Eat, Pray, Love : Confronting and Reconstructing Female Identity

EAT, PRAY, LOVE: CONFRONTING AND RECONSTRUCTING FEMALE IDENTITY
24 
recognizes them as resources” (p. 218). If we are to follow the Fosses’ (2011) view that in 
turning to symbolic instead of material sources to relieve our exigence we are drawing from 
unlimited resources that don’t compromise others in the pr
ocess, we 
can see how Gilbert’s use of 
symbolic means 
–
confronting her identity, re-framing her circumstances, owning up to her 
mistakes, taking responsibility for her well-being, etc. 
–
to find a new identity and a more 
authentic happiness did not come at the expense of others, but in fact showed her readers a world 
of infinite possibilities. 
But in the end, perhaps the most powerful impact offered by the possibilities presented to 
us through narratives is to encourage a moment of pause and self-reflection. As Alice Walker 
(2006) said, “during the pause is the ideal time to listen to stories [
as] stories are capable of 
teaching us things we all used to know” (p. 59). As we listen to these stories and the possibilities 
they present to us, in our moment of pause and self-reflection, we can begin to find the answers 
that ring true for each of us.  

---

EAT, PRAY, LOVE: CONFRONTING AND RECONSTRUCTING FEMALE IDENTITY
25 
References 
Anzaldúa, G. (1983). La prieta. In This bridge called my back: Writings by radical women of
color. (Moraga, C. & Anzaldúa, C.). (Eds.). 2nd ed. New York: Kitchen Table. p. 208. 
Bennett, M. L. & Edelman, M. (1985). Toward a new political narrative. Journal of
Communication, 35, 156-171. 
Burke, K. (1984). Attitudes toward history. (3
rd
Ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press. 
Burkitt, I. (1991). Social selves: Theories of the social formation of personality. London: Sage. 
Carrillo Rowe, A. (2009). Subject to power: Feminism without victims. 
Women’s Studies in 
 
Communication, 32, 12-35. 
Chávez, K. R., & Griffin, C. L. (2009). Power, feminisms, and coalitional agency: Inviting and
enacting difficult dialogues. 
Women’s Studies in Communication
, 32, 1-11. 
Chidvilasananda, S. (1994). My lord loves a pure heart: The yoga of divine virtues. South
Fallsburg, NY: SYDA Foundation. 
Eat Pray Love. (2010). In International Movie Database online. Retrieved from 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0879870/
 
Elshtain, J. B. (2003). Reflections on identity. In Philosophy, feminism and faith. (Groenhout, R.
E. & Bower, M.) (Eds.), Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, p. 260-281. 
Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason,  
value and action. Columbia, SC: The University of South Carolina Press. 
Fenton, N. (2000). The problematics of postmodernism for feminist media studies. Media,  
Culture & Society, 22, 723-741. 

---

EAT, PRAY, LOVE: CONFRONTING AND RECONSTRUCTING FEMALE IDENTITY
26 
Foss, K. A. & Foss, S. K. (2009). Our journey to repowered feminism: Expanding the
feminist toolbox. 
Women’s Studies in Communicat
ion, 32, 36-62. 
Foss, K. A. & Foss, S. K. (2011). Constricted and constructed potentiality: An inquiry into
paradigms of change. Western Journal of Communication, 75, 205-238. 
Frank, A. W. (1995). The wounded storyteller: Body, illness, and ethics. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. 
Gilbert, E. (2006). Eat, pray, love. New York: Penguin. 
Hains, R. C. (2009). Power feminism, mediated: Girl power and the commercial politics of
change.