What is Authenticity?

This week we have wrestled with notions of authenticity in religion. Authenticity is being worthy of acceptance or belief based on, or conforming to fact. In every facet of human life we are forced to perceive authenticity, from music to movies. Religion poses a far more difficult application of authenticity because it is chiefly based in the subjective. More importantly, it’s chiefly based in a belief system that reaffirms the authenticity of the religion.

In Kumare and Seinfeld, we have seen the power of seemingly unauthentic religions. In Kumare, fourteen people followed the every teaching of a faux guru. His fabricated backstory and rituals provided legitimacy to his teachings. In many cases he was saying exactly what his followers had said to him but his authenticity brought their belief. In Seinfeld, George’s father creates the holiday of Festivus, equipped with a giant ceremonial pole and rituals like “The Airing of Grievances.” Both Kumare and Festivus have their own objects, teachings, events like many religions, however, we still would question considering these religious aspects as authentic.

As Chidester argues, “what counts as religion is the focus of the problem of authenticity” (9). Religion and American Pop Culture share many properties but that does not equate them. What is it that distinctly separates what is religious and what is not?

Fake religions: authentic or inauthentic?

The question on hand in this week's reading out of David Chidester's Authentic Fakes and in the film, Kumaré, is whether or not it the authenticity of a religion matters if its effects are authentic. In my opinion if people latch onto a message in a certain religion, it does not matter the authenticity of the presentation. Vikram Gandhi establishes his credibility as Kumaré by growing out his hair and beard and teaching yoga classes filled with made up moves and rituals. Eventually, people latch on to his message and he meets with them individually. Halfway through the movie, he is doing very little yoga and simply being a friend and advisor to his followers. Although the delivery of his message was phony, the message itself was sincere, and that is what made the largest impact on people. His followers were filled with a new desire to improve their lives and find happiness. In the end, this wildly inauthentic religion turned out to have authentic results.

In many ways, Kumaré’s made up religion is equally as authentic as well established ones. Because he had no history or tradition on which to rely, he gained his followers by being impactful. Often people follow religions because of their family history and traditions, but Kumaré did not have that advantage. His followers came back for him and his message. If we are judging religious authenticity by its positive effects on people, then his religion was certainly authentic.

Fake Religions and Authentic Results

            Throughout Kumare and the episode of Seinfeld regarding Festivus, the question of whether or not a fake religion or tradition can yield authentic results is continuously explored. Even though the initial emergences of the Kumare teachings and Festivus is done out of jest, both manage to take on their own meanings that seem authentically religious. In Kumare, despite the teachings being fake, people really buy into the philosophies and gain some tangible benefits that an authentic religion would provide. Within the show of Seinfeld, Festivus does take on the form of a religious holiday, as there are set traditions (aluminum pole, airing of grievances, feats of strength) that have to be followed every year. These all seem fake though. What comes out of Festivus that seems authentic is the following it attains outside of the Seinfeld universe. It has amassed a real following of people that believe in Festivus and the message it sends. Atheists often rally around it as a counter-culture to religious holidays, and others view it as a symbol against the commercialism of holidays. Even though the birth of Festivus is fake, the results seem authentic because it brings people together who have a certain set of beliefs. As David Chidester puts it, both the Kumare teachings and Festivus are examples of, “…authentic fakes, doing real religious work in forging a community, focusing desire, and facilitating exchange in ways that look just like religion” (Preface, viii). Is it even fair to label somethings as a "fake" if it is causing authentic results?