largely the same as standard feminist and phenomenological readings, with which Hengehold maintains a steady dialogue. The problems of individuation and sexist sense encompass key Beauvoirian themes such as the shaping of experience by sexist society and the difficulty of maintaining ethical relationships. Core Beauvoirian concepts such as transcendence, ambiguity, and reciprocity feature prominently, situated in the Deleuzian framework as reactions to and implicated in the problem of sexist sense and the broader problematic of individuation. Hengehold also responds to some standard and important criticisms of de Beauvoir’s apparent masculinism, anti-maternalism, and cultural universalism. Here too her responses largely agree with those in the previous literature. In addition, reading de Beauvoir’s philosophy, fiction, and life writings together to develop philosophical ref lections has significant precedent (e.g., Kruks 2012; Vintges 2017). Hengehold’s specific Deleuzian twist is to take the characters in de Beauvoir’s fiction and life writing as “conceptual personae” who exemplify the problem-concept structure and connect it to the readers’ own singular becoming. She concludes, in line with earlier studies, that de Beauvoir’s fiction and life writing demonstrate how sexist society presents barriers for women’s development of singular subjectivity, and how individuation requires transcendence in and through maintaining reciprocal relationships and acknowledging ambiguity. The primary advantage of Hengehold’s Deleuzian approach is the way it provides unity and clarity to de Beauvoir’s oeuvre, drawing commonly recognized Beauvoirian themes together into the conceptual scheme of individuation. [End Page 132] The focus on individuation also delivers some novel and significant insights. For instance, discussing the role of others in...