Reclaiming and Renegotiating Authenticity Through Autofiction: Meena Kandasamy’s When I Hit You
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autofiction, often regarded as an innovative means of self-exploration and self-presentation, invites discussions of authenticity. Highlighting the complexity and social value of the notion, I suggest that authenticity is not an outdated ideal that autofiction seeks to transcend; rather, autofiction opens up ways to critically engage with this notion. This potential is realized in Meena Kandasamy’s When I Hit You, a work of “biographical autofiction” that proclaims to be “fiction” but does not contain any perceivable elements of invention. Critiquing Genette’s dismissal of biographical autofiction as “veiled autobiography,” I argue that the paratextual label of “fiction” is not a gesture of evasion but a liberating leap that makes space for the author to renegotiate authenticity, a notion that is highly at stake in the narration of domestic violence but systematically denied to female survivors. A close analysis of the work informed by this new metaphor shows that Kandasamy negotiates four forms of authenticity with her autofictional performances: a partial authenticity that recognizes female survivors’ need for self-protection, an emotional authenticity that registers the psychological repercussions of domestic violence, an emergent authenticity that gives women the space to heal and grow, and a collective authenticity that highlights the importance of culturally sanctioned narrative templates. Kandasamy’s work highlights the need to continually scrutinize and renew our ideas of authenticity and shows the constructive role autofiction can play in this process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it