Leo Bersani

1. Introduction

Leo Bersani (1931–2022) was an American literary critic and theorist whose work significantly reshaped debates on sexuality, subjectivity, and aesthetics. Trained in French literature yet deeply engaged with psychoanalysis and continental philosophy, he is frequently cited as a foundational figure in queer theory and in contemporary critiques of the autonomous subject.

Bersani’s writings are best known for two interrelated claims. First, he argued that certain forms of sexuality—especially gay male anal sex—expose the modern ego as fragile, aggressive, and dispensable. Second, he proposed that aesthetic and erotic experiences can model non-sovereign, non-possessive ways of being with others. Across his oeuvre, sexuality and art function less as distinct topics than as experimental fields for rethinking what a self is and how selves can coexist.

His work engages closely with Freud, Lacan, French post-structuralism, and Anglo-American literary criticism, yet it resists simple classification within any of these traditions. Proponents often emphasize his distinctive style of philosophical argument: dense but precise close readings of novels, films, and artworks that yield broader ontological and ethical claims. Critics, by contrast, question the generalizability, politics, or gender assumptions of his theories.

Within the wider landscape of twentieth‑ and twenty‑first‑century thought, Bersani is frequently discussed alongside Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick as a key architect of theoretical approaches to sexuality. At the same time, his later focus on impersonal relationality has been taken up in debates on ethics, non‑mastery, and post-humanist conceptions of subjectivity. This entry surveys his life, intellectual development, principal works, and the major controversies surrounding his thought.

2. Life and Historical Context

2.1 Biographical Overview

Leo Paul Bersani was born on 16 April 1931 in Detroit, Michigan, into a French‑speaking family of Italian descent. This bilingual, bicultural upbringing is often seen as prefiguring his later role mediating French theory for Anglophone audiences. He pursued advanced study in French literature in the 1950s, earning a PhD (usually dated to this decade) and beginning a career as a specialist in classical and modern French writing.

After early teaching appointments, including at Wellesley College, Bersani joined the University of California, Berkeley, in the 1960s. Berkeley’s climate of political radicalism and intellectual experimentation coincided with his increasing engagement with structuralism, psychoanalysis, and emerging critical theory. He remained associated with Berkeley for much of his career, while also spending time in France and participating in transatlantic theoretical networks. He died in San Francisco on 20 February 2022, reportedly of natural causes related to age.

2.2 Intellectual and Political Milieu

Bersani’s work developed within several overlapping historical contexts:

Commentators sometimes emphasize the importance of the AIDS epidemic and culture wars of the 1980s for Bersani’s most influential interventions, while others stress the continuity of his concerns with violence, selfhood, and representation from his earliest Proust studies onward.

3. Intellectual Development

3.1 From French Literary Historian to Theorist

In the 1950s–early 1970s, Bersani built his reputation as a scholar of seventeenth‑ and nineteenth‑century French literature. Works culminating in Marcel Proust: The Fictions of Life and of Art (1973) combine philological rigor with attention to desire, memory, and narration. Scholars often note that even at this stage Bersani framed literary form as a site where the self is constructed and undone, foreshadowing later theoretical concerns.

3.2 Psychoanalytic and Critical Turn

From the mid‑1970s through the 1980s, Bersani increasingly drew on Freud and Lacan to explore aggression, narcissism, and the violence of representation. In texts such as The Freudian Body (1986), he treated psychoanalysis as a theory of signification rather than simply a clinical practice. Proponents describe this period as a decisive “theoretical turn,” in which Bersani began to question liberal and humanist accounts of a coherent, self‑identical subject; he examined how cultural forms both encode and disavow the destructiveness of the ego.

3.3 Queer Intervention

The late 1980s and 1990s saw Bersani emerge as a central figure in queer theory. The essay “Is the Rectum a Grave?” (1987) and the book Homos (1995) articulated his influential concept of self‑shattering sexuality and his critique of redemptive, identity‑based politics. Some commentators view this as a radical break with his earlier literary‑historical work, while others argue that it extends his longstanding interest in the instability of subjectivity.

3.4 Aesthetic and Ethical Reorientation

From the 1990s into the 2010s, often in collaboration with art historian Ulysse Dutoit, Bersani turned toward film and visual art in works like Forms of Being (1998/2004). He developed the notion of impersonal relationality, proposing that aesthetic experience can model non‑possessive, non‑mastering forms of coexistence. Interpretations differ on whether this phase softens his earlier emphasis on aggression and self‑dissolution or radicalizes it into a more explicit ethical project.

4. Major Works

4.1 Overview

4.2 Early and Psychoanalytic Works

Marcel Proust: The Fictions of Life and of Art reads Proust’s novel as staging the fabrication of selves through memory and desire. Commentators emphasize how Bersani’s close reading already links literary form to questions of subjectivity.

In The Freudian Body, Bersani interprets Freud not only as a theorist of the unconscious but also as proposing a bodily “text” of drives. He investigates how psychoanalytic concepts illuminate art and vice versa. Supporters regard this book as pivotal for understanding his later emphasis on the violence and instability of the ego.

4.3 Sexuality and Queer Theory

The essay “Is the Rectum a Grave?” addresses the AIDS crisis, cultural fantasies about gay male sex, and the fear of anality. It famously suggests that gay sex may threaten the ideal of a proud, self‑contained subject. The Culture of Redemption extends this critique to literature and criticism that transform suffering into consoling narratives.

Homos elaborates a non‑identitarian account of same‑sex desire and introduces a distinctive ethics in which “lessening the significance of our own being” becomes central. It has been widely discussed in queer theory and political philosophy.

4.4 Aesthetic and Ethical Writings

In collaboration with Ulysse Dutoit, Bersani wrote Forms of Being and related books on painting and cinema. These works argue that certain visual and cinematic forms figure an impersonal intimacy, suggesting ways of being‑together that avoid mastery or possession. Scholars often read these texts as the culmination of his attempt to link aesthetics with a new model of ethical relationality.

5. Core Ideas on Sexuality and Subjectivity

5.1 Self‑Shattering and the Ego

Central to Bersani’s thought is the idea that sexuality can shatter the ego. Drawing on Freud and Lacan, he treats the ego as a defensive structure built around fantasies of coherence, mastery, and autonomy. Certain sexual practices, particularly receptive anal sex, are said to dramatize the dissolution of boundaries that the ego seeks to maintain. Proponents interpret this as exposing the ego’s contingency and the violence required to sustain it.

5.2 Anality and Masculinity

In “Is the Rectum a Grave?”, Bersani links anality to cultural anxieties about masculinity and degradation. He famously writes:

"

“The rectum is the grave in which the masculine ideal … of proud subjectivity is buried.”

— Leo Bersani, “Is the Rectum a Grave?” (1987)

According to his analysis, the hostility directed at gay male sex during the AIDS crisis reflects fear that masculinity might be separated from dominance, phallic integrity, and invulnerability. Critics argue that this focus on male anality risks marginalizing other sexualities and experiences, while defenders claim that Bersani is using an extreme case to illuminate broader structures of subjectivity.

5.3 Suspicion of Redemptive Sexual Narratives

Bersani consistently challenges narratives that portray sex as a route to authenticity, mutual recognition, or liberation. He opens “Is the Rectum a Grave?” with the line:

"

“There is a big secret about sex: most people don’t like it.”

— Leo Bersani, “Is the Rectum a Grave?” (1987)

Commentators read this as a critique of romantic and emancipatory discourses that overlook sexuality’s links to aggression, risk, and psychic disintegration.

5.4 Subjectivity Beyond Sovereignty

From Homos onward, Bersani connects self‑shattering sexuality to the possibility of a non‑sovereign subject. Rather than seeking to repair or redeem the ego, he explores how diminishing its importance might open less violent forms of relationality. He writes:

"

“Perhaps the most generously ethical act is to lessen the significance of our own being.”

— Leo Bersani, Homos (1995)

Some scholars view this as an anti‑humanist or even nihilistic stance; others interpret it as outlining a counterintuitive ethics rooted in decentered subjectivity.

6. Aesthetics, Cinema, and Impersonal Relationality

6.1 Aesthetic Experience as Ontological Experiment

In his later work, particularly with Ulysse Dutoit, Bersani treats painting and cinema as laboratories for alternative ways of being. Rather than viewing art as redemptive or morally uplifting, he investigates how forms, rhythms, and spatial arrangements might temporarily suspend ego-centered perception. This continues his skepticism toward “redemption,” now transposed into aesthetics.

6.2 Impersonal Relationality

A key notion is impersonal relationality, an ethical and ontological model in which relations are grounded not in strong personal identities but in shared fields of perception and affect. In Forms of Being, Bersani and Dutoit propose:

"

“A nonviolent being-together might best be thought of as an impersonal intimacy.”

— Leo Bersani & Ulysse Dutoit, Forms of Being (2004)

Here, intimacy does not rely on mutual recognition between solid selves; instead, it arises from a common participation in patterns of light, movement, or composition. Supporters argue that this offers a resource for non‑possessive ethics; skeptics question how such impersonal ties translate into concrete social or political practices.

6.3 Cinema and Visual Art

In analyses of filmmakers such as Bresson and Godard and painters including Caravaggio and Rothko, Bersani traces how images can partially disaggregate the viewer’s ego. Long takes, fragmented framing, or non‑narrative structures are said to encourage a mode of attention less organized around mastery and control. Some film theorists find here a valuable alternative to spectator models based solely on identification or voyeurism; others view Bersani’s readings as highly selective and less concerned with historical or industrial contexts.

6.4 Continuity with Earlier Work

Scholars debate whether this aesthetic turn marks a shift from negativity to a more affirmative project. One reading stresses continuity: self‑shattering becomes the precondition for impersonal intimacy. Another suggests transformation: the emphasis moves from sexuality’s destructive potential to art’s capacity to sketch fragile, positive forms of coexistence.

7. Key Contributions to Queer Theory and Critical Thought

7.1 Foundational Role in Queer Theory

“Is the Rectum a Grave?” and Homos are widely regarded as canonical in queer theory. Bersani’s insistence that homosexuality can threaten, rather than simply seek inclusion within, dominant models of the subject distinguishes his work from some liberationist paradigms. He has been positioned alongside Judith Butler and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick as shaping early queer theoretical debates on identity, normativity, and the politics of representation.

7.2 Critique of Identity and Community

Bersani’s analyses complicate understandings of gay identity and community. In Homos, he questions whether affirmative gay identities risk reproducing exclusionary norms and fantasies of wholeness. Proponents in critical theory and political philosophy draw on this to articulate anti‑identitarian or non-sovereign ethics. Critics from activist or minoritarian perspectives sometimes argue that his suspicion of identity underestimates its strategic importance in struggles for rights and recognition.

7.3 The Culture of Redemption

In The Culture of Redemption, Bersani extends his critique beyond sexuality to literary and cultural criticism more broadly. He argues that many interpretive practices seek to convert trauma, loss, or negativity into stories of uplift or moral improvement, thereby reinforcing the ego and social order. This concept of a “culture of redemption” has influenced discussions in trauma studies, aesthetics, and political theory. Some commentators praise it as a powerful diagnosis of contemporary culture’s moralizing tendencies; others contend that it risks dismissing genuinely reparative or transformative projects.

7.4 Influence on Critical Thought

Beyond queer studies, Bersani’s work has been taken up in:

• debates on non‑sovereign subjectivity and post-humanism,
• ethical theory centered on vulnerability and non‑mastery,
• aesthetic theory emphasizing affect, form, and spectatorship.

Comparative studies often place him in dialogue with Foucault (on sexuality and power), Deleuze and Guattari (on desire and assemblages), and Levinas (on ethics and alterity), highlighting both convergences and tensions.

8. Methodology and Use of Psychoanalysis

8.1 Close Reading as Theory

Bersani’s primary method is a highly attentive close reading of literary, cinematic, and visual texts. Rather than separating interpretation from theory, he allows textual details—narrative structures, stylistic choices, visual compositions—to generate broader claims about subjectivity and social relations. Supporters see this as a distinctive contribution to philosophy through criticism; detractors sometimes describe it as speculative or insufficiently grounded in empirical contexts.

8.2 Reworking Freud and Lacan

Psychoanalysis is central to Bersani’s approach, especially in The Freudian Body. He reads Freud’s drives and Lacan’s account of the ego as resources for analyzing cultural forms. Notably, he emphasizes:

• the drive as a disruptive, non‑teleological force;
• narcissism and aggression as structural features of ego-formation;
• anality as both a psychosexual stage and a symbolic locus of control, degradation, and boundary dissolution.

Rather than applying psychoanalytic concepts mechanically, Bersani often reinterprets them, sometimes against clinical or traditional uses. This has led to both innovative insights and debates about the fidelity of his readings to Freud and Lacan.

8.3 Anti‑Redemptive Critique

Methodologically, Bersani is wary of interpretive moves that attribute coherence, moral depth, or redemptive meaning to texts. His analyses frequently aim to show how works of art stage the failure of such meanings. Some critics applaud this as a rigorous suspicion of ideological closure; others suggest it can overemphasize negativity or overlook alternative, less ego‑centered forms of repair.

8.4 Relations to Other Methods

Compared to sociological, historicist, or empirical approaches to sexuality and culture, Bersani’s method is relatively formalist and speculative. Historicist critics argue that his readings sometimes underplay material conditions and institutional power, especially in discussions of AIDS or queer politics. Conversely, theorists sympathetic to post-structuralist and psychoanalytic traditions value his commitment to reading cultural forms as sites where unconscious fantasies and ontological assumptions are at work.

9. Reception, Criticism, and Debates

9.1 Academic Reception

Bersani’s work has been widely cited in literary studies, queer theory, and cultural criticism. Many scholars credit him with offering one of the most philosophically ambitious accounts of sexuality’s relation to subjectivity. His influence is particularly visible in discussions of non‑sovereign subjectivity, negativity in queer theory, and anti‑redemptive aesthetics.

9.2 Debates within Queer Theory

Within queer theory, reactions are diverse:

Some theorists align him with “antisocial” strands of queer thought; others resist that label, emphasizing the later turn to impersonal relationality as a more affirmative ethical project.

9.3 Responses in Aesthetics and Film Studies

In aesthetics and film studies, Bersani’s collaborative work has been praised for rethinking spectatorship and form, but also critiqued for limited engagement with production histories, audience reception, or institutional contexts. Formalist and phenomenological critics tend to find his emphasis on perception and pattern productive; social and historical critics sometimes see it as insufficiently contextualized.

9.4 Psychoanalytic and Philosophical Critiques

Psychoanalysts differ on his reinterpretations of Freud and Lacan: some welcome his extension of psychoanalysis into cultural theory, while others argue that he selectively appropriates concepts. Philosophers sympathetic to analytic traditions have sometimes regarded his arguments as metaphorical rather than strictly logical, whereas continental philosophers have generally engaged more extensively with his rethinking of the subject.

10. Legacy and Historical Significance

10.1 Position in Intellectual History

Bersani is now commonly situated among the major late twentieth‑century figures who reconfigured understandings of sexuality and subjectivity. His work bridges French post-structuralism and Anglophone criticism and has become a touchstone in the genealogy of queer theory, alongside Foucault, Butler, and Sedgwick. Historians of criticism often highlight his role in shifting literary studies toward theoretically informed reflections on the self, violence, and desire.

10.2 Ongoing Influence

His concepts—self‑shattering, culture of redemption, impersonal relationality, non‑sovereign subject—continue to circulate across disciplines. They inform:

• contemporary queer theory, including debates over “antisocial” versus reparative approaches;
• ethical theory focused on vulnerability, de-centering the self, and non‑mastery;
• aesthetic discussions of spectatorship, affect, and form in visual culture.

Subsequent thinkers have extended or revised his ideas in light of race, coloniality, gender, disability, and trans politics, sometimes identifying blind spots in his corpus while retaining his critical tools.

10.3 Assessments of Historical Significance

Assessments of Bersani’s significance vary. Supporters depict him as a major theorist of the late twentieth century whose rethinking of sexuality and the subject will remain central to critical theory and philosophy. Others describe his influence as more concentrated within specialized fields such as queer theory and psychoanalytic criticism, suggesting that his style and focus may limit broader uptake.

Despite these divergences, there is broad agreement that Bersani’s work crystallized a powerful challenge to redemptive understandings of art and sexuality and opened enduring questions about what forms of selfhood and relationality might be possible beyond the sovereign ego.